Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Keith Ellison Chosen to Lead Prosecution in George Floyd Case

Keith Ellison Chosen to Lead Prosecution in George Floyd Case

Can he put aside his activism to not mess up the case and present a case to give George Floyd the justice he deserves?

Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison will lead the prosecution in the George Floyd case with assistance from Hennepin County Attorney Mike Freeman. It turns out “some elected officials and the Minnesota chapter of the” ACLU demanded a special prosecutor since the community does not trust Freeman.

You guys might remember Ellison as a former Democratic congressman. His ex-girlfriend accused him of pulling her around the bedroom by her hair. He also publicly supported ANTIFA.

Officer Derek Chauvin faces counts of third-degree murder and second-degree manslaughter.

Ellison promised that the state is “pursuing justice” and “pursuing truth” and “pursuing accountability” while asking for the community’s “trust.”

But can people trust Ellison? He has a history of political activism. Can they trust him to put aside his political wants to present the best case so George Floyd can get justice?

Only two days ago Ellison told rioters to take out their anger on the police instead of the National Guard.

He then excused the rioters:

Ellison went on to say that riots such as the one unfolding in Minneapolis are how the “unheard get heard.”

“Don’t just dismiss that and ignore it and relegate it to just criminality and bad behavior,” he said. “Actually ask yourself what’s going on there.”

The appointment also came after Ellison said on Fox News that black people in Minnesota had a “reason to fear” the police.

This is the man who once proudly voiced his support for ANTIFA, who is accused of infiltrating the protests and causing the riots.

https://web.archive.org/web/20180104000356/https:/twitter.com/keithellison/status/948657342308147202

Ellison’s son Jeremiah, who sits on the Minneapolis City Council, followed his footsteps with Antifa.

Jeremiah tweeted his support for ANTIFA after President Donald Trump announced his administration wants to label the group a terrorist organization.

Let’s not forget Ellison’s vocal love for racist Louis Farrakhan!

George Floyd deserves the best prosecution. He deserves prosecutors who are willing to put aside their political views and activism to give him the best possible case to receive the justice he rightfully deserves.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

2smartforlibs | June 1, 2020 at 11:07 am

Do you really think this is going to be a fair trial?

    Milhouse in reply to 2smartforlibs. | June 1, 2020 at 11:31 am

    It may very well be. It’s not up to the prosecutor, after all. So long as they draw a fair judge, and the defense is able to discover any illegal activity by Ellison and bring it to the judge’s attention, the trial can be completely fair. Also, Freeman being still involved as Ellison’s assistant may mean he can’t get away with too much; Freeman would see it as his duty to report anything he saw to the judge.

    notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to 2smartforlibs. | June 1, 2020 at 12:41 pm

    A MUST SEE MESSAGE FROM PRESIDENT TRUMP
    ABOUT THIS MOMENT IN TIME.

    Students For Trump
    @
    Twitter doesn’t like this video being posted on their platform – they even banned the person who posted it……

    https://twitter.com/i/status/1267202212192796673

Floyd and Chauvin both worked security at the El Nuevo Rodeo Club on Lake Street in south Minneapolis — and overlapped shifts on popular music nights within the last year, former club owner Maya Santamaria told local outlet KSTP.
https://nypost.com/2020/05/29/george-floyd-and-derek-chauvin-once-worked-overlapping-shifts/

    Paul in reply to Neo. | June 1, 2020 at 11:33 am

    And in the articles I’ve read on this, the owner of the venue says that the cop worked the door and George worked inside. She said she has no reason to believe they ever actually met or interacted with each other.

    It’s an interesting angle, but at this point there is nothing to suggest they actually knew each other.

    p.s. Sorry to go all Milhouse on you.

      notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to Paul. | June 1, 2020 at 12:43 pm

      The opposite is also true.

      They knew….

      barnesto in reply to Paul. | June 1, 2020 at 12:50 pm

      Since they both worked there for over a decade together, the chances of them not knowing each other are slim to none. And all my money is on none. Floyd’s lawyer admitted they knew each other on Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan this weekend.

