Tag Archives: Derek Chauvin

Keeping faith in system

By John Kanelis / johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

Try as I might to understand the anger simmering inside the black community in this nation, I cannot possibly grasp it in its entirety.

I am a white man. I haven’t experienced the type of brutality that many of my black friends have endured. With that said, I am left to stipulate that I am inclined to place a good measure of trust in the judicial system that seeks to render a decision that has a lot of folks on tenterhooks.

Former Minneapolis cop Derek Chauvin is on trial on a charge that he murdered George Floyd. Chauvin is white; Floyd was black. Floyd was suffocated on a Minneapolis street by Chauvin because he tried to pass a counterfeit $20 bill.

From what I have witnessed of this trial from the peanut gallery, I believe Chauvin is guilty of the crimes for which he is standing trial. I have the luxury, though, if being able to go about my day without being hassled because of my skin color.

The jury that is going to deliver a verdict has heard every bit of evidence. It has heard prosecutors and defense counsel take their best shot. The criminal justice system places a huge burden on prosecutors who have to prove “beyond reasonable doubt” that the defendant did what he is charged with doing. Defense counsel has to persuade one of the 12 men and women that there is reasonable doubt, producing a hung jury.

I am sitting at a safe distance from the simmering anger in the Twin Cities community. Thus, I won’t presume to know how I would react to an unfavorable verdict if I had been hassled by the cops. Nor can I in good conscience instruct others on how they should react if they don’t get a verdict that fits their expectation.

I am left only to hope sanity will prevail. I also can hope that those who want the jury to deliver their version of justice will understand that our  judicial system places these decisions in the hands of just plain folks … just like the rest of us.

Waters needs to shut her mouth!

By John Kanelis / johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

Just as U.S. Rep. Maxine Waters correctly admonished her House colleague Jim Jordan to “shut your mouth,” she ought to heed her own advice.

Waters, a California Democrat, decided to weigh in on a possible consequence of the trial of a former Minneapolis cop, Derek Chauvin, who is on trial for murder in the death of George Floyd in that infamous arrest that cost Floyd his life.

Waters said some highly inflammatory remarks about the possible outcome of the trial. According to NBC News: “We’ve got to stay on the street and we’ve got to get more active, we’ve got to get more confrontational,” Waters told reporters when asked what would happen if the Chauvin trial, which is wrapping up this week, ends in acquittal. “We’ve got to make sure that they know that we mean business.”

Chauvin trial judge says Maxine Waters’ ‘confrontational’ protest remarks could fuel appeal (msn.com)

Get more confrontational? What in the world is Rep. Waters advocating? Violence? Good fu**ing grief.

Her remarks drew a sharp rebuke from the judge presiding over the Chauvin trial, suggesting her comments could end up as fodder for an appeal by Chauvin’s defense counsel if the ex-cop gets convicted of murder or manslaughter.

Maxine Waters long has been seen as a lightning rod for those on the left and the right. She tends to get in people’s faces, saying whatever she damn well feels like saying.

Look, I endorsed her comments about Jordan, who hectored and badgered Dr. Anthony Fauci about the pandemic. Jordan needed to be slapped down.

However, Rep. Waters stepped way beyond her sphere of influence in calling for “more confrontation” if a criminal defendant gets acquitted. The jury system well could produce an unsatisfactory verdict in this case. Let’s allow the jurors to do their civic duty to the best of their ability.

As for Rep. Waters, she needs to shut her mouth.

How does a police officer do this?

By John Kanelis / johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

With much of the nation riveted on the trial of a former cop who suffocated a man by pressing his knee on the back of his neck, I am utterly astonished at the conduct of another police officer who decided to roust a uniformed Army lieutenant.

Derek Chauvin, a white former Minneapolis police officer, is on trial for killing George Floyd, a black man arrested for passing a fake piece of currency.

Now we have former white cop Joe Gutierrez pepper-spraying 2nd Lt. Caron Nazario after stopping him because Nazario, who also is black, didn’t have a license plate displayed on his brand new vehicle.

Perhaps you have seen the video of Gutierrez ordering Nazario to get out of his car. Nazario was trying to talk the officer down. Gutierrez responds by spraying Nazario in the face while he was sitting behind the steering wheel of his car! The more recent incident occurred in Windsor, Va.; the city manager has fired Gutierrez.

Yes, the incident involving Lt. Nazario occurred in December, prior to the start of the Chauvin trial. Still, intense public scrutiny of George Floyd’s death garnered tremendous attention. It called attention to police conduct throughout the nation.

Yet we now have video showing an officer overreacting in the extreme on a traffic stop that never, ever should have escalated to the level that it did.

It is fair to ask: Did the ex-officer choose to drop the hammer on the young Army officer only because he is a black man?

Joe Gutierrez: Windsor, Virginia police officer who pepper-sprayed an Army officer during a traffic stop, has been fired (msn.com)

This national conversation must continue. There must be some resolution to what is becoming what looks to be an all-too-frequent occurrence.

I have long stated my belief and support of police officers. I recognize the life-threatening danger to which they expose themselves every day they report for work. I have known many fine officers over my years covering their activities while working in the media; I live next door to a fine young man who patrols our highways for the Texas Department of Public Safety.

Still, what we now have seen unfold in Windsor, Va., simply boggles my noggin.

Waiting for end to this trial

By JOHN KANELIS / johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

I try not to let my fear consume me, but I do have a particular fear about how this trial under way in Minneapolis might play out.

