What people are witnessing in the Chauvin trial is an exercise in attrition. Chauvin’s defense council understands that he doesn’t really have a defense. His objective is to find one ally in the 12 person jury willing to hold out. In the Chauvin trial a hung jury is as good as a win because it then forces the state to make some very important decisions.
In the event of a hung jury the prosecution must make the decision about a retrial. They have to review the quality of their Case. They must evaluate the defenses arguments. They must weigh the cost of a retrial. Finally they must determine the viability of selecting a jury from a polarized potential jury pool.
The defense only has to find one while the prosecution must convince all 12. In Chauvin’s case there is very little downside to a hung jury. They got to see the prosecutions case in chief and what all of their witnesses will testify to at trial. The biggest challenge they face is financing legal representation at a second trial. In Chauvin’s case he’s not paying for his representation. It’s coming from outside sources. There’s no reason to believe that those sources would dry up in a second trial.
I’m sharing this with you so that you understand that inspite of the evidence that the prosecution will present this is far from a slam dunk. This is going to be a long grueling chess match. The wild card is the 12 jurors. It only takes one to deny justice.
Think!!
Eyes Wide Open!!!