      There is more to this story that isn’t being reported or investigated publicly. If you think this is a case of police brutality and that the subsequent riots are for justice or to be heard… simultaneously in over 10 cities… with pallets of bricks placed strategically in some cities…

      Weird how all these things just happen one after the other after the other after the other, right?

      Russia, Russia, Russia
      Ukraine!
      Impeachment
      More Russia!
      Wuhan Virus – that was ignored for months during Impeachment!
      Anti-lockdown protesters are killing gradma
      Riots, Riots, Riots – which are now being blamed on, you guessed it, the Russians. Or white supremacists. Dealer’s choice, really.

      Life doesn’t work this way. It’s mathematically impossible.

We will find out what kind of lawyer Keith Ellison really is. His resume demonstrates political ambition, but it’s not clear whether he ever got any real experience at lawyering.

    buck61 in reply to Valerie. | June 1, 2020 at 11:28 am

    You know darn well he isn’t going to do any work except for to sign his name next to the X on whatever documents they put in front of him.

What if Chauvin meets Mr. Epstein before the trail? A fair trial resulting in an acquittal will not be a risk any longer. A lot of politicians would sleep better.

Can he put aside his activism to not mess up the case and present a case to give George Floyd the justice he deserves?

He probably can. That’s not the real question, though, is it? He probably can do that, but he definitely has no intention of doing so. Fortunately it’s not up to him. He’s the prosecutor, not the judge, so there’s a limit to what he can do to subvert justice.

    GWB in reply to Milhouse. | June 1, 2020 at 12:09 pm

    He can certainly ensure an acquittal by doing his job poorly (like overcharging). Which means more riots and more racial division and more unrest (if he times it right) going into the November elections.

    Why would you think Ellison was aiming for a conviction?

    Dr. Ransom in reply to Milhouse. | June 1, 2020 at 12:29 pm

    Pfff, Buddy, you have no idea.

    Virginia42 in reply to Milhouse. | June 1, 2020 at 12:38 pm

    No, he can’t. And there’s plenty he can do to subvert justice. It’s almost like they want this to get tossed on appeal.

Either we take back our schools, or the likes of this Jew-hating, leftist radical islamist maggot will become president.

Oh, wait a minute. One already did.

You want a repeat?

I’ll mmake you a prediction right now. Unless the prosecution produces a smoking gun that Chauvin’s actions 1) were illegal and 2) actually caused Floyd’s death, he will walk. This happened in the Treyvon Martin case, the Michael Brown Case, the Eric Garner case and in the case of the Baltimore Six. Why? Because these are not legitimate legal prosecutions, but political show prosecutions designed to assuage mob sentiment or to pander to a particular political sub-group. Once the evidence is presented to a jury, it is so glaringly deficient, that the cases are essentially thrown out by the jury. Then, the civil unrest, which the prosecutions were supposed to prevent or stop, flair up again.

In the Floyd-Chauvin case, the same playbook is being followed. First, a factually deficient arrest affidavit results in an arrest. Then the state places a political sycophant prosecutor in charge to continue the legally deficient prosecution. The jurists involved either refuse to exercise their duties and dump the case into the laps of a jury or actively work to support the prosecution in its efforts to continue the legally deficient prosecution. When it goes to a jury, the case is too weak to gain a conviction. So, here we have simply a reboot of this scenario. In the meantime, the progressive leaders of our largest cities and some states allow the mob to run unchecked harming innocent people. They only bring the force of law to bear upon those people justifiably trying to defend themselves from a lawless mob.

