The Daily - The Case Against Derek Chauvin

Episode Date: April 8, 2021

In Minneapolis, the tension is palpable as the city awaits the outcome of the trial of Derek Chauvin, the police officer accused of murdering George Floyd last summer.The court proceedings have been both emotional — the video of Mr. Floyd’s death has been played over and over — and technical.At the heart of the case: How did Mr. Floyd die?Today, we look at the case that has been brought against Mr. Chauvin so far. Guest: John Eligon, a national correspondent covering race for The New York Times. Sign up here to get The Daily in your inbox each morning. And for an exclusive look at how the biggest stories on our show come together, subscribe to our newsletter. Background reading: Bystanders’ pain had been mostly hidden for the last 10 months. But over the first week of Derek Chauvin’s murder trial, it spilled tearfully into the open as witnesses testified to their shared trauma.Follow along live here for the latest updates on the trial of Mr. Chauvin.What to know about the death of George Floyd.For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily. Transcripts of each episode will be made available by the next workday.

From The New York Times, I'm Michael Barbaro. This is The Daily. Today, the prosecution's case so far in the closely watched trial of Derek Chauvin, the former Minneapolis police officer accused of murdering George Floyd. I spoke with my colleague, John Eligo, in Minneapolis. It's Thursday, April 8th.

John, I wanted to start by having you set the scene there in Minneapolis this past week or so. What are your impressions of this trial so far? It's really a city on edge right now. I mean, you walk around downtown, there's cement barricades with fencing and barbed wire up. There's National Guard armored vehicles and National Guard members who are standing outside watching over everything. People are already starting to board up windows. So there's clearly this underlying tension of what's going to happen with this trial? What's the verdict going to be? And is that going to lead to more unrest like they saw last year, when there was lots of vandalism and buildings burning amid mass protests for racial justice?

So you really get around the town that this is something that cannot be avoided, that people cannot stop thinking about. And then you look, you know, in the courtroom now, and you have to look from afar, right? Because of COVID protocols, there's very few people allowed into the courtroom. As reporters, we're not even allowed in there. We were allowed to have one person representing all print media, one person representing all broadcast media. So I'm sitting here in my hotel room with a bag of chips and some bottled water watching this trial. And what's proceeding inside the courtroom?

Honestly, Michael, it's like a range of emotions and impressions, I would say, because on the one hand, you have this video of George Floyd's death playing over and over and over and over and over again during testimony in the courtroom. So it's in many ways kind of like bringing that kind of trauma all to the surface again, right? So there's like that emotional part of it. Then there's also like, it's a trial, right? It's technical. They parse all these, you know these different legal nuances, all these medical nuances. And you're really seeing a battle develop inside the courtroom over fundamentally what is this case about. Plus that you see Derek Chauvin kneeling on George Floyd's neck. And then the defense is saying, no, no, no, it's not the video.

It's all these other things. Don't just look at the video. And so that's really the battle lines that have been drawn as you watch this trial each and every day. So let's talk about what you've been able to watch or piece together inside the courtroom as the prosecution has laid out its case and started to call witnesses? Where should we start? The heart of the case really is how did George Floyd die? Because the prosecution is attempting to show that he died because Derek Chauvin knelt on his neck for more than nine minutes, right? And so in order to do that, they have to have medical experts who can attest to that. Right.

The state calls Dr. Bradford Langenfeld, John. And the one expert that we've seen who's probably said that most powerfully so far is the actual emergency room doctor who pronounced George Floyd dead at the hospital and who treated him before he died. When Mr. Floyd's body, when Mr. Floyd was brought in, would you describe it as an emergency situation? Yes, absolutely. What was his condition in terms of his cardiac condition? He was in cardiac arrest. He said essentially that when George Floyd came to him that his heart was already stopped. Mr. Floyd had been in arrest for, by this time, 60 minutes. I determined that the likelihood of any meaningful outcome was far below one percent and that we would not be

able to resuscitate Mr. Floyd. And so I then pronounced him dead. And he said that from all the signs that he had, all the information that he received, that in a nutshell, he did not have sufficient oxygen. Was your leading theory then for the cause of Mr. Floyd's cardiac arrest, oxygen deficiency? That was one of the more likely possibilities. I felt that and that lack of oxygen led to asphyxia, and that essentially caused his heart to fail and caused his heart to stop. And doctor, is there another name for death by oxygen deficiency? Asphyxia is a commonly understood term. Thank you, Dr. Langenthal. No further questions.

