MINNEAPOLIS (AP) — It’s former Officer Kim Potter who’s on trial for the killing of Daunte Wright,But the ex-cop Derek Chauvin was tried in the exact same courtroom in January. death of George FloydIt casts a shadow on the proceedings.
jury selection last week,There was no mention made of Floyd or Chauvin, who were both victims of police brutality in America. It has been difficult for the court to mention it at times.
However, opening statements set for Wednesday,There are many reminders of that case, from Chauvin being tried by the same prosecutors to Chauvin being asked about his fears of receiving a unpopular verdict.
Regina Chu, Hennepin County judge, is in the 18th floor courtroom, where Chauvin, who was convicted for murder by the jury of April, was seen repeatedly by the jury as he kneeled on Floyd’s neck, which was captured by video. Judge Peter Cahill later sentenced Chauvin to 22 1/2 years.
In addition to video, prominent spots will also be made in Potter’s manslaughter trial.The jury will decide. footage showing the white officer shouting “Taser, Taser, Taser”She aimed her Glock 9mm semi-automatic pistol at the target, at Wright, a Black man, as he tried to drive away from a traffic stop on April 11, then fired a fatal bullet into his chest before exclaiming, “I grabbed the wrong (expletive) gun.”
Her attorneys say Wright’s death was an innocent mistake,It is not a crime.
Though Floyd’s death was rarely mentioned directly during jury selection, his case’s impact on the trial has been obvious. The jury pool got nearly the same questionnaires used for Chauvin’s trial, with only slight edits in some places to fit the circumstances of the Potter case. It doesn’t mention either Chauvin or Floyd by name.
Jurors were asked whether they agree with the “defund the police” movement that gained momentum after Floyd’s death. They were asked whether they trust police — and whether it’s right to second-guess an officer’s actions under pressure. Also, they were asked whether or not damaging protests had affected them.
The defense and prosecution sifted through their answers and probed more in court. People with moderate views were more likely to be seated, like a man who said he opposed cutting police funding but also said: “I absolutely believe there’s a need for change.”