Like many people, I watched the Derek Chauvin sentencing hearing Friday. I am no criminal lawyer but I’m friends with people that are. On both sides of the line. That and I know a thing or two just from being around as long as I have been around.
Cases like these serve like unto a national Rorschach test in that people look at the outcomes and see different things that are largely personal to them. And naturally they put them out there on Facebook. The responses seem to be as polarized as anything else in the national zeitgeist.
Chauvin caught 22 and a half years from Judge Peter Cahill. The minimum sentence according to the Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines would have been 12.5. The Prosecution wanted an upward departure to 30. The defense wanted probation as Chauvin was a first time offender. The 22.5 year sentence meted out was decried by some as too light and too harsh by some.
If I were the King of the World I would have given him 50. The video was shocking. Mr. Floyd was accused of passing a counterfeit bill. And according to the medical evidence that was adduced at trial, Mr. Floyd was executed for it. I would have put Chauvin away forever to serve as a warning to bad cops everywhere.
But I’m not the King of the World and neither are you.
As I mentioned above, all states (I’m pretty sure) and the United States sentence defendants pursuant to guidelines. These guidelines, hopefully, take into account the Defendant’s criminal history, the crime committed and the harm to the victim. They represent a final product after input from the Prosecution and Defense bars in order to remove as much discretion from judges in sentencing albeit for different reasons.
Judge Cahill attached a Memorandum to his Order in which he explained his reasoning. In short, he that the aggravating circumstances present in the case warranted an upward departure from the sentence of 12.5 years called for by the Minnesota guidelines and he considered 10 years to be appropriate rather than the 18 requested by the State. This was based, in part, of his analysis of similarly situated Defendants who had been sentenced for the same offense. You can read the memo if you want to. It’s a matter of public record.
In short, this is my take of his reasoning in layman’s terms. Derek Chauvin was never a candidate for probation. I mean, c’mon. Secondly, Chauvin may have picked a particularly heinous and gruesome way to stray from the straight and narrow, but he was a first time offender. That carries a lot of weight in the sentencing guidelines. And without walking around in his head I’m guessing that the judge didn’t want to get reversed for maxing out a first time offender no matter how much he deserved it. But he gave him 10 more years to do which he found to be within an acceptable range.
People forget something very important. Guilt (or innocence for that matter) is a conclusion of law. This is why when one pleads guilty the Court advises the Defendant that “the Court accepts your plea and hereby FINDS you guilty.” Similarly speaking, a sentencing order is a conclusion of law. Judge Cahill struck me as a sober minded jurist. Lance Ito he is not. His reasoning for how he ruled is clear and likely to be bulletproof on appeal.
Bottom line: No cop that gets videoed choking to death an otherwise subdued suspect will get probation. Period. No first time offender that doesn’t commit a capital offense is gonna get maxxed out.
It was not a perfect resolution based on a precise mathematical formula. But it was one based on facts and the law. And that’s the best we can ever hope for from our judges.
***
The Deacon is kind, patient and slow to anger. We may add “long suffering” to her list of virtues. Yesterday afternoon she sat through “The Sparks Brothers” documentary. All two hours and twenty minutes of it. Say what you will about Sparks-and up until I watched the documentary today I had no idea that they were the most influential act in the history of rock music-Ron and Russell Mael are two strange dudes. Especially Ronald.
She claimed that she enjoyed it despite her not quite having the appreciation for serious weirdness that I have. So we can also add “polite” to her list. But I’m also guessing that she will not appreciate me singing “Pretending To Be Drunk” in the shower anytime soon.
