Image 01 Image 03

Chauvin State Appeal Argued – Low Likelihood Of Success Despite Being Deprived Of A Fair Trial

Chauvin State Appeal Argued – Low Likelihood Of Success Despite Being Deprived Of A Fair Trial

Key issues raised in oral argument were a juror who allegedly lied about attending a George Floyd protest, and the fortress courthouse atmosphere because of threats of rioting if there were a not guilty verdict.

We last checked in on the appeal by Derek Chauvin of his state court conviction in the death of George Floyd on October 12, 2022, when we noted that Derek Chauvin State Appeal Now Fully Briefed. The oral argument before the mid-level appeals court took place on January 18, 2022.

Media coverage of the oral argument was infuriating because it repeated the false claim that Chauvin had his knee on Floyd’s neck for 9 minutes.

“Floyd died on May 25, 2020, after Chauvin, who is white, pinned the Black man to the ground with his knee on his neck for 9 1/2 minutes.”

That’s simply not true. Chauvin’s knee was on Floyd’s neck for a very short time, mostly the pressure was on the upper back. Indeed, the prosecution’s medical testimony was that Floyd died from “positional asphyxiation” caused by Floyd being placed face down on his stomach and chest such that the pressure on his back prevented him from inhaling. The forensics found no evidence of pressure on the neck.

In an egregious trial error, the prosecution was permitted to have a non-expert (“lay”) martial arts instructor eyewitness testify that pressure to the coratid artery cut off blood flow to the brain, but that contradicted the actual medical evidence and testimony. It was one of a long list of ways in which Chauvin was deprived of a fair trial.

Here are some of our prior posts demonstrating problems with the Chauvin trial:

We’ve been following the because receiving a fair trial — even for “guilty” people — is so fundamental to our pre-existing now-fading justice system. Here, I said in an interview after the close of the evidence but before the jury verdict, that there was evidence of excessive use of force, but enough disputed evidence that the jury could go either way:

The prosecutor’s best piece of evidence is that videotape, the nine minute videotape where even if you can justify, and I think you can, Floyd being taken to the ground, being put in a prone position at some point, I think even the prosecution’s use of force witnesses admitted that that was okay, but it’s the length of time. And the fact that Chauvin keeps the pressure on him. It’s not quite knee to the neck, like the media saying, but kept the pressure on him even after he visibly stopped breathing. I mean, for a minute or two, after that, uh, just, there’s just that length of time is brutal.

And I expect that that tape will be showed or at least part of it will be showed in the closing arguments, by the prosecution. That’s their best piece of evidence that if you just turned them on his side, or if you’d given him a little more breathing room, so to speak, you know, halfway through the nine minutes, he’d be alive. So that I think is a really tough thing for the defense to overcome. I think they can justify a lot of what was done, but it’s those extra three to four, three to five minutes that are going to be a real problem.

This local TV account of the oral argument summarizes the issues (but repeats the false 9-minutes to the neck claim). The judges were skeptical at best of Chauvin’s claims, particularly because of the deference given to trial court judges on the details of how trials are conducted. Much of the argument concerned a juror who allegedly lied about attending a George Floyd protest that was not disclosed, and perhaps gives Chauvin a minor ray of hope on the appeal. There’s no reason to think from the oral arguments that a new trial will be ordered.

You can watch the full argument below. At the 36 minute mark the state’s attorney repeated the claim that Chauvin’s knee was on Floyd’s neck for over 9 minutes.

Not only is this appeal a long-shot, it wouldn’t get Chauin out of jail. He’s already pleaded guilty to federal civil rights charges and received a sentence approximately as long as he received on the state charges. And even if the judges agreed with Chauvin, that would only mean there would be a re-trial.

So the Chauvin prosecution shows that when the politics are overwhelming, the rights of the accused get trampled. And most people couldn’t care less.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


A progressive condition prompted a premature exit, followed by an assembled mob that delayed access by authorized medical personnel, and nationwide insurrections colored by diversity [dogma] (e.g. racism). One step forward, two steps backward.

In my opinion he ROYALLY screwed himself when he pled guilty to the federal charges.