    American Human in reply to Mac45. | June 1, 2020 at 12:03 pm

    Mr. Mac, as Milhouse implies, the case may be fair and just. Just because his knee on the neck of Mr. Floyd may not have directly caused his death, it is possible that the actions of the police overall lead to his death.
    I don’t know what would or would not be admissible in a court, did they really need five or so policemen to arrest a possible forger? The preliminary coroner’s report indicated that he was complaining about not being able to breathe before he was on the ground with a knee on his neck. Did the police follow standard procedure? I’ve heard it said that the knee-on-the-neck move should never ever be used by anyone. He didn’t want to get into the police car, which it seems is what may have started all this. He was on the ground with his hands cuffed behind his back. Did the police need to kneel on him? At one point there seemed to be three police kneeling on him. What if it is determined that the police tactics did not cause his death but they are only on trial for less dramatic charges? They could move the trial to Timbuktu and the “wrong” verdict would still cause massive rioting such as we’ve seen.
    I don’t believe he’ll be convicted of 3rd degree murder (whatever it is). There would need to be some sort of proven intent, right? I’m not rooting for either side, just giving an opinion. What I truly believe is:
    1 – MPD did not need to have five or so police officers to take arrest and take this guy in
    2 – Chauvin didn’t need to put his knee on the guys neck, especially for 8 or 9 minutes. That is what set everyone off. If he had not done that and they guy still died none of this would have happened. It was the whole visual image of a white knee on a black neck.
    3 – No matter what happens from here out, there is no good ending to this.
    Our beloved Republic takes another step toward total government control of our lives…..

      Mr. Human. You are totally mistaken, here.

      In the first place, Chauvin was charged with the homicide of Floyd. The PC affidavit actually says that the ME did NO find any evidence of asphyxiation or strangulation but strong evidence that Floyd suffered from serious underlying medical conditions as well as possibly on some form of drug. Nowhere in that charging document does it specify WHAT actions, taken by Chauvin caused the death if Floyd. Nowhere in that document does it charge that the arrest or any of the action of the police was illegal. So, what actions of the police caused Floyd’s death. A lawful felony arrest?

      Now, as to police procedures. The whole point of having overwhelming force on the scene of an arrest is to convince the person being arrested NOT to resist said arrest. With 4×1 odds, most people will submit to arrest without violently resisting. Also, having a large number of LEOs on scene makes it easier to subdue a violent individual, without resorting to deadly force. So, while it was not necessary to have four officers involved in the arrest, it was tactically desirable. Kneeling on a person’s neck is not a good idea. It is dangerous and can lead to serious injury or the death of the person so restrained. However, in this case, there is no evidence that the knee caused any damage to Floyd. While the optics were terrible, things are not always as they seem. That is why we have investigations to provide factual evidence to support conclusions.

      The death of George Floyd was used as an excuse to start widespread civil unrest designed to further destroy the United States of America. The people behind this inserrection seek to advance their own power and agenda.

        rocky71 in reply to Mac45. | June 1, 2020 at 5:19 pm

        “The whole point of having overwhelming force on the scene of an arrest is to convince the person being arrested NOT to resist said arrest.”

        Additionally ‘extra’ officers are often dispatched to provide a buffer from other persons in the area for officer(s) actually apprehending a suspect to reduce chances of bystander interference and a potential for a routine event to be unnecessarily escalated.

      Milhouse in reply to American Human. | June 1, 2020 at 7:04 pm

      Mac is correct. We will see the facts when they come out, and maybe they will support a conviction, but I wouldn’t bet on it. I think Mac’s prediction is more likely than not to be correct, at least on the facts currently known. If the autopsy results released by Ben Crump’s hired quack turn out to be correct, that would be a game changer. But I’m very skeptical.

    notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to Mac45. | June 1, 2020 at 12:47 pm

    “Then, the civil unrest, which the prosecutions were supposed to” FORMENT…..

    FIFY

Perhaps this means Freeman understands that there really is no case that he can prosecute, at least not on the murder charge that is the only charge that will satisfy the angry left. So he is happy to dump this in Ellison’s lap?

Freeman made comments that clearly hinted at that.

    Eric R. in reply to Wisewerds. | June 1, 2020 at 2:36 pm

    And Herr Ellison is more than happy to try and get an acquittal about three days before the election.

What are you saying? Keith Ellison is too incompetent to conduct a show trial against (former) Officer Chauvin? He would be the perfect choice.

From the beginning of this trial, I have tried and failed to keep some of my friends from joining in the mob’s idea of ‘justice.’ Mary, you wrote an entire piece here without one single concern about what is fair for the cop. I’ve had to endure a couple weeks of commentators prejudging this case, even as evidence (not opinion or conjecture) rolled in that challenged the original narrative that a white cop intentionally murdered an unarmed black man. (See: autopsy; charging documents) In a short span of time we have gone from the mob calling for First Degree Murder and Capital Punishment for all four officers, to the weakest of charges, Third Degree Murder and Manslaughter for one officer.

