The Derek Chauvin verdict was remarkable because the law is designed to favor police over people

The verdict in the trial of Derek Chauvin, a former Minnesota police officer convicted of murdering George Floyd, has many breathing a sigh of relief. Even though the disturbing video evidence of Floyd dying under Chauvin's knee is impossible to refute, it's incredibly hard to convict an officer of murder.
The United States judicial system is so preferential to law enforcement that even though the world saw murder in broad daylight, many were skeptical of whether he'd be convicted.
"Most people, I think, believe that it's a slam dunk," David Harris, a law professor at the University of Pittsburgh and an expert in policing, told the Washington Post before the trial. "But he said, "the reality of the law and the legal system is, it's just not."
Chauvin was convicted of all three charges of second-degree murder, third-degree murder, and manslaughter. The presumptive sentence according to Minnesota law is 12 ½ years, but aggravating circumstances could raise that number by decades.
"Let's also be clear that such a verdict is also much too rare," President Biden said after the verdict was announced. "For so many, it feels like it took all of that for the judicial system to deliver a just — just basic accountability."
Since 2005, Philip M. Stinson, a criminologist at Bowling Green State University, has been tracking police misconduct and found the number convicted of murder is incredibly small.
Over that time's he's counted 140 causes of police being arrested on murder or manslaughter charges as the result of an on-duty shooting. Of the 97 cases that have been concluded, only seven resulted in murder convictions. Some were reduced to lesser offenses and more than half were dismissed or resulted in acquittals.
When it comes to justice for unarmed Black men and women, the numbers are even more sobering.
According to NPR, around 135 Black people have been fatally shot by police since 2015 and authorities failed to press charges in 80 of these cases. Only 13 of the officers who received manslaughter or murder charges with only four were found guilty.
There are myriad reasons why it's so difficult to convict police of murder. "The law favors the police, the law as it exists," Harris added.
One major reason is because of the Supreme Court's 1989 Graham v. Connor decision that states an officer's actions must be judged against what a reasonable officer would do. "A police officer can use force, but it has to be justifiable," Neil J. Bruntrager, a St. Louis-based attorney, told Washington Post. "And what the Supreme Court has told us is we have to see it through the eyes of the police."
Officers can avoid convictions by claiming they killed someone out of fear for their own safety.
"If a civilian is displaying a weapon, it's very hard to charge [the police officer] with murder for taking action against that civilian," Kate Levine, a professor of law at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, told FiