Judge will declare 'mistrial' if prosecution witness 'even mentions' new evidence in Chauvin trial

[DonViejo]

[PoliticAverse]

1. "I'm not claiming any bad faith on the state's part but..." n/t

[Escurumbele]

2. This is insane...fu judge

They don't care about the truth, do they?

These technicalities in the judicial system drive me nuts...OK, the carbon monoxide data may have remained berried somewhere, but everyone should be after the truth, and to make it inadmissible is a technicality that should have no place in a trial.

SOBs all of them!

[DENVERPOPS]

8. Would love to see the results of a

Carbo-Oxy Hemoglobin test.................

[Hamlette]

3. so what did the test show?

[Escurumbele]

4. I have not seen the video but what I read is that the defense claimed that carbon monoxide could

have have been part of the cause of Floyd's death.

There is proof they could not find traces of carbon monoxide in the tests they run on Floyd. The problem is that those tests seem to have been left berried under some papers and were never part of the prosecution data presented and seen by the defense, so the judge made it inadmissible to the trial, so Mr. judge doesn't want to hear "there is new evidence".

This is very irritating in many levels, the goal of any trial should be to find the truth and nothing but the truth...unreal how some people get away with murder because of trial technicalities.

Forgot to ad that the defense brought a Dr. who claimed the carbon monoxide could have contributed to Floyd's death, which is not true, so I guess now, the prosecution cannot rebut that.

CORRECTION: I just saw the video. I do believe the prosecutors are brilliant.

[Hamlette]

6. good call by the Judge. This is not a meaningless technicality.

It is not as though the defense expert sprung this on the prosecution at trial for the first time. The defense witness gave the prosecution a report prior to trial wherein he said George should have been tested for carbon dioxide. At that point the prosecution was on notice and should have produced the test immediately and not waited until after the witness testified.

Although I think Chauvin should be convicted, as a former public defender I want the trial to be fair so it is not reversed on appeal. It is not a meaningless technicality. The rules are there to protect us all from unfair treatment.

BTW, in all my years defending people accused of a crime, I only got one defendant off on a technicality and the crime was possession of pot. Murderers don't routinely get off on technicalities.

[Escurumbele]

7. Thank you for your feedback, as you most probably figured out, I am not a lawyer

But from a layman's view it is a technicality in the sense that ALL proof must be accepted, it doesn't matter if it came late, even more when we are talking about something that eliminates misconceptions the jurors may have about CO2 in Floyd's system. I understand there was some negligence in the part of the prosecution to not enter the tests as part of proof, but regardless of that, we should all strive to work with the truth.

Once again, an ignorant like me of the workings of the law and trials, I find that the proof must always come out, and by not admitting this one it allows the defense to sustain the idea on the jurors that Carbon Monoxide could have contributed to Floyd's death and thus maybe either causing a hung jury or a lesser sentence from a murder indictment where no questions should exist because there is a full video that tells the story well. If any of the jurors would have any doubt that there was intent or be moved one way or another because the report was not allowed and thus he/she needs to ignore it, then I have a problem with that.

I find the law fascinating, I keep telling my wife that I missed my calling...maybe on my next life

Once again, thank you for your feedback.

[sprinkleeninow]

9. I agree with your sentiments. The jury 'hears' something and latches onto that.

Be it actually factual or not.

The defense is throwing out a plethora of 'evidence' in an attempt that 'something' sticks.

My ma worked for a 4 attorney law practice for 22 years in an extended carreer after my dad reposed.

'I' have no legal experience on my CV. ⚖ 🌞

[Hamlette]

10. the rule is there to protect you

I admit it is harder to see here but prior to the rule about undisclosed evidence, police and over zealous prosecutors routinely failed to disclose evidence that showed the defendant was innocent. The police and prosecutors in those cases believed that the defendant was guilty. They were trying to get to what they believed was the truth by failing to disclose the evidence. This led to untold numbers of wrongful convictions.

As the saying goes, I would rather 100 guilty people go free than one innocent person be convicted. If you take the politics out of it, and they were trying someone you thought was innocent, maybe even yourself, you'd be outraged that the prosecution failed to disclose any information to you. One of the dangers here is that the defense got an expert who believe no CD test had been done and that CD may have caused the death. He testified in good faith. Now, if you let the prosecution pull a "gotcha" move, it makes the witness look dishonest which reflects badly on the defendant. Look, I don't like what Chauvin did and in many ways it pains me to defend the police but I has to be consistent.

And had the judge let it in, and Chauvin had been convicted, the case might have been overturned on appeal. And, from the video posted, and more about an oxygen saturation test the judge discussed in another clip, I think the prosecution has evidence they can introduce that will show it was not CD poisoning. I'm also guessing the car was off and the prosecutor can show that.

[Turbineguy]

5. If the CO was "environmental"

The officers would have been affected too.

It seems that if the car was running, somebody would have asked to have it shut off since breathing the exhaust fumes is unpleasant regardless of CO concentration.

[mountain grammy]

12. If George Floyd was facing the car exhaust and the car was running

He was unable to turn away from it while the cops held him there. He was held immobile for nine minutes with Chauvin's knee on his neck and two other cops holding his legs.

[peppertree]

11. The fix is in

This is the same judge who wouldn't allow jurors to consider 6 prior abuse allegations against Chauvin - but does allow them to be regaled with footage of Floyd's being intoxicated before.

We've seen this movie before.

[jaxexpat]

13. Marvelous point. Is there anyone here at DU who would refute that argument?

Not a lawyer here either but like to hear the seemingly twisted logic that somehow arrives at a reasonable point. My sister says I have an "engineering mind". She may be right. I like to hear arguments which state a hypothesis, establish a parameter, provide a basis and then find facts upon which other facts will rely. It's simple and clear to understand. Also more difficult to obfuscate within such a framework of logic.

[peppertree]

14. Well said. Judges will resort to all kinds of arbitrarity, when in the tank for one side or another

This Judge Cahill reminds me of the way Judge Debra Nelson steered the Trayvon Martin case (misleading the jurors into a not guilty verdict by lying to them about their choices of convictions).

Or, in an unrelated but equally asinine case, the way Judge Tom Greasa literally made up law as he went along to award Paul Singer's Cayman Islands vulture fund an 1200% payout in the Argentine bonds case.

Anything goes, when judges decide to prevaricate.

[jaxexpat]

15. Let Roy Bean try it.

[peppertree]

16. +1

Aa arbitrary and bigoted as he was, at least he had a code - and stuck to it.

He never presumed to be anything but his hard-ass self.

[llashram]

17. this

countless times in my 70+ years...

[peppertree]

18. Thank you.

It's almost as if Cahill wants a riot.

Talking to Repug strategists in his spare time, perhaps?