While I didn’t watch it all, I watched an awful lot of the Chauvin trial either live or via replays as part of panel discussions. Most of what I watched was on HLN and MSNBC. One thing that struck me and was addressed by a pretty good panel that was part of HLN’s coverage was it was only Eric Nelson in court defending Chauvin. That prompts the question of why?
This was no ordinary case. It was going to get not just national but international coverage. As for Nelson, looking into his background he’s experienced and seems fairly competent. He’s a founding member of a small firm (a dozen lawyers) in Minneapolis that sprang up back in 2005. He eventually became part of a group that the police union in that city has on hand to represent their members in various matters. So he’s experienced and knows what he’s doing. Still, any case where murder charges are on the table is huge and this one was always going to be bigger than most.
A look at some stories about Nelson indicate that yes, he got some support from other lawyers in his firm, as well as the lawyers for other cops charged in this murder who are scheduled to go on trial later this summer. Oh, and contrary to a story making the rounds lately Trump never promised to pay for Chauvin’s defense, much less sent dollar one. We’re talking about Trump here so the thought that anyone would have believed that nonsense is laughable. No, Chauvin’s defense was paid for by the police union even though he’d been fired. The union’s statement was that with nineteen years of service Chauvin deserved their support. And they hired a good attorney they knew and trusted for the job.
But ONLY Eric Nelson.
So again I pose the question of why? Yes, such cases and lawyers to handle them are expensive to defend and there are after all other defendants for which the police union is covering legal costs. However, one result of splitting off into separate trials is that defendant’s individual interests are no longer necessarily aligned. That means to represent Chauvin Nelson probably at times was forced into difficult choices when it came to asking for or accepting help from the other cop’s lawyers – that the union was also paying to keep their guys out of jail! Maybe the union doesn’t have the resources everyone assumed they had either. That would be a scary thought for any Minneapolis cop to ponder should they need a good lawyer! It might also make police union members in lots of places start quietly looking at the union’s budget and more specifically the legal defense category, and how many cases they are handling (everything from internal investigations to civil suits and in fending off criminal indictments) and questioning whether the resources might even be there, much less provided if they were in hot water! That could lead to some serious self-reflection on both their own and other’s actions. Because sometimes a cop can do everything right and still need a good lawyer. However, if a good cop caught up in bad, tragic situations can’t get the representation they need because so much is spent propping up and protecting dirtbags? Well, that’s something a lot of cops might start thinking about.
Anyway, getting back “on point” as lawyers say as one analyst on HLN noted Nelson was not just overmatched, but looking worn out one day. Hell, a couple of times in discussions (without the jury present) he flat out spoke about only having a day or two to review information. That might become an issue on appeal but I’m sure prosecutors will note Nelson supposedly was able to count on support from his law firm. Not to mention many defendants in capital cases have to rely on the services of a public defender! But in the case we’re talking about we are talking about a small but successful firm. One where lawyers expect to get paid for their time but isn’t large enough or rich enough to do much in the way of pro bono work. In general, lawyers don’t work for free and I can’t help but wonder if the police union balked at shelling out for hundreds of billable hours to other lawyers at Nelsons firm. And that few, if any of them had either the time or inclination to drop work for paying clients and work for free. Have you even heard of the Halberg Criminal Defense law firm? That’s the name of Nelson’s law firm that he co-founded. They kept an awfully low profile, and from what I saw in court and heard Nelson himself say they weren’t going gangbusters behind the scenes to help out.
So, in the end I can’t help but wonder if Chauvin’s union decided to get him a good lawyer – ONE good lawyer and otherwise leave him out there on his own.
Maybe they assumed that Nelson would be able to rely on tried and (not really but you get what I mean) tropes that have almost always worked in the past. I think even Nelson and Chauvin too recognized early on that the “I was in fear for my life” thing would be a non-starter. Had that been the main defense theme we’d have had a guilty verdict within a few hours. However, there was also the “He was a black guy! They are Superman! Superman who can become Superman the Incredible Hulk in an instant!” defense. “All hopped up on drugs” too. That was clearly key to the defense strategy. Basically, rely on a giant dog-whistle that has sadly worked all too well for many a cop for far too long. However it’s clear that particular turd didn’t sprout wings and fly with this jury either. Then there were the few and pretty unlikeable defense experts. They looked even worse when compared to the experts the prosecution used. That again begs the question of just how much the union was willing to shell out on Chauvin’s behalf.