I never said Chauvin was innocent of any crime or shouldn’t have been summarily fired. I was concerned about fairness for all parties involved. Rather than doing what is the easiest, and most virtuous in joining with the mob’s demand for blood, we have to make sure that the process of a fair trial is untainted with this bloodlust being displayed in the media 24/7.

“You guys might remember Ellison as a former Democratic congressman.”

I remember him more as a Muslim in Congress serving his Allah and not bring faithful to his Article VI oath to support the Constitution. Muslims believe man-made law like the Constitution and laws made pursuant to it have no place here, only their Shariah.

The girl friend of Muslim Ellison learned firsthand about Surah 4:34 and the place of women: “Men look after women, because Allah has made the one of them to excel the other, and because they spend of their property (for the support of women). So good women are obedient, guarding in secret that which Allah hath guarded. As for those from whom ye fear rebellion, admonish them and banish them to beds apart, and scourge them.”

Just a bit of hypothetical pondering here:
Do you think that Ellison took the case so he could screw it up and ensure further unrest and violence. I know the classical thinking is that he’s doing it in a bid for a higher political office. But given his ties to Antifa *****?

Can he put aside his activism to not mess up the case and present a case to give George Floyd the justice he deserves?

Where would we be without rhetorical questions?

I’ve gotta side with Millhouse on this. If the judge is fair it will be a fair trial. We’ll see.

IMO, Officer Chauvin was wrong and his actions contributed to Mr. Floyd’s death. The information published indicates the officers on scene believed Floyd was in medical distress before he was ever put on the ground. Additionally it seems Officer Lane had requested they move Floyd to his side because he was concerned and Chauvin said no.

I don’t believe intent is part of Murder III in MN so it seems the bar is lower. IMO, Chauvin has a great deal of culpability based on what I know today. I’m not an AAL but a social worker with the court (I do PSI’s, post conviction and pre-release assessments). I used to work in a secured facility with sex offenders and then MH offenders and have about 15 years experience with CPI training to restrain offenders. The first thing we learned is when someone said, “I can’t breath”, you need to be concerned because while you may think if they can talk they can breath, this simply isn’t true. Watching the video based on my experience and training, Chauvin is unquestionably wrong. I can’t say if that makes him legally culpable but ethically and morally, yes. (I probably wouldn’t be a good juror).

I guess we’ll see what happens.

    Know who else contributed to Floyd’s death? Floyd. His conduct in resisting arrest was the single factor in the escalation of the use of force by Chauvin to effect Floyd’s arrest. This should never been framed as a murder case (specific intent to kill), but a question about the level of force utilized by Chauvin. I guess talking about training, policies and procedures in dealing with full blown ‘excited delirium’ isn’t as much fun as virtue signaling by those who don’t care to know what law applies to what facts.

      Milhouse in reply to Redneck Law. | June 1, 2020 at 7:08 pm

      His conduct in resisting arrest was the single factor in the escalation of the use of force by Chauvin to effect Floyd’s arrest.

      Did he resist arrest? From what I’ve read it seems to me that he may simply have had a panic attack at being put into the car, in which case this was not his fault and it’s all very sad, but of course that would not make it Chauvin’s fault either.

        ConradCA in reply to Milhouse. | June 1, 2020 at 11:52 pm

        He resisted entering the patrol car and even after 3 officers struggled with him he was successful by dropping to the ground. I expect that the officers were tired of fighting him and decided to just wait him out.

          Milhouse in reply to ConradCA. | June 2, 2020 at 3:56 am

          Again, did he resist or did he simply have a panic attack? That is not resisting and is completely not the person’s fault. But it’s not the police’s fault either.

Given his political record and known sympathies, I expect him to try to prosecute not just Chauvin but the entire Minneapolis PD.

