The CubanAmerican Voice®

Chauvin Case: Can There Be Justice in America?

Chauvin Case: Can There Be Justice in America?Chauvin Case: Can There Be Justice in America?

Derek Chauvin did not receive a fair trial. Considered in the complexity of its circumstantial totality, this entire process emulated a kangaroo court in a non-democratic regime. This moral and procedural calamity occurred because mob terror, Neo-Marxist dogmatic underpinnings (Critical Race Theory), and the leftist conspiracy theory hoax of “right-wing extremism” prevailed and is sadly now the instituted legal norm in America. The valued principle of the rule of law, as the Chauvin verdict has demonstrated, is now subject to the whims of a warmongering left.

Derek Chauvin who served eight years in the United States Army Reserve, including two intervals in the military police, nineteen years in the Minneapolis Police Department (MPD), and graduated with a bachelor’s degree in law enforcement from Metropolitan State University, must now face looming sentences for second-degree murder, third-degree murder, and second-degree manslaughter. The whole process was stacked up, from the beginning, against the former police officer. Ethical callousness from the political class of the highest level was showcased all along. The corporate mass media did its partisan part by proactively trying and convicting him before he was even fired from the MPD. 

The Chauvin case, The Rule of Law and a fair trial

Irregularities and unfairness plagued the trial from its onset. In the Chauvin case, the defendant had only one attorney representing him during the entire ordeal, Eric Nelson. The prosecution had an active team of twelve lawyers and a complete State Attorney’s Office at their disposal. The twelve-member jury was not representative of the demographics of the city of Minneapolis. It was 50% non-white. According to estimated figures of the U. S. Census Bureau for 2019, whites make up 63.6% of the population and blacks 19.2%. In such a racially charged trial, the jury’s composition would logically work against the defendant.    

Nelson, Chauvin’s sole legal representation, requested from the beginning that the jury be sequestered. Jury sequestration is an attempt to uphold fairness in high-profile legal cases, especially where hefty criminal charges are hovering. In these situations, jurors are not allowed access to media or external contact to preserve unbiasedness and alienate prejudices. The cases of Bill Cosby (2017), George Zimmerman (2013), and O. J. Simpson (1995) are all examples of trials where jury sequestration was practiced. In the Chauvin case, a minutely partial sequestration was allocated, but only after the trial’s end during the deliberating phase. The risk of contaminating the jury’s objectivity was obviously high without that protective measure.

Eminent defense attorney, Harvard Law School professor emeritus, and lifelong Democrat, Alan Dershowitz, told Newsmax TV on Tuesday, April 20, “I have no confidence that this verdict was produced by due process and the rule of law rather than the influence of the crowd.” Referring to statements of both President Biden hoping the jury would reach a “right verdict” and Peter Cahill, the judge presiding over the case, lamenting rants by Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) inciting mob violence, Dershowitz commented that an appeal was likely and that the Supreme Court may be the only place capable of fairly trying Derek Chauvin.

“This moral and procedural calamity occurred because mob terror, Neo-Marxist dogmatic underpinnings (Critical Race Theory), and the far-left’s conspiracy theory hoax of “right-wing extremism” prevailed and is sadly now the instituted legal norm in America”. (EFE)

The nation’s highest court exclusively, he reiterated, “holds the best possibility for the defense of getting this conviction reversed, on the grounds that the judge himself suggested the statements made by people outside the courtroom essentially intimidating jurors and telling them that if they don’t come to the ‘right verdict,’ there will be violence and consequences and their own lives may be affected.” The revered and respected lawyer added, “That is not the rule of law. That is the passion of the crowd.”

The jurors in the Chauvin case were browbeaten into a guilty verdict. Every measure of persuasion was employed. Biden’s egregious butchery of legal prudence and presidential conduct, evidenced by his anti-Chauvin pre-verdict comments of “praying” for the “right verdict” and suggesting that the evidence was “overwhelming” is potentially an impeachable offense, given the fact that he is tampering with a jury in a most contentious criminal case. If Donald Trump would have said it, the Democrats would be racking up charges.

Black Lives Matter (BLM) and Antifa henchmen carried out methodically, for almost eleven months, enough urban terror to remind everyone who is running the show. Clearly, any non-sequestered jury, living in the crime vicinity within the easy grasp of the communist mobs, the rendering of any just verdict was made implausible by the inertia and complicity of the authorities and other agitators. Professional troublemakers like Al Sharpton, and Democratic Representative Maxine Waters, egged on violent revolution unless they received an ideologically validated decision by the juror. Waters openly ranted about defying “curfews” and the need to “get more confrontational”, as a viral video tweet by Jack Posobiec (@JackPosobiec) reveals.