I just can’t help but think that even Chauvin’s union was only willing to go so far to support him. Knowing the team the prosecution had put together you’d have thought the union would have sprung for at least one more lawyer to handle part of the case, and more or at least better expert witnesses. However, unless Nelson was lying in court (and I don’t think he was about his workload) it seems that Chauvin was pretty much on his own. They paid a retainer to Nelson and offered a small budget for research and experts. It’s possible they figured the standard police bullshit that has worked in the past would work again. It’s also possible and I’m starting to think maybe even likely that the police union decided at some point Chauvin’s case was a lost cause. They’d put up enough of a fight to appease their members but only just enough to prevent an uproar in the ranks. If I’m right about that, and cops there start complaining amongst themselves things could get pretty interesting indeed.
So put a pin in this – maybe even the Minneapolis police union decided that THIS time they’d only go so far to defend one of their own. If that causes some dissension within the rank and file of the union, and it leads to some reflection on whether it’s finally time to start policing their own ranks and if not dumping the worst at least easing them out then that’s a good thing. Not enough. Not nearly enough, but at least a start.
Perhaps you disagree, but if you watched a significant portion of the trial as I did then you had to wonder about Nelson taking on ALL of the cross examination and presentation of defense witnesses. And wonder why the union was willing to pay for a good lawyer for him but ONLY one.
Baby steps (maybe) in the right direction. But it’s something to think about, especially if you’re a cop. The thought that a normally fierce union wouldn’t go ALL OUT for a cop in funding a kick-ass defense has to be something that’s entered the minds of many a cop in the last six or seven hours. And will bounce around in their minds for some time to come. And hopefully, if all too slowly start causing changes in how cops conduct themselves.
I didn’t think he was very good and wondered if it wasn’t so the verdict might be overturned due to a poor defense. Too, they only had two very bad experts. Sad.
Most apposite.
‘However, if a good cop caught up in bad, tragic situations can’t get the representation they need because so much is spent propping up and protecting dirtbags? Well, that’s something a lot of cops might start thinking about.’
Why waste limited resources that you have paid for with your own union dues propping up and protecting dirtbags?
Chauvin might try one post conviction path of saying counsel was inadequate, but that is usually reserved for counsel so inexperienced or incapable that adequate defense was impossible. But Nelson wasn’t Cousin Vinnie. He was experienced and trotted out the usual defenses. So I don’t think that will work.
I didn’t watch much of the trial, maybe five or six half hour bursts in the background. Nelson didn’t seem like a bad lawyer to me. Maybe he was low key because they were presenting their side as the reasonable professionals swept up in an unfortunate tragedy? It almost always works for police.
I don’t know…either side had their arguments pretty limited to the facts considering the video evidence. I think no matter what either lawyer said, the jury was going to see that and decide it was murder or not based on what they could see with their own eyes.
Nelson did the best he could but the point is that The Cop killed George on TV. Nelson put his career on the line when he took this Ractists Case and then the Dr’s was lying on the stand. Sad to lose all because of Racisum. It is what it is.
Every criminal defendant is entitled to and should have a competent defense attorney represent them. Nelson provided that service but since for some years he’s represented cops in that city as part of a group that has a contract with the union to do so I think it’s a stretch to think he put his career on the line. I see it more like he placed a bet, thinking he could get at least a hung jury and become a higher profile lawyer – beyond the city of Minneapolis and start commanding much higher fees. I also think as my article hinted at that he might have been expecting more resources and didn’t get them. As for doing the best he could I for one don’t think promoting racist tropes in an attempt to sway whites on the jury qualifies as “best.” Finally, just what Doctors are you saying lied on the stand?