Regardless of what a laughable travesty the trial and jury was (the lying juror in the Black Lives Matter t-shirt should have been an automatic mistrial), it was already going to take an incredibly courageous judge to overturn it, and NO judge is going to do it after the guilty plea.

    Skip in reply to Olinser. | January 21, 2023 at 9:11 am

    Fully agree, same I think for the Jan6 Ralliers

    Paula in reply to Olinser. | January 21, 2023 at 9:22 am

    He was already screwed.

    artichoke in reply to Olinser. | January 22, 2023 at 1:34 am

    That judge wasn’t lacking courage. He worked hard to get that 2nd degree murder charge added. A lot of things that could have been disallowed to the prosecution were not. I think he wanted the verdict that came out.

    And lack of courage is no excuse. NONE. That’s part of what we gave him the lifetime job and high salary for. If we can’t get that, our people are inadequate to the system we used to have. It was a good run.

Bottom line is that blacks with Dem support are complicit in a lot of injustice.

I like seeing people succeed on merit, I am completely fed up with Affirmative shit, which is racism. Placing Affirmative incompetents in industry and government greatly lowers competiveness.

This poor guy was absolutely railroaded.

Why is there no billionaire like Soros backing non-leftist judges and DAs? Did Chauvin actually break any laws? I’m not seeing it.

Imagine America if his case got overturned.

    Suburban Farm Guy in reply to windbag. | January 21, 2023 at 10:02 am

    Not fun at all being held hostage by mobs of vicious racists on one side and their well-heeled NGO/ Soros backing on the other. Chauvin had to be tossed into the volcano. Science!

    Sanddog in reply to windbag. | January 21, 2023 at 11:35 am

    And that is why it will never be overturned. The powers that be figure that incarcerating Chauvin and torturing him for the rest of his life will keep the thugs from burning and looting.

      gonzotx in reply to Sanddog. | January 21, 2023 at 11:39 am

      No they won’t they are looting everything everywhere everyday without any fear

      DaveGinOly in reply to Sanddog. | January 23, 2023 at 1:21 pm

      That’s the theory. In effect, it is operational in this one instance (at best). The next triggering episode will cause more riots (as they already have) regardless of having achieved a “win” in this case. Effectively, the outcome of the Chauvin trial did nothing to quiet or mollify the Leftist mob in the long term. Any effect was temporary.

    Patriots should meet the worthless hordes of rioters with volleys of musketry.

    artichoke in reply to windbag. | January 22, 2023 at 1:30 am

    Imagine it now. We would be far better off to have this overturned and go through the pain. Some people would, hopefully, find out that their grievance does not overcome other people’s rights, and that intimidation doesn’t work as much as they wanted it to.

Lest we not forget the silver lining
Floyd has not reoffended since this arrest

E Howard Hunt | January 21, 2023 at 8:51 am

Should Chauvin be granted a new trial and win, then he could be pardoned, or his sentence commuted on the federal charges if a real man were elected president. Nixon did this with Calley. Chauvin is an innocent man.

Suburban Farm Guy | January 21, 2023 at 10:13 am

Is there no way to withdraw a guilty plea, to claim coercion? (Not a lawyer, I had to use spell check on ‘coercion’) Seems certain he was under threat of mob violence (as also were entire cities and society at large) — he obviously succumbed to some very bad legal advice under the pressure.

I think his appeal has plenty of merit but I agree there’s little chance of it being successful. What he really needs is for a juror to admit they felt pressure to convict or something that shows Dr. Tobin’s testimony to be junk science.

Char Char Binks | January 21, 2023 at 10:49 am

Chauvin was badly treated, but he should have known better. As the senior officer on the scene, he should have instructed Officer Keung, as the blackest officer on the scene, to handle the drug addict himself, or call for other, blacker officers for assistance. After Slager, Tensing, and Pantaleo, he should’ve known better than to go anywhere floyd’s neck that mattered

    DaveGinOly in reply to Char Char Binks. | January 23, 2023 at 1:23 pm

    You’re right. Someone else here mentions the episode was about optics, and the optics were extremely bad. What was needed in the situation was better optics.

