The prosecution and defense will make their closing arguments before the jury is sequestered and begins to deliberate.
MINNEAPOLIS — After three days away from the courtroom, the jury reconvened Monday morning to hear closing arguments before deliberating on the charges facing Derek Chauvin.
Chauvin, a former Minneapolis police officer, is charged with second-degree and third-degree murder, and second-degree manslaughter in the May 25, 2020 death of George Floyd. Bystander video and police body camera footage showed the former Minneapolis police officer kneeling on Floyd for nine minutes and 29 seconds.
Judge Peter Cahill instructed the jury on Thursday to bring a packed bag on Monday to prepare for sequestration. Up to this point in the trial, the jurors have been allowed to return home every afternoon after court. Witness testimony wrapped up on Thursday.
It is unknown how long it will take the jury to reach a verdict. Judge Cahill said that the timing is up to them, but that they should “plan for long and hope for short.”
The jury will be instructed to consider each charge and verdict separately, so Chauvin could be found guilty of some charges but be acquitted of others.
Each charge will come with a detailed set of instructions for the jurors to follow as they seek to reach a unanimous verdict.
In the rare event of a “hung jury” for all three charges of second-degree murder, third-degree murder and second-degree manslaughter, Judge Cahill could declare a mistrial and schedule a new trial at some point in the future.
If the jury can only reach an agreement on one or two of the counts, the judge could accept a partial conviction and proceed to sentencing, legal experts tell KARE 11.
RELATED: What are the possible outcomes in the Derek Chauvin trial?
Prosecutor Steve Schleicher delivered the state’s closing argument to the jury in the murder trial of Derek Chauvin.
“His name was George Perry Floyd, Jr.,” Schleicher began, telling the jury about Floyd’s birth and upbringing.
“He would always take time, special attention to be with his mother,” Schleicher told the jury, reminding them of the testimony from George Floyd’s brother, Philonise Floyd. He showed photos of Floyd and his family as he spoke.
“George Floyd was surrounded by people he cared about and who cared about him, throughout his life,” Schleicher said. “On May 25, 2020, George Floyd died facedown on the pavement. Right on 38th and Chicago in Minneapolis. Nine minutes and 29 seconds.”
Schleicher continued to repeat that amount of time, which prosecutors said in their opening statements would be the most important numbers in the trial.
“Nine minutes and 29 seconds,” Schleicher said again. “During this time, George Floyd struggled, desperate to breathe. To make enough room in his chest to breathe. But the force was too much, he was trapped. He was trapped with the unyielding pavement underneath him, as unyielding as the men who held him down, pushing him, a knee to the neck, a knee to the back, twisting his fingers, holding his legs, for nine minutes and 29 seconds the defendant’s weight on him, the lungs in his chest unable to expand.”
“George Floyd tried, he pushed his bare shoulder against the pavement to lift himself,” he said. “He pushed with his face to lift himself, to open his chest to give his lungs room to breathe.”
Schleicher countered testimony about “excited delirium” that some witnesses said could cause “superhuman strength,” telling the jury, “There was no superhuman strength that day. There was no superhuman strength because there are no superhumans.”
“He was surrounded by strangers, not a familiar face to say his final words,” he said. “But he did say them to someone. He said them to someone he did not know by name, but he knew them by the uniform he wore, and the badge he wore. And he called him Mr. Officer.”
Schleicher told the jury that while Floyd asked “Mr. Officer” to help, he did not help, instead “grinding his knees” and twisting Floyd’s fingers.
The prosecutor then recited the motto of the Minneapolis Police Department, “To protect with courage and to serve with compassion.”
“Facing George Floyd that day, that did not require one ounce of courage, and none was shown on that day,” he said. “No courage was required, all that was required was a little compassion. And none was shown on that day.”
Schleicher quoted Floyd’s words that day, “I’m not trying to win.”
Schleicher said that more than compassion, what Floyd needed was oxygen.