The Old Guard dies, but does not surrender.
Nicolas Chauvin (apocryphal, perhaps)

My gut tells me Ellison will be as effective as Mueller in leading this, just a name that they may recognize.
This is also a convenient way to get Ellison away from having any direct involvement in prosecuting the looters and rioters. He can claim I am already busy with another case.

You know what? I think he wants Chauvin acquitted. There is no profit in justice.

notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital | June 1, 2020 at 12:37 pm

Short answer NO.

Ellison IS Antifa.

James O’Keefe
@
We warned you…

https://mobile.twitter.com/JamesOKeefeIII/status/1267131863405146124

George Floyd deserves the best prosecution. He deserves prosecutors who are willing to put aside their political views and activism to give him the best possible case to receive the justice he rightfully deserves.

The defendant also deserves no less.

    Spot on, Tom. The minute the case becomes solely about ‘Justice for George Floyd’, the system has already taken sides, making a mockery of the fundamental fairness of the American criminal justice system. Chauvin is looking at 25 years with Murder 3. I’m saddened that so many here feel that such a sentence is insignificant.

Keef FarraKlan Mohammad is unworthy of American citizenship. Maybe he and Ilhan The Harlot can enjoy a connubial weekend of faith tradition–at government expense.

Positioning himself to preempt attacks?

In a week, when AG Barr is pointing to evidence that Ellison colluded with Antifa leaders in inciting the mob, it can be angrily condemned as Evil Trump trying to defend Chauvin by attacking his prosecutor.

You’ll know if the trial is rigged if they do not grant a change in venue away from the Twin Cities, where finding a non-biased jury in a metro area full of Communists is well nigh impossible.

Redneck Law;

Here’s the actual MN Law;

“609.195 MURDER IN THE THIRD DEGREE.
(a) Whoever, without intent to effect the death of any person, causes the death of another by perpetrating an act eminently dangerous to others and evincing a depraved mind, without regard for human life, is guilty of murder in the third degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 25 years.

(b) Whoever, without intent to cause death, proximately causes the death of a human being by, directly or indirectly, unlawfully selling, giving away, bartering, delivering, exchanging, distributing, or administering a controlled substance classified in Schedule I or II, is guilty of murder in the third degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 25 years or to payment of a fine of not more than $40,000, or both.”

No intent is needed.

    I read the entire law last week. (It was discussed by Andrew Branca on his personal blog, as well as discussed by Prof Jacobson here at LI. The Professor even referenced a legal opinion that Murder 3 does not apply based on a 2006 case in Minnesota. I’ll let you search for it.)

    I honestly don’t get your point for quoting the statute to me. Up until charging docs were filed and Chauvin was arrested, everybody was talking about this as an “intent to kill” case, except for a small minority with an actual legal background.

Let’s back up for a minute to the arrest itself.

According to the Probable Cause Statement involving then-MPD Officer Derek Chauvin’s arrest, Officer Thomas Lane placed the now-deceased suspect under arrest for passing an allegedly counterfeit $20 bill at a nearby merchant as valid tender during a recent sale. No citation to the law that was presumably violated in this case was made in the above document.

Ponder this: You pay for goods at a merchant with a $20 bill you’ve taken out of your wallet. You do not know it’s counterfeit; you got it as change for the $50 bill you gave the gas station attendant yesterday. You thus have no mens reus or guilty mind, indicating no knowledge your action constitutes and you had no conscious intent to commit a crime.

You’re advised of the crime you’re being cited for by a police officer, who was contacted by the merchant you just paid. You’re then arrested and handcuffed as you’re led into the squad car to be booked at the nearby police station.

Does this replay make any sense on its face? Is being the subject of an accuser’s pointed finger enough to have you arrested — for a crime you did not know you were committing, and which crime you had no intent to commit?

This inquiry is based, of course, on the presumption of innocence, in case it still matters. And if this inquiry is valid, how in the world do (some?) people manage to live with Minnesota police procedure?

As a white American, would I be arrested in, say, Minneapolis or St Paul if I paid for merchandise with what the merchant determined to be counterfeit currency that, unbeknownst to me, was in fact counterfeit and knowing the law on the books is color-blind?