And that's a very important point because, for one, the medical examiner who actually did the autopsy on George Floyd did not say asphyxiation is a cause of death. He basically said that George Floyd's heart stopped. And what the prosecution is trying to show is that it was the asphyxiation that led to that. While the defense, on the other hand, is trying to show that, hey, there were all these reasons for George Floyd's heart stopping. on the other hand is trying to show that, hey, there were all these reasons for George Floyd's heart stopping, you know, one of them being his drug use, one of them being a lot of the adrenaline pumping through him. So the defense is really trying to paint a holistic picture of George Floyd and his whole medical history and his drug use and things like that and use that to argue while the prosecution is saying, hey, no, it's asphyxiation that but for the fact that

Derek Chauvin knelt on his neck, George Floyd would be alive today. So given that testimony, it feels like understanding whether or not Chauvin's actions were justified would also be crucial to the prosecution's case. So how do they approach that? Yeah, so once you get past, you know, the medical portion of it, you have to look at the policing portion, right? Because there are times when police officers are allowed to use force, even deadly force, right? And so the question was whether this was a case where Chauvin needed deadly force or at least needed the force that he was using, which was kneeling on George Floyd's neck. Right. And the prosecutors, they brought in several members of the police department

to talk about this, from the longest-serving homicide detective in the department all the way up to the police chief, so the man who's leading the department. So tell me about this longest-serving officer from the Minneapolis Police Department. What was his testimony? Yeah, so this was Lieutenant Richard Zimmerman. What is your view of that use of force during that time period? Minneapolis Police Department. What was his testimony? Yeah, so this was Lieutenant Richard Zimmerman. What is your view of that use of force during that time period? Totally unnecessary. What do you mean? Well, first of all, pulling him down to the ground face down and putting your knee on a neck for that amount of time is just uncalled for.

I saw no reason why the officers felt they were in danger, if that's what they felt. And that's what they would have to feel to be able to use that kind of force. And what the defense has tried to argue is that, hey, these situations are uncertain. Even when individuals go unconscious, there's chances that they can, you know, wake back up and then become even more aggressive again. But what Zimmerman essentially said was that when you have someone in handcuffs, as George Floyd was, the real threat that they pose goes way down. Based on your review of the body cams, did you see any need for Officer Chauvin to improvise by putting his knee on Mr. Floyd for nine minutes and 29 seconds? No, I did not. And then we get the top official of all.

Your Honor, the state calls Chief Medaria Arredondo. Police Chief Medaria Arredondo, who is the head of the department, he is a black man and the first black police chief the city has ever had. And he took to the stand and essentially says that what Derek Chauvin did, not only was it not in line with department policy. Do you believe that the defendant followed departmental policy 5-304 regarding de-escalation. I absolutely do not agree with that. They said it wasn't part of the department's ethics or values. continue to apply that level of force to a person proned out, handcuffed behind their back,

that in no way, shape, or form is anything that is by policy, is not part of our training, and it is certainly not part of our ethics or our values. So this was a stinging rebuke, essentially, of the actions of Derek Chauvin not acting as a Minneapolis police officer should, ethically or morally. I have a sense that police officers, let alone police chiefs, don't testify against their own colleagues on a police force lightly, and that it's quite rare for the leadership of a police department to be so openly critical of an officer. Are we right to see this as quite unusual? Yeah, it is certainly unusual. I mean, it's very stunning to have a police chief

rebuke an officer in his department like that. So I think for this police chief, it was also about setting a tone that I will defend my department, but when officers do wrong, I also have to speak up. And some people I talked to afterwards said it was refreshing to hear a police chief do that. And it was important in that they hope it could send some sort of broader message to other police chiefs and other leadership of police departments that when your officers do wrong, you will actually speak up and call it out. But I imagine that for the jury, there's a lot of power in hearing the police chief say those things. Absolutely. I mean, this is the boss saying these things. So that is going to carry a certain weight.

This is clearly a man who likes the police department, likes police officers, but he still thinks that this police officer was wrong. This was a city that is completely divided over its police department. This is a city where many people are frustrated about policing and believe that what Derek Chauvin did is representative of a larger problem of abusive policing. And so I think, especially the chief's testimony,

was really a strong statement to the community as much as it was to the jury. We'll be right back. of what Derek Chauvin did. My sense is that the prosecution wanted there to be strong testimony from non-police figures who had seen what happened on May 25th of last year. Yeah, a big part of the prosecution's case so far has been to bring in this group of people who were just going about their everyday lives. You know, they were going to, you know, buy snacks, going to fill up their tank of gas, going to buy a phone cord, who all converged on this corner in South Minneapolis.

