Legal Journalist Thinking Out Loud...

April 20, 2021, 5:50 p.m. ET15 minutes ago

15 minutes ago

Emily Bazelon

Reporting on legal issues

The jury could have convicted Chauvin or any combination of manslaughter, third-degree murder or second-degree murder, but chose "all of the above." When that happens, it raises questions about whether the theory of the conviction is internally coherent. 

In this case, could Chauvin be guilty of:  1) causing the death of a human being, without intent, while committing an assault (second-degree murder); AND 

2) unintentionally causing a death by committing an act that is eminently dangerous to other persons while exhibiting a depraved mind, with reckless disregard for human life (third-degree murder) AND 

3) creating an unreasonable risk, by consciously taking the chance of causing death or great bodily harm to someone else (manslaughter)? I’d say the answer is probably yes, but I confess I’m still absorbing all the legal jargon.

April 20, 2021, 5:48 p.m.

--------------

 

Except,

Not enough people will question conviction on all those counts because:  1) the "right" verdict was reached; AND 2) this is the balm needed. like the Biden election, to salve the nation's racial sores and move us forward, together, into the 21st Century as a more united country.