Perhaps the biggest failure of the legal process against Derek Chauvin, was that this trial was never about him. Neither was it about vindicating the death of George Floyd. Both were pawns in a much greater endeavor that saw an opportunity when a black man, who was unarmed and potentially not conservative or Republican, died in the custody of a white policeman. It is the American republic that was on trial. The prosecutor, ladened with Marxist Critical Race Theory weaponry, laid out the false argument of “systemic racism” and of a Blue Anon-cogitated conspiracy theory about “right-wing extremist” forces, which the nation’s police forces represent. 

Perhaps two people, both from different backgrounds, yet sharing the same objectives, told it the clearest. One was former President Barack Obama and the other, a BLM activist. Obama, the architect of this Fabian/Neo-Marxist ‘march through the institutions’, tweeted out after Chauvin’s verdict, “But true justice requires much more.” The notion of the quest for “true justice” has become a rallying cry by the broad spectrum of American leftism in its quest for further systemic demolition.

The BLM provocateur, in more uncivil language, added emphasis to Obama’s death pill for America. The BLM radical from Minneapolis is captured in this video tweet by Drew Hernandez (@DrewHLive) saying, “attack [the] system from every f*cking angle”. Was Derek Chauvin guilty of causing the death of Floyd? We will never know. This whole Chauvin case was not about them anyway.

©The Cuban American Voice. Originally published in @El American. All rights reserved.

🖋️Author Julio M. Shiling

J M Shiling Author circle red blue🖋️Author Julio M. Shiling 
Julio M. Shiling is a political scientist, writer, columnist, lecturer, media commentator, and director of Patria de Martí and The CubanAmerican Voice. He holds a master’s degree in Political Science from Florida International University (FIU) in Miami, Florida. He is a member of The American Political Science Association and The PEN Club (Cuban Writers in Exile Chapter).

        📚Published books   📺In the media   👨‍🏫 Conferences and Symposiums    🎙️Podcast The Shiling Summary

Subscribe to our Newsletter


Julio Articles

Does the U.S. Have Political Prisoners? Leer en Español There is a consensus, for the most part, as to what constitutes a political prisoner. Ideological inclinations, however, often stand in the...

[Cotinue reading]

Why Are Cubans Going to Ukraine? Leer en Español Cuban soldiers and conscripts are officially present in the Eurasian region. Their mission is customary, given the role Cuban communism has played...

[Cotinue reading]

Criminalizing the U.S. Constitution Leer en Español The United States has a big problem. Its version of democracy is being deconstructed. Free speech, a prerequisite of democratic rule, is being...

[Cotinue reading]

Trump Indictment III: Free Speech and Fair Elections? Rigging an election is a form of theft, and there are many ways to achieve this. Leer en Español The latest indictment against former...

[Cotinue reading]

The Power of the Imponderable  "The 11th of July Popular Uprising (11J) of 2021 marked a watershed moment for the communist dictatorship in Cuba." Leer en Español Hannah Arendt argued that...

[Cotinue reading]

Dissecting the Trump Documents Indictment “No one is above the law” is a phrase that once had depth in the U.S. It has become a lame cliché Leer en Español Few who believe in a free society can...

[Cotinue reading]

The Cuba-China Espionage Nexus: New or Old? Leer en Español The use of alien elements to assist in Cuban communism’s longevity is old stuff. When will the U.S. and the West figure this out and...

[Cotinue reading]

Putting the Caimanera Protests into Context Leer en Español Maintaining political power by force is an art. It is not an ethical practice or an exercise of a moral task. Nonetheless, it is a chore...

[Cotinue reading]

Biden’s Rush to Rescue Castroism. Cuban communism (yes, a kleptocracy can be communist also) continues faithfully to exercise dictatorial pragmatism, a policy institutionalized in 1959. Sharp...

[Cotinue reading]

Cuba’s Influence in American Academia

Cuba’s Influence in American Academia. Leer en Español To accurately fathom the success of the Castro-Communist regime[1] in Cuba, as measured by its ability to fructuously withstand the pressures for democratic[2] liberalization and persevere in...

The real reason why Hispanics voted for Trump

The real reason why Hispanics voted for Trump. The 2020 US presidential election has not yet been officially decided. Some things, though, are indisputable and already a matter of truth. A big surprise for many was the fact that a staggering and sur...

Trump, Hamilton and State Legislatures

Trump, Hamilton and State Legislatures. Trump, by insisting on going to the courts and, above all, to the state legislatures, to denounce the fraud in these elections with abundant evidence, is defending democratic institutions Alexander Hamilton n...

New Right or Trumpism?

New Right or Trumpism?A New Right had been forming before, and increasingly since 2016. Broadly speaking, it is soundly Conservative with Classical Liberal undertones in the economic sphere. “Trumpism” is a concept commonly being tossed around these...