header-logo header-logo

The US: jury unanimity needed (Pt 2)

47604
Justice is done. Michael Zander QC on the aftermath of the murder trial of Derek Chauvin
  • Without video evidence one wonders whether there would have been criminal charges, let alone a conviction.

There was immense relief in America—and certainly in many other countries too—that the trial of former police officer Derek Chauvin ended with verdicts of guilty on all three counts—second degree murder, third degree murder and second degree manslaughter of George Floyd. Chauvin’s bail was revoked and he was led from the court in handcuffs.

Given the overwhelming strength of the prosecution’s evidence and a diverse jury, an acquittal was always unlikely. But in the US the jury in a serious criminal case must be unanimous and there was always the possibility that the defence would succeed in persuading at least one juror to hold out against conviction and thereby cause a mistrial.

One thought it might take the jurors several days to sift through two weeks of evidence of over 40 witnesses,

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll