MINNEAPOLIS (AP/WCCO) — At a pretrial hearing in the death of George Floyd, a Hennepin County judge disqualified members of the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office — including attorney Mike Freeman — from the case.
Two days after Floyd’s death, Freeman and the attorneys met with Chief Hennepin County Medical Examiner Dr. Andrew Baker, who conducted the autopsy on Floyd. Judge Cahill said Freeman and the other attorneys’ actions were “sloppy” and “they are off the case.”
In a statement released Friday afternoon, Freeman said the meeting in question was in accordance with Minnesota Supreme Court guidelines. He said he’s confident the order barring him from the case will eventually be withdrawn.
The judged opened the hearing by saying he would not be considering dismissal motions on Friday, but cautioned “don’t read anything into that.”
The judge wants to try and form a jury pool months before the trial of the four ex-Minneapolis police officers. Attorneys for all four men have also asked that the trial be moved from Minneapolis, saying pretrial publicity has made it impossible for them to receive a fair trial.
“There is not a county or state in this country that has not had publicity in the George Floyd case,” Cahill said.
Paule, Thao’s attorney, said in a court filing that the state has tainted the jury pool by calling Floyd’s death a “murder.” Paule also cites protests that caused millions of dollars of damage in Minneapolis, saying an impartial jury can’t be found in Hennepin County because jurors would “shoulder the weight of their decision creating further rioting and destruction.”
Also on Friday, the judge said he would not admit into evidence any criminal records involving Floyd from when he lived in Texas.
“What possible relevance could that have?” Cahill said.
Attorneys for four former Minneapolis officers charged in the death of Floyd say each client should get his own trial, as the officers try to diminish their roles in Floyd’s death by pointing fingers at one another. The former officers are in court Friday for a hearing on several issues, including the prosecution’s request to hold a joint trial. Other issues being argued include defense requests to move the trial out of Minneapolis and to sequester the jury and keep jurors anonymous.
Floyd, who was in handcuffs, died May 25 after Derek Chauvin pressed his knee against his neck as Floyd said he couldn’t breathe and became motionless. Chauvin is charged with second-degree murder, third-degree murder and manslaughter. Thomas Lane, J. Kueng and Tou Thao are charged with aiding and abetting both second-degree murder and manslaughter.
Friday’s hearing also marks the first time Chauvin has appeared in a courtroom. He is in state custody and has attended previous hearings via videoconference.
A few dozen protesters gathered in a street in front of the courthouse that had been blocked off, chanting “No justice, no peace.” One carried a Black Lives Matter flag and wore a black helmet with swim goggles around the back of his head. The windows on most nearby buildings were boarded up.
Prosecutors say the case should proceed with one trial because the evidence – including witness statements, body-camera video and police department policy on use of force – is similar for each officer. Prosecutors say the officers also acted in close concert.
“Here, all four Defendants worked together to murder Floyd: Chauvin, Kueng, and Lane pinned Floyd face-down, while Thao stopped the crowd from intervening, enabling the other Defendants to maintain their positions. Defendants also discussed and coordinated their actions throughout the incident,” prosecutors wrote in a court filing.
Prosecutors also say witnesses and Floyd’s family members would likely be traumatized by multiple trials, and it would be more efficient and in the interest of justice to hold one proceeding.
But defense attorneys are pushing for separate trials, saying they are likely to offer “antagonistic” defenses, and evidence against one officer could negatively impact another’s right to a fair trial.
Attempts at finger-pointing are already prevalent throughout court filings in the case. Attorneys for Lane and Kueng have argued that their clients were rookies who were following Chauvin’s lead. Thao’s attorney, Bob Paule, has said his client’s role was “absolutely distinct” from the others, because he was on crowd control and was securing the scene, while the other three restrained Floyd.
Chauvin’s attorney, Eric Nelson, wrote that his client’s case is different. Nelson said prosecutors must prove Chauvin intended to assault Floyd, but they must also show that the other officers knew of Chauvin’s intent before it happened. As a result, he said, Chauvin will have to defend himself differently.
“The other defendants are clearly saying that, if a crime was committed, they neither knew about it nor assisted in it,” Nelson wrote. “They blame Chauvin.”
But Chauvin also points fingers at the others. Nelson wrote that Lane and Kueng — the officers who responded to a forgery call — initiated contact with Floyd before Chauvin and Thao arrived, and that Chauvin believes Floyd was overdosing on fentanyl. Nelson wrote that while Lane and Kueng called for a paramedic and believed Floyd was “on something,” they didn’t elevate the call to one of more urgency or give medical assistance.
“Instead, they struggled to subdue Mr. Floyd and force him into their squad car, likely exacerbating his condition considerably,” Nelson wrote, adding that Chauvin could reasonably argue that their inaction led to Floyd’s death.
“If EMS had arrived just three minutes sooner, Mr. Floyd may have survived. If Kueng and Lane had chosen to de-escalate instead of struggle, Mr. Floyd may have survived. If Kueng and Lane had recognized the apparent signs of an opioid overdose and rendered aid, such as administering naloxone, Mr. Floyd may have survived,” Nelson wrote.
After the hearing, Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison, who is in charge of the prosecution, said there will be justice for Floyd.
“George Floyd mattered. He was loved, and his life had value,” Ellison said.
The judge has 90 days to make ruling in the case, but said in writing he hopes to have most of his decision made by Oct. 15.
The next scheduled court date is March 8, 2021, which is the start of the trial.
(© Copyright 2020 CBS Broadcasting Inc. All Rights Reserved. The Associated Press contributed to this report.)