You poor soul who fell for the lies and bullshit. This case had NOTHING to do about racism—NOTHING!!! Derek didn’t set out to find a black man and pull him over. He was called as backup you fool. Not his fault the uncooperative suspect was a drugged out stinky felon filled to the brim with deadly drugs. Take your racism beliefs where they belong
Let’s be clear. I grew up as a lower middle class white guy in a small midwestern town. Lived in similar place in WV for ten years much later in life too. I grew up with, and in WV knew white guys that accumulated a bundle of arrests and convictions that were mostly for drug crimes of varying degrees (possession to minor sales stuff) and did varying amounts of time in jail or prison and also some felony time for assault – sometimes domestic matters and sometimes resisting arrest. Oh, and in the latter case arrests happened while these WHITE dudes had weapons they were brandishing and threatening cops with! Yet somehow non-lethal force was used and they are still alive today. George Floyd’s conviction for assault was a plea deal he took – as often happens to poor people and people of color who decide that it’s better to accept a deal than risk having the book thrown at them when they have to face the state with only an overworked Public Defender to represent them. Floyd’s conviction (if you dig into the case) was based on no physical evidence, but an ID made three months after the incident in question where the woman who was struck during the home invasion couldn’t identify him but her seven year old son could – using what’s known as a “stand up” ID that has long since been discredited and not accepted in that and most jurisdictions. Standing up a six and a half foot tall, muscular guy of any race by himself isn’t a reliable process. But down in TX someone like George Floyd (and his lawyer) knew how it would play out at trial in those days and Floyd would have gotten decades in prison if he’d fought the charges. The point however is that even that felony conviction is dubious.
The larger point though is that the “stinky” (revealing yourself more than you intended with that one!) “drugged out” (low amounts in his system and for a chronic abuser not significant) (again, rather telling – about YOU) dude you so casually dismiss as having deserved the death penalty in a particularly cruel form (having the life crushed out of him via neck and back compression) with Chauvin applying deadly (and unapproved by his dept.) force for NINE AND A HALF fucking minutes is the epitome of cruel and unusual punishment. And Chauvin did everything but laugh as Floyd tried to plead for his life while he still had the ability to squeeze out some of the residual air in his lungs, bystanders and even fellow LE (eventually) and and off-duty EMT pleaded with him to ease up. He literally believed he’d get away with it.
And if you don’t think Chauvin believed that because he was a white cop and George Floyd was back you are either a liar or so fucking round the bend from reality I’ve wasted my time responding to you. Because had George Floyd been some white guy from the type of towns I lived half my life in you wouldn’t be dismissive of him or how he died.
Take YOUR racism and STFU and go away.
You poor soul. Sucked in by the BLM and all the lies the state and media rammed down everyone’s throat. You obviously know NOTHING about the deception in this case, nor do you seem intelligent enough to want the truth.
Not to impeach the conviction, or to deny the man is guilty AF for murder, but I’ve had this nagging thought that maybe the PTB — the city, the police bureau, the union — all decided to simply throw Chauvin under the bus in this situation. Make him a scapegoat so the public doesn’t go looking beyond this case.
Reading this article, I appear to be not the only one with this nagging thought.
I’ve seen a couple of indications this concept is floating around in RW circles. Or a variation of it in which Chauvin is innocent and being sacrificed. My bet is that right wing media and RWNJ types in general will work like hell to promote the notion that a “great, upstanding” cop who is TOTALLY innocent of any ill intent and only lived to “serve the public” was doing his job EXACTLY like ANY other cop has been trained to do it” is being “sacrificed” to appease BLM and “lib-ruls.” Complete and utter bullshit of course but complete and utter bullshit is what right wing media and its leadership have made standard operating procedure.
RWNJs would, of course, think in terms of optics, because optics is all they need to control their base. And I am not denying that optics can be important. But I hope and believe that progressives in this fight have already seen way too much over the years to ever be taken in by the optics of any one case. And I’m pretty sure RWNJs will never understand that.
Denise, I would bet money (if I had any!) that this is how FUX News and other right wing media will spin this. And you can be sure our least favorite ex-president will chime in along these lines as well!
One small correction. (my name isn’t Denise)