The Derek Chauvin trial, regardless of the ultimate verdict (as satisfying as it may have been), is emblematic of an institution that refuses to change for the better.
Soon-to-be a year since George Floyd’s violent death at the officer’s hands, famously and critically recorded in broad daylight by panicked but determined bystander Darnella Frazier, the case even having gone to trial is an anomaly in a policing culture where POC are constantly brutalized with little-toabsolutely-o just consequence for their assailants.
It would be more than safe to say that this hearing wouldn’t even be taking place had the massive, righteous demonstrations last summer never taken place, yet another example of the collective people needing to pick up the American judicial system’s slack in terms of actual pursuit of justice.
It is certainly reasonable and a right in the United States to expect a fair, careful trial judged by a jury of one’s peers. This is an especially valuable prospect in situations of great nuance, where the truth is even more subjective than usual.
That said, it would be hard to argue there was any particular amount of nuance regarding Chauvin’s guilt; the last nine-and-a-half minutes of Floyd’s life were practically perfectly documented, after all.
In the face of said undeniable, very public evidence, Chauvin’s likely shorter sentence length, intending to correspond his second-degree murder, third-degree murder, and second-degree manslaughter charges is a cowardly compromise that, while making the trial more “practical” to conduct in the view of many, is antithetical to the legitimate justice needing to be carried out.
With an expression appearing to read more bafflement than outright shock and much less, remorse, it would be safe to say that Chauvin, like many viewing the live-televised jury declaration, did not expect the jury to declare him entirely guilty of all offenses that afternoon. While, yes, this is the best possible scenario for this moment and technically a victory for those fighting against ignored police violence, we cannot pretend this one outcome is even close to enough to rectify what needs fixing.
The outcome of this trial proves it will always be in our best interest, as citizens, to furiously retaliate when immoral structures fail us, an inevitability as long as those structures continue to be allowed to exist. In fact, we are obliged to.
Innocent men should not have to die excruciating deaths for us to be able to achieve the bare minimum in terms of progress
"bitter" - Google News
April 30, 2021 at 02:00PM
https://ift.tt/33bQwbU
DEREK CHAUVIN TRIAL: A BITTER VICTORY NOT WORTH PEOPLE'S LIVES - The Advocate
"bitter" - Google News
https://ift.tt/3bZFysT
https://ift.tt/2KSpWvj
Bagikan Berita Ini
0 Response to "DEREK CHAUVIN TRIAL: A BITTER VICTORY NOT WORTH PEOPLE'S LIVES - The Advocate"
Post a Comment