You know, people from different walks of life, you know, people, you know, from nine years old to 61 years old, people who were there that day who witnessed it firsthand and saw what happened to George Floyd. And that really brought out some scenes of just astonishingly emotional testimony. I mean, you had people who were standing feet away, who were yelling at the officers, who were interacting with the officers. And these would become like the first eyewitnesses to this trauma that we would all kind of collectively watch and share around the world. And who were these people? So one of the people that they called was this young man named Christopher Martin.

C-H-R-I-S-T-O-P-H-E-R. Last name Martin. M-A-R-T-I-N. Mr. Martin, how old are you? 19. Now, he worked at the store Cup Foods where this happened. And Christopher, he was the person who interacted with George Floyd and actually sold him a pack of cigarettes and took a $20 bill that turned out to be a fake bill. And so it was Christopher Martin who first kind of reported to his boss that, hey, you know, I think this is a fake. And the boss sent Christopher out there to try to get George Floyd to come back in. He didn't come back in.

The boss sent him out a second time with some of the other co-workers, and they all tried to get George Floyd to come back in. He didn't come back in. And from there, the manager said, hey, we'll call the police. And so that's kind of like what started this series of events. And one thing that was very evident with Christopher Martin was this just burning sense of regret. You can actually see these moments in some of the surveillance footage where Christopher Martin's outside as George Floyd is being pinned to the ground with the knee on his neck. You could see him kind of pacing. Wow. You saw you standing there with your hands on your head for a while, correct?

Correct. What was going through your mind during that time period? Disbelief and guilt. Why guilt? If I would have just not taken the bill, this could have been avoided. And so it seems like he's haunted by his actions that day and what role they may have played in George Floyd's ultimate passing. And how does that serve the prosecution's case?

His regret, his remorse, his description of his actions that day? Well, I think you have to take the totality of his testimony into account, right? So not only did he offer that testimony for the prosecution about his remorse and regret, but he also talked about what things looked like when George Floyd walked in. They actually played surveillance footage of George Floyd in the store, walking around. He seemed very friendly, approachable.

He was talkative. He seemed to just be having an average Memorial Day, just living his life. But he did seem high. He said, yeah, George Floyd appeared a little bit high, but he was otherwise coherent. He was joking with people and things like that. So it was in some ways to bring George Floyd to life as like a human being who was going about his day that day. So I think that that's one of the important points.

And I think the other important point with Christopher and some of the other witnesses that we heard from is, I think in some ways, it's a reminder of how disproportionate Derek Chauvin's response was. Because essentially, you had this, you know, at the time, 18 yearold, who saw what George Floyd did as wrong, not the thing that, you know, he was supposed to do. But not something that warranted guns drawn police response, you know, pinning him to the ground and kind of holding him down. So I think that is definitely an element that the prosecutors want to put out there about how disproportionate Derek Chauvin's response was. Right. So who else is called to the stand who witnessed what happened as an eyewitness? Yeah, so we also had Darnella Frazier.

Good morning, Darnella. Good morning. Are you a little nervous up there? Yes. Who is the young woman, she was 17 at the time, who took that infamous bystander video that was posted to Facebook. And so she was actually with her nine-year-old cousin that day. They were walking to the store to get snacks. And then Darnella mentions kind of seeing out of the corner of her eye,

like this kind of police commotion going on in the street. When you walk past the squad car there, did you see anything happening there on the ground as you were walking towards Cup Foods with your cousin? Yes, I see a man on the ground and I see a cop kneeling down on him. Was there anything about the scene that you didn't want your cousin to see? Yes.

And what was that? A man terrified, scared, begging for his life. And so she quickly ushers her cousin into the store and then comes back out. She took out her cell phone and hit record like, you know, so many people do. her cell phone and hit record like, you know, so many people do. So tell the jury what you observed, what you heard when you stopped to look at what was happening there at the scene. I heard George Floyd saying, I can't breathe. Please get off of me.

I can't breathe. He cried for his mom. He was in pain. And much like Christopher Martin, Darnell also spoke to a real regret and sadness for what she witnessed. When I look at George Floyd, I look at my dad. I look at my brothers. I look at my cousins, my uncles, because they are all Black. And I look at that and I look at how that could have been one of them. It's been nights. I stayed up apologizing and apologizing to George Floyd

for not doing more and not physically interacting and not saving his life. And you could definitely tell that this is something that completely stays with her. That, yes, her recording was a big deal for her to do that. But she felt like looking back on it, it wasn't enough because it did not save George Floyd's life. And that was extremely powerful.