Char Char Binks | January 21, 2023 at 10:56 am

The lying media says the juror attended an mlk Day rally, not more accurately a bLM rally, and omits the “knee-on neck” shirt

Thought the Chauvin felony Murder charge was ruled unconstitutional in the previous Somali cop case. Anyone know how this effects chauvin presently.

Poor guy, anyone who is still a PO has to have their head examined

Meanwhile, 2 years ago, without employing any other tactics, Capitol Police Lt. Michael Byrd unjustifiably killed unarmed Ashli Babbit in cold blood when he drew his service revolver, and fired point blank into her neck during a mostly peaceful protest of the unconstitutional potus election of 2020. Byrd was hailed as a hero, and faced no criminal charges.

Chauvin may not be a good guy, but at least he didn’t execute drug addled and violent Saint George in cold blood.

    artichoke in reply to LB1901. | January 22, 2023 at 1:31 am

    I hope the Statute of Limitations doesn’t run out before a Republican AG can charge Michael Byrd with murder.

    DaveGinOly in reply to LB1901. | January 23, 2023 at 1:30 pm

    Video shows that Byrd approached the situation at the door with his sidearm already in-hand, and his finger on the trigger. I believe this posture indicates he had already made the decision to shoot before even having an opportunity to evaluate the threat (if there was, indeed, any threat at all). Two or three other offices already at the door with their guns drawn decided the threat didn’t justify lethal force. (And at least one of them can be seen to have his finger off the trigger.) Byrd’s decision to shoot seems unsupported by the non-actions of his fellow officers. Why wasn’t the “reasonable person” (or “reasonable officer”) standard applied? Here’s an instance were “reasonableness” in the minds of others didn’t require conjecture, there were others actually there whose actions/inactions demonstrated the standard.

    Edward in reply to LB1901. | January 23, 2023 at 2:47 pm

    Byrd had his service pistol out, aimed at her and ready to shoot before she managed to get balanced in the window frame. In one video you can see his finger on and off the trigger before he even stepped forward to shoot. According to a transcript I read in his interview with Lester Holt he told Holt that he didn’t know if it was a threat before he shot it (where “it” is Ashli Babbit, and he in fact used “it” without comment from Holt). So not only was she not a threat, he admitted that he didn’t know if she was a threat (as we all know a requirement for use of deadly force), but assassinated her anyway. And (so far) got away with it, and likely will continue to get away with murder.

BierceAmbrose | January 21, 2023 at 1:22 pm

What nuance in the comments — remember when “nuance” was a good thing? Net:

“This guy screwed up. We need to handle this. But handle it right.”

You folks are giving me hope. Stop that.

When Chauvin pled guilty to anything he gave it away, and became fair game. That was dumb and bad legal advice, if that’s where it came from.

The important thing here is not Chauvin. He’s still going to be in prison even if he wins the appeal.

It is however important to future defendants who may be in similar circumstances with lying jurors, mass protests at court houses essentially threating violence if they don’t get the right verdict, and even acts of going after jurors by trying to dox them.

All of which seem to becoming more common when racial factors are in play.

Question for Jacobson

W Jacobson – can you clarify what can be asked during cross examination.

For example , the cardiologist testified that the floyd did not die from the bad heart. On direct, he was not questioned on the effect of the fluid in the lungs.

Since the issue of the excess fluids in the lungs was not asked during direct, is the cross barred from asking about the fluid?

I recall that if direct testifies on point A, but nothing is mentioned regarding point B, then the cross cant ask about point B.

Please clarify


Weren’t four or five “causes of death” introduced by various experts? “How did GF die?” is not supposed to be a multiple-choice question or a smorgasbord from which the jurors may choose the correct answer. These multiple opinions actually demonstrated that the “experts” couldn’t agree to a cause of death. It’s usually the job of a defense expert to create doubt in the minds of the jurors. In this case, the prosecution’s experts undermined each other’s testimony. How could any of them be considered credible?

    Obviously a man with severe heart disease, fluid buildup in the lungs, a case of Covid-19, high levels of meth and fentanyl in the blood, and enough drugs in his stomach to kill an ox, died from being placed on his chest and having a person keep a knee in the vicinity of his back in case he got violent. I mean just because that restraint had been used without fatality hundreds of times before in the city doesn’t mean…. Oh, wait.