“Humans need that to breathe, and he said that, and the defendant heard him say that, over and over, he heard him but he just didn’t listen,” Schleicher said.
He emphasized that Chauvin ground his knee into Floyd, twisted his fingers and did not let up.
“When he was unable to speak, the defendant continued, when he was unable to breathe, the defendant continued,” Schleicher said. “When he no longer had a pulse, the defendant continued.”
Schleicher described Chauvin finally getting up when the ambulance arrived, and Floyd being carried away, limp. He repeated to the jury that Chauvin was “on top of him.”
“He had to know,” he said. “He had to know.”
Schleicher brought up the death certificate, pointing out that Floyd’s death was ruled a homicide.
“What the defendant did to George Floyd killed him,” he said.
Schleicher told the jury that they’ll have to put bias aside because people tend to trust the police.
“We believe the police are going to respond to our call for help,” he said.
He pointed out that after the bystanders saw what they saw, two of them called the police. Schleicher also commented that policing is a “noble profession.”
“To be very clear, this case is called the State of Minnesota vs. Derek Chauvin,” he said. “This case is not called the State of Minnesota vs. the police.”
Schleicher referenced the testimony from Minneapolis Police Chief Arradondo, who took the stand and testified that Chauvin did not act within his policy or training.
“You met the people who staff the training center and they told you, ‘We don’t train this,'” Schleicher said.
Judge Peter Cahill began to give the jury their official instructions for deliberating toward a verdict in the Derek Chauvin trial Monday morning.
“Deciding questions of fact is your exclusive responsibility,” Cahill said. He reminded the jurors they can consider everything they heard in court, and nothing they heard outside the courtroom.
“The defendant is presumed innocent of the charges made,” Cahill told the jury. He told them the state bears the burden of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, which is not a “capricious doubt” and is not beyond “any doubt.”
Cahill told the jurors they can consider circumstantial evidence, giving the example of seeing deer tracks in the snow and inferring that a deer walked through.
“The fact that other causes contributed to the death does not relieve the defendant of responsibility,” Cahill told the jury, unless they determine there was a superseding cause that came in after Chauvin committed the act and was the “sole” cause of death.
The judge explained each charge and what the prosecution needs to prove for each one.
- For second-degree murder while committing a felony, they have to prove that Chauvin caused Floyd’s death while committing or attempting to commit third-degree assault. Cahill said the state does not need to prove Chauvin intended to kill Floyd, only that he committed or intended to commit assault. Cahill said it is not necessary for the state to prove that Chauvin intended to cause substantial bodily harm, only that he intended to commit the assault and then the assault caused substantial bodily harm.
- For third-degree murder, the state has to prove Chauvin caused the death of George Floyd “by an intentional aSct that was eminently dangerous to other persons,” acting with a “mental state consistent with reckless disregard for human life.” Cahill said the act does not have to cause death intentionally, but had to be committed with a “conscious indifference to the loss of life that the eminently dangerous act could cause.”
- For second-degree manslaughter, the state has to prove that Chauvin caused Floyd’s death by “culpable negligence.” The jury has to conclude that Chauvin took an “unreasonable risk” and “consciously took a chance” of causing death or great bodily harm.
Cahill also read to the jury instructions about “aiding and abetting” charges and what they mean.
“No crime is committed” if a police officer used force that a “reasonable police officer in the same situation would believe to be necessary,” Cahill told the jury.
The jury has to consider the “totality of the circumstances” Chauvin was facing.
Significantly, Cahill did not include language telling the jury not to “consider the 20/20 vision of hindsight,” which is often included in the instructions during a police officer’s trial.
Cahill also told the jury that they “should not draw any inference” from the fact that Chauvin invoked his Fifth Amendment right to not take the stand.
RELATED: Anxiety builds around Derek Chauvin trial as closing arguments begin Monday
RELATED: In Chauvin trial, jurors face enormous responsibility