But that guilt is so complicated because, of course, what exactly were these witnesses supposed to have done? If you walk up to a police officer in the middle of an arrest and touch them or challenge them, you yourself could very easily get arrested for interfering in their work. And so there's something very poignant and painful about watching these witnesses say they feel guilty when it's not really clear what they could have done differently. It really raises these questions of like, what it's like to be a bystander in these situations and who can police the police. Because police are the ones, are supposed to be the ones, are supposed to be the ones who are supposed to stop wrong from happening in some ways.

But when you see a wrong happening and you think it's the police who are doing the wrong, yeah, you can litigate it after the fact, but that's not going to save a life in the moment. And I think that that's the burden that people like Darnella carries with them for the rest of their lives, really. Was there testimony from anyone who did seek to intervene in a meaningful way?

Yeah, I mean, there were several eyewitnesses there who in one shape or form did become a little bit more forceful in their efforts to intervene. A full name is Donald Wayne Williams II. Specifically, I'm thinking of Donald Williams. I'm an entrepreneur and a professional fighter. He is actually a mixed martial arts fighter. And he had went to the store that day to cup foods. And you can see in the video, Donald Williams,

he is extremely animated. You can get him off the ground, you're being a bum right now. Were you here the whole time? Both, you know, in the bystander video that Darnella took, but also body camera footage that was played. At one point he yells at Derek Chauvin that he was doing a blood choke. We're done. You're trapped in this breathing right here, bro. It's a blood choke where it specifically attacks the side of the neck and it specifically cuts off the circulation of your arteries.

Which is essentially like a move that's used in mixed martial arts where you try to, you know, render your opponent unconscious. Based on your training experience, if this looked like a blood choke. That is correct. Is he breathing right now? There's definitely a point where Donald Williams steps out into the street a couple times stepping off the curb. And the officer kind of telling him to get back. He's not responsive right now, bro.

Does he have a pulse? No, bro, look at him. He's not responsive right now. You know, there was a firefighter who was there. She was off-duty, an off-duty firefighter. Are you really a firefighter? Yes, I am from Minneapolis. Okay, then get on the sidewalk. Show me his pulse. She said, I'm a firefighter.

I'm an EMT. Let me look at him. And she was, you know, summarily kind of ushered back by the officer who was standing there. Get back on the sidewalk. The man ain't moved yet, bro. So basically, none of them could really get

in any close proximity to do anything meaningful, right? Right. Not even a firefighter with the city of Minneapolis, a peer in the eyes of the police. If not even a firefighter can influence the course of events here, what chance does a regular old bystander? Yeah, it feels like there's no chance. Good afternoon, sir. Good afternoon. You know, one of the bystander. Yeah, it feels like there's no chance. Good afternoon, sir. Good afternoon. You know, one of the bystanders...

How are you doing today? I'm okay. Charles McMillan, he actually tried maybe a little bit of a different route. So could you tell the jury how old you are? 61 years old. And you can hear Charles McMillan on some of the footage that was played in court. You can hear him

yelling at George Floyd in the sense like trying to reason with him and saying, hey, they got you. You're in handcuffs. There's nothing you can do about it now. Just go, man. I'm not trying to win. I'm not trying to win. I'll get on the ground or anything. He was doing the type of de-escalation

that we would expect from police, right? Right. I am claustrophobic. I'm claustrophobic, man. He was doing the type of de-escalation that we would expect from police, right? If you get in this car, we can talk. I am a thomacalist. I'm claustrophobic. I'm claustrophobic, man. You're not working with me. I can't joke. I can't breathe. Please.

And there was a moment where the prosecutors were showing footage of George Floyd on the ground, calling for his mother. Oh, my God. I can't believe this. I can't believe this. I can't believe this. I can't believe this, man. Can we stop it right here, please? Mama, look. Mr. McMillan, you need a minute. As McMillan was watching watching that he just completely broke down oh my god Oh, my God.

I can't. I feel helpless. I don't have a mama either. Can I just stay in here? You could see in McMillan's testimony that like the other folks who were there, he is haunted and burdened by the question of did he do the right thing? Was there more that he could have done? So by the end of all of this eyewitness testimony, the message to the jury from the prosecution would seem to be that for all of these people, there is absolutely no ambiguity that what they witnessed was wrong. And the depth of that feeling is clearly encapsulated by the trauma and the hauntedness that they're expressing. Absolutely. How does the defense then try to rebut,

do they try to rebut, what these witnesses have observed and communicated in this testimony? What the defense does is they basically try to reframe this whole view of what the bystanders were doing. They portray them not as people who were desperate to help George Floyd, but as an angry mob that was threatening police officers. Hi.

