Attorneys in trial probe jurors’ views about police

MINNEAPOLIS >> Attorneys in the trial of a former Minneapolis police officer charged in George Floyd’s death probed potential jurors Wednesday about their attitudes toward police, trying to determine whether they’re more inclined to believe testimony from law enforcement over evidence from other witnesses to the fatal confrontation.

Judge Peter Cahill seated two more jurors to go with the three picked Tuesday for Derek Chauvin’s trial on second-degree murder and manslaughter charges. It’s been a grinding process during which attorneys ask prospective jurors one by one whether they could keep an open mind, what they think of the criminal justice system and racial justice issues, how they resolve conflicts and much more.

In a separate development, the Minnesota Supreme Court declined to hear Chauvin’s appeal to block a third-degree murder charge from being reinstated. At issue is whether the conviction of another former Minneapolis police officer in the unrelated killing of an Australian woman established a precedent for prosecutors to restore a third-degree murder count that the trial judge dismissed earlier. The Minnesota Court of Appeals last week said it settled the law with its ruling last month affirming the conviction of Mohamed Noor in the 2017 shooting death of Justine Ruszczyk Damond.

The new decision from the state’s highest court left open the possibility that Cahill could add the charge back, lessening the chances that Chauvin’s trial would be delayed over the dispute. The conventional legal wisdom is that giving the jury another option for convicting Chauvin of murder raises the chance of a conviction.