Hi friends! I am not barred in the state of Minnesota. But what I can say is that the charging decisions in Chauvin's case are going to be reported in slightly misleading ways, as most criminal charges are.

Quick thread. 1/

Chauvin was charged with third-degree murder and manslaughter. Third-degree sounds very unserious at first glance. But that's because most states only have two degrees of murder. Minnesota is one of a handful that distinguishes between second and third degree. 2/

Third-degree murder in Minnesota requires you to do something "eminently dangerous to others and evincing a depraved mind, without regard for human life." I think the still images clearly support that.

Second-degree murder requires you to intend to kill. 3/

If the story is that Chauvin was effecting a normal police stop and grossly misjudged Floyd's suffering, supporting second-degree murder is tricky. We might be done here.

But as long as a charge can be supported by "probable cause", a very low standard, you can toss it on. 4/

This leads to the phenomenon of "overcharging", where a prosecutor will toss in thinly supported charges to be in a better plea bargaining position.

For example, if you got into a bar fight and hit somebody with a broken bottle, that might now be attempted murder. 5/

The prosecutor can then get you to plead to the aggravated assault that they were considering the top count anyway.

So was there probable cause to support an intent to kill? Or even premeditation, which would be required for first-degree murder? 6/

Arguably, the fact that Chauvin and George Floyd might have known each other through private security work supports a probable cause finding.

It's easy for prosecutors to charge premeditation basically whenever the victim and defendant have prior contact. 7/

Those charges may still be added or that angle might be proven incorrect in the future, but it's, well, VERY INTERESTING that in this particular case, the prosecutor's office is sticking more closely to the letter of the law. 8/

It may not even be direct pro-police bias; it might be the assumption that since Chauvin was on duty, this kind of pretext would be unlikely or impossible.

But the Supreme Court allows cops to conduct a search based on a pretext. If that pretext is possible, so is this one. 9/

That being said, without more facts than we know right now, securing a conviction on something above third-degree murder would be tricky.

But the investigation doesn't stop when charges are filed. Prosecutors will continue to develop the case up until a trial or a plea. 10/

Anyway, let's talk about sentencing. Most people are reporting that third-degree murder carries a max term of 25 years in prison.

That's technically true. But MN is a sentencing guidelines state, so we actually have a little more info about what a sentence might look like. 11/

First off: Minnesota has determinate sentencing. No range, none of what people think of as "parole".

You get a number of months to serve.

I'm going to assume that Chauvin has no prior convictions. If he does, these numbers will be higher. 12/

Minnesota provides both a presumptive sentence and a range around that sentence. The court usually will sentence within that range, but they have the discretion to go outside of it.

Doing that is complicated and comes with a number of safeguards and rules. 13/

In 2018, roughly 75% of all felony convictions resulted in a within-range sentence. 14/

http://mn.gov/msgc-stat/documents/reports/2018/MSGC2018AnnualSummaryStatistics.pdf

For depraved-heart third degree murder, which is what Chauvin was charged with here, the presumptive sentence is 150 months (12 1/2 years). His range is 128-180 months.

For manslaughter, the presumptive sentence is 86 months (~7 years), with a range of 74-103. 15/

Two important thoughts there. First: do those numbers sound low to you? Part of this is because journalists tend to report the statutory maximum sentences in news articles. Chauvin does face up to 25 years, but by the numbers, he's 75% likely to get 10-15 if convicted of M3. 16/

Statutory maximum sentences are exceedingly rare across all jurisdictions but drive public perceptions of prison time.

Ten years is an incredibly long time. Think about who you were in 2010.

And while Chauvin is not the most sympathetic defendant... 17/

...the perception that people are eligible for decades of imprisonment for other crimes (drug trafficking can carry 40-year terms in the federal system, for example) may make this feel particularly unjust.

But the solution must be to lower those terms of imprisonment. 18/

Second: I think it'll be telling, if Chauvin gets convicted, if he receives one of those in-range sentences or if he gets an out-of-range sentence.

Despite these guidelines, judges have immense power at sentencing, and there is lots of evidence that biases rule the day. 19/

The example I quote over and over and over again is that juvenile terms of imprisonment in Louisiana were consistently longer in weeks when LSU lost a football game they were expected to win. 20/ https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2016/09/judges-issue-longer-sentences-when-their-college-football-team-loses/498980/

Sentencing disparities are difficult to address. And again, the solution is not to agitate for increased sentences. But a below-range sentence in this case would be illustrative of further disparities that need to be worked on. 21/

We must be careful with our language, with our expectations, and with narratives that can be unintentionally misleading.

And I do think that the way in which something is inequitable matters a lot. 22/

George Floyd was sentenced to death without a jury. That doesn't mean that the death penalty makes sense in Chauvin's case or any case.

But given our track record in these situations in the past, the Hennepin County Attorney's office needs to be aware of the stakes. 23/23

Anyway, if you're not sure what you, personally, can do about the state of racism in the criminal system and in policing, check out my thread from earlier today 24/23 https://twitter.com/ahnbrand/status/1266413548093288457

Here's another argument for at least second-degree murder via intent to kill, which again, even if I don't necessarily think a jury will buy this, it satisfies the "probable cause" standard. 25/23 https://twitter.com/BrianDStraw/status/1266454189124788230