Just have some follow-up questions for you. And he even, you know, went after Genevieve Hansen, one of the witnesses who was there. Right. This is the fire, this is the firefighter. Yeah, exactly. So he asked the firefighter, you know, why were you getting so upset? Like, why were you going so angry? You would agree that your own demeanor got louder and more frustrated and upset? Frustrated, I'm not sure is the word I would use. Angry?

More desperate. You called the officers a bitch, right? Yeah. I got quite angry after Mr. Floyd was loaded into the ambulance. You yourself were saying vulgar things to the officer. And wasn't this crowd growing angrier and angrier because he wants to drive home that point? Some people were yelling louder than others, right? Right. to the officer. And wasn't this crowd growing angrier and angrier because he wants to drive home that point? Some people were yelling louder than others, right?

Right. And would you describe other people's demeanors as upset or angry? Um, it's... I don't know if you've seen anybody be killed, but it's upsetting. So while the prosecution is presenting these eyewitnesses as evidence of how terribly wrong this all went and how guilty Derek Chauvin is, the defense is trying to make the case that that feeling among the witnesses and their reaction on the scene to try to intervene, that dynamic is what made Chauvin's behavior, they say, justified?

They say that the people gathered there made Chauvin feel or sense that there was a threat. And because of that, he was not able to carry out his duties. He was not able to care for George Floyd because he perceived a threat and he was trying to maintain his own safety and the safety of others. And he was distracted from George Floyd, essentially. Well, that's interesting, John. Are they then conceding these defense lawyers that Chauvin did something wrong or didn't do it properly? I don't know if I'd say they're conceding that per se, but one of the charges is manslaughter, which is the lowest charge, which for Derek Chauvin

would probably be, you know, short of an acquittal. That would be the best outcome for him, the lowest charge. And in manslaughter, it requires some element of recklessness. So you could reasonably see an argument in which he was a little bit reckless

because of this commotion around him, it did cause him in some way to panic or to not act in the most proper of ways because of this commotion around him, right? So this is an admittedly difficult question, but having watched all this testimony so closely, which version of this argument about the eyewitnesses do you think may have landed more forcefully with the jury, the prosecution or the defense? I know you said at the beginning of our conversation that you can't exactly read the room and the jury given the circumstances of how this trial is being carried out, but I wonder what your sense of that is. I think that anyone who watches those bystanders and their reaction to what they saw that day

cannot help but be moved by that. If I'm not mistaken, I'm pretty sure of all the bystanders, there were probably two that did not cry. There was even a juror who had to be excused one day. They had to take a break in the trial because she got sick. And she told the judge that she couldn't sleep, that she'd been up until 2 a.m. and she wasn't feeling well. Regardless of the nuances of were they an angry mob, were they not? This was such emotional and powerful testimony that you cannot help but think that that landed well for the prosecution

and for the prosecution's case. But the defense has been able to, in some ways, muddy the waters a little bit to make it a little bit more complicated, more confusing. And the defense still has to put on their own witnesses and present their own case. So there's still a long way to go in the trial in that sense. But I think as that plays out in the courtroom, what's undeniable is that there is a huge unresolved trauma that so many people have experienced because of this case. John, thank you. We really appreciate it.

Thank you, Michael. We'll be right back. Here's what else you need to know today. A very in-depth analysis has concluded that the reported cases of unusual blood clotting following vaccination with the AstraZeneca vaccine should be19 vaccine and rare blood clots, a move that could threaten the pace of vaccinations across Europe and the world. This vaccine has proven to be highly effective. It prevents severe disease and hospitalization, and it is saving lives. Vaccination is extremely important in helping us in the fight against COVID-19. And we need to use the vaccines we have to protect us from the devastating effects. But the regulators emphasized that the benefits of getting the vaccine still outweigh its risks and stopped short of advising that use of the vaccine be curbed in the European Union's 27 countries.

use of the vaccine be curbed in the European Union's 27 countries. So far, 35 million people have been vaccinated with AstraZeneca's vaccine, and 18 of them have died from blood clots. But in a discouraging sign for AstraZeneca, Britain has responded by saying it would offer alternatives to the AstraZeneca vaccine for adults under 30. The United States, meanwhile, has yet to authorize AstraZeneca's vaccine for Americans. Today's episode was produced by Jessica Chung, Rachel Quester, and Leslie Davis, with help from Austin Mitchell.

It was edited by Paige Cowett and engineered by Marion Lozano. That's it for The Daily. I'm Michael Barbaro. See you tomorrow.