Like many people worldwide, we were there when the verdict was read in the Derek Chauvin trial. Fortunately, we live close enough to pick up CourtTV from Ann Arbor, Michigan.
It really wasn’t necessary. As the announcement that a verdict had been declared, all of the major television stations cut to a live feed.
We had watched, where we could, the trial and particularly the defense presentation to the jury. I think we’ve all seen the video of the incident and the image of Chauvin looking directly at the camera while kneeling on the neck of George Floyd. We were amazed at the theories presented to try to explain away the effects of having his air cut off for 9 minutes and 29 seconds. We remain puzzled as to why, with four police officers there, a better policing solution wasn’t taken.
The lawyer presentation wasn’t as smooth as you would see on a television show but everything seemed to fall along the lines of what you would expect. Then, as they say, the judge gave the case to the jury.
As couch jurists, we figured that the greatest period of time would be spent selecting a foreperson to return the verdict to the court. Half an hour tops.
As we know now, it took something like ten hours over the course of two days before the verdict was returned. Even from a distance, we were sitting on pins and needles because we’ve seen trials like this in the past and an unpredictable verdict returned. As we know, that wasn’t the case.
Sadly, there are those who would use this opportunity to get their names and faces on the news. It continues today. Lots of talk about the need for reform but will it truly happen? Then, there are the deniers as well. Will it ever stop?
At least for this moment in time, there were no surprises with the results and justice was delivered.