MINNEAPOLIS – The first week of the selection of juries in the trial of a former Minneapolis police officer charged with the death of George Floyd has laid down patterns for how attorneys work around potential jurors they consider unfavorable to them , to resign.
The defense beats people who tell the court they already have strong feelings about Derek Chauvin’s guilt. The prosecution, meanwhile, is blocking potential jurors who appear to be inclined to give the police the benefit of the doubt – or to express their concern about the Black Lives Matter movement.
Although their targets are predictable, there is an art to how both sides carry them out. Advocates tried in their interrogation to unravel prejudices against their case by members of the jury pool, which led Judge Peter Cahill to dismiss them and save valuable and limited strikes.
It is not always successful.
One candidate writes in his questionnaire that he has a ‘very negative’ perception of Chauvin after watching the video of Floyd’s arrest. When asked to explain, he said he felt Floyd was ‘treated worse than a hostile fighter’.
“It made me think of a war scene,” he said. “What came to my mind were images of World War II.”
The man also said that in this case he would have problems with the suspicion of innocence, and based on the video he saw, it would be difficult to acquit Chauvin. Despite his strong emotions and statements, when lawyer Eric Nelson repeatedly asked if the man could drop his opinions and decide the case impartially based on what is said in court, the man said “Yes”, which Nelson’s attempts to judge dismissed the judge for the case. “If I could not imagine saying ‘innocent’, I would not be here,” the man said.
Nelson was forced to use a mandatory strike to keep him from the jury. He gets 15 such challenges that can be used without giving a reason – as long as it’s not just because of a person’s race. The prosecution gets nine.
The lawyer had to use another to beat a man who had a lot of details about the case from various news sources and expressed strong opinions about Floyd’s death in his questionnaire. The man also spoke positively about the protests that followed, saying they reinforced the need for change and to end systemic racism.
Nelson noted that the man posted on Facebook that he had visited 38th and Chicago – the site of the fatal confrontation, which has been turned into a memorial – and he calls it ‘sacred ground’. Like the juror before him, the man continued affirmatively saying that he could put all his opinions aside and weigh the evidence fairly, forcing Nelson to use another strike.
So far, most rejected jurors have been people with negative views of Chauvin. But some were hit because they tipped over to the police, or because they were skeptical about the Black Lives Matter movement.
When questioned by prosecutor Steve Schleicher, one man said he had a “somewhat unfavorable” view of Black Lives Matter. He said he was of the opinion that the movement had ‘good intentions, but that it had been destroyed too much in our city’, and that he did not approve of ‘BLM’ graffiti in the city.
It’s ‘hard not to see those letters,’ he said. He also said he has a lot of respect for law enforcement and does not agree with the idea of paying the police, a movement that made money after Floyd died.
Schleicher used one of his strikes to fire the man.
By the end of Friday, the defense had used eight coercive strikes versus five for the prosecution.
Seven jurors sat in on the opening week. Four were white, one was multiracial, one was Spanish and one according to the judge. The court blocked another two weeks of jury selection before the arguments open on March 29.
Several jurors were dismissed because of the case. About two dozen in the pool were so problematic just from the answers they gave on their questionnaires, that the advocates on both sides agreed that they should be beaten without first being questioned.
For the potential jurors who came to court under security escort through the fences, barbed wire and razor wire, some are guilty of the case due to personal hardships.
But most of those fired because of the case had unwavering views.
Cahill dismissed one woman over the case after saying outright that she could not be an impartial juror. The woman said Floyd’s death affected her life, prompting her to volunteer at a nonprofit group that helps inferior and vulnerable children. The judge and prosecution briefly pressured her to make sure she did not change her mind.
“Do you not think you could give the accused a fair trial?” Ask Schleicher.
“I do not think I can,” she replied.