A former police officer, Derek Chauvin, is on trial in the death of George Floyd, whose life was snuffed out when Chauvin pressed his knee on the back of Floyd’s neck for more than nine minutes.

The prosecution is about to wrap up its case against Chauvin, who is charged with second-degree manslaughter and third-degree murder.

My fear? It’s that the defense is going to persuade one juror that there is “reasonable doubt” that Chauvin’s actions resulted in Floyd’s death.

I haven’t heard every single word of the testimony so far, but I remain convinced that Chauvin’s brutal restraint tactic resulted in the death of a man as he was being arrested — for passing a counterfeit $20 bill. Talk about the punishment not fitting the crime.

I am sitting far away from the trial. I fear what the reaction might be if jurors cannot reach a unanimous verdict that Chauvin is guilty of murdering George Floyd.

Trial has me hooked

By JOHN KANELIS / johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

Someone called it the “trial of the century.” I fear it is such only because the 21st century is still in its relatively early stages.

Derek Chauvin is on trial for the death of George Floyd, who Chauvin pinned to the ground by pressing his knee into the back of Floyd’s neck until Floyd stopped breathing. Floyd likely died while lying on the ground after Chauvin and his Minneapolis police colleagues stopped him — get this — for passing a counterfeit $20 bill.

The trial has captured the nation’s attention. It has grabbed us by the throat. It won’t let go until the Hennepin County, Minn., jury delivers its verdict. Chauvin is charged with third-degree murder.

I am sitting out here in the peanut gallery. However, I believe Chauvin deserves to serve time in prison for what looks to me like unreasonable force in restraining a man who wasn’t even resisting. 

How might I react if the jury decides otherwise? Oh, my.  I cannot yet even process that outcome. I won’t go marching on the streets of my community; civil protest is not how I roll. I likely would be angry and I’ll likely have to settle on using this blog as a forum to register my outrage.

I do respect the American jury system of justice. I acknowledge that criminal defendants deserve the best defense they can get. To that extent, Derek Chauvin should not be denied that right as a U.S. citizen.

Still, I haven’t been this transfixed by a criminal trial since, oh, the time O.J. Simpson got away with killing his ex-wife and her friend.

I hope this jury delivers the correct verdict.

How do you find a jury for this trial?

(Photo by OLIVIER DOULIERY/AFP via Getty Images)

By JOHN KANELIS / johnkanelis_92@hotmail.com

This might be one of the world’s greatest puzzles … trying to find 12 competent Americans who can pass judgment on a former police officer accused of murdering a man in one of the nation’s most chronicled and publicized events — ever!

A Minneapolis trial court has commenced the process of finding jurors who will decide the fate of Derek Chauvin, accused of murdering George Floyd, the African-American man who suffocated after Chauvin placed his knee on the back of Floyd’s neck for 8 minutes, 46 seconds. The judge in this case has delayed jury selection for the time being.

There is no “allegedly” to be used here. The whole world has seen it. Chauvin snuffed the life out of Floyd as Floyd was pleading for his life. He said he couldn’t breathe. He begged Chauvin to let him get up. Chauvin didn’t budge.

How do lawyers determine who hasn’t seen that video, or who hasn’t drawn any conclusions based on what they saw? If they can find 12 men and women who live in Hennepin County, Minn., who know next to nothing about this case, then how competent are those individuals to pass judgment in this most notorious matter?

Hey, I’m sitting here far away, in the peanut gallery. I don’t have a direct stake in who they select.

And for that I am grateful. This is a tough call to make. I wish them  well. As for Derek Chauvin, I wish something quite different for him … which is why I never could serve on that jury.

This tragedy seems … different

Americans have witnessed so many tragedies that we have become numb — or so it seems — to their effects.

Politicians get assassinated. Buildings are blown up. Madmen open fire in schools, churches and movie theaters. And, yes, police officers kill citizens in acts of brutality.

However, this latest tragic event — the death of George Floyd more than a week ago on a Minneapolis street — seems sadly different. This one well might stick in our national consciousness for far longer than anything else we had have witnessed.

Why is that?

I want to posit a couple of theories.

One is the physical evidence we all have seen of a cop holding Floyd to the ground, with his knee pressing against the man’s neck. We watch the cop do nothing to respond to Floyd’s pleas for help, his cries for his mother, his crying out that “I can’t breathe.” The cop, Derek Chauvin, hold him down — while the suspect is handcuffed. Floyd loses consciousness. Chauvin still doesn’t lift his knee off of Floyd’s neck.

How in the name of human decency does one explain this away? How will this former police officer tell the world why he held down a man who offered no resistance until he no longer has a pulse? You’ve seen the video, yes? He looks at the young bystander who took the video as if to say, “So what are you looking at?”

This event calls out loudly and clearly to the issue of how police treat African-American men and whether they treat them differently than they do, say, white men or white women.

The second notion that might produce the seminal moment in police-black community relations has been the reaction of police agencies around the country. We are hearing other law enforcement officials condemning the actions of Derek Chauvin. They are standing — and kneeling — with peaceful protesters in cities from coast to coast to coast in solidarity with the concerns they are raising.

So, the dialogue has commenced. Americans are demanding justice be delivered to Chauvin and the three police colleagues who watched him kill George Floyd. They also are demanding that police cease demonizing American citizens simply because of their skin color.

This outrage should last for as long as it takes for there to be tangible evidence that we are slaying this deadly beast.