Are peaceful protesters — those I’d like to hear from if I could only do so, above all the distracting din and arson attributed to the rioters in their midst — saying, then, that only members of the Hennepin County African-American community are arrested on the spot for having “committed” such a crime, while other citizens living in the same jurisdiction are not?

So, if what the decedent in this case was suspected of doing knowingly and intentionally, is his immediate, on the spot arrest a valid police procedure?

I would think that the “knowingly and intentionally” part of the action is questionable, to say the least, and not immediately arrest-worthy, to say the most.

More importantly, what does AG Ellison or CA Freeman think?
Was the entire arrest invalid? And anyway, wouldn’t passing a counterfeit bill as tender, once proved, come under US, rather than Minnesota law (due to its potential for interstate involvement), or is just the act of counterfeiting currency itself tasked to the Secret Service to arrest and refer the suspect for prosecution, and the passing of the fake bills is prosecuted by Minnesota, under state statute. Citable somewhere, I’d suppose.

The whole, entire, terrible, terrible mess — and maybe over a completely unnecessary, even invalid state-based arrest. Wouldn’t that be something?

I’m just that unclear and uncomfortable about these issues.

    I see your point and it’s worth asking rhetorically, since it changes nothing: “Why wasn’t Mr. Floyd simply given a citation and released over such a minor offense?”

    MN does have a state counterfeiting law:

    609.632 COUNTERFEITING OF CURRENCY.
    Subdivision 1.Manufacturing; printing. Whoever, with the intent to defraud, falsely makes, alters, prints, …

    Mac45 in reply to GatorGuy. | June 1, 2020 at 4:04 pm

    What we do not know is what Floyd may have said to the merchant or the police. We do not know if he had additional counterfeit bills in his possession. We do not know exactly what he was arrested for, as his death precluded any charges being proffered. And, we do not know the particulars of the incident as expressed by the officers involved. See, when you purchase anything of value with a counterfeit bill, you potentially commit two or more crimes. There is the crime of possessing and or tendering a counterfeit bill. Then there is theft by fraud, as the bill is worthless. As it is possible for a person not to realize that he is in possession of counterfeit currency, usually an on-scene investigation is conducted to determine whether there is probable cause to believe that the person who passed the bill did so knowing it was counterfeit. And, because the person tendered the counterfeit bill, he is now a witness and must assist in the investigation, unless doing so would incriminate him.

    The problem with the arrest of Chauvin is that the PC affidavit did not specify exactly how, through what actions, he violated the statute charged.

I think this change of prosecutors is great! Unless actual factual evidence showing Chauvin caused Floyd’s death can be introduced, Chauvin cannot be convicted of either murder or manslaughter. The only factual evidence to date from the autopsy is against that conclusion, not supporting it. The jury will be largely composed of people who do not support rioters. Ellison’s grandstanding will blow up in his face. The Great Black Sharia Hope will go down in defeat. He will then see what losers are worth to the Donkey Party. Bigoted black racist fools will be angry, maybe even riot. So what else is new? There will be more evidence available to the DOJ from domestic terrorists in MN that will be collected by the NSA. We watch Ellison’s hubris, but patiently await his nemesis.

Katy L. Stamper | June 1, 2020 at 4:21 pm

Keith Ellison will do whatever he deems will get his side the greatest advantage. What factors that will involve I do not know, but I do know that will be what he will always keep in mind.

No.
But, there are no winners in this fight.
A Democrat city for over 50 years…
That you would think with their Liberal Values would not tolerate any sorta racist stuff..
( They are actually the worst )
And a repeat offender who caught a mean Cop on a Bad day, or managed to light him up.
Absolutely no winners here.

As far as chances for a fair trial, that is near nonexistent. Numerous elected officials have already implied these cops guilty.

I don’t expect much leadership from AG Ellison, truly a legal lightweight. Seems he marches to the beat of a different drummer. Problem; the drummer is Calypso Louie Farrakhan, Nation of Islam.

It’s shameful Ellison holds the position of AG. What’s with the people of Minnesota? Ellison and Omar. Is that the best they can do?

If I recall correctly, Ellison was a p[al of Farrakhan–in short, a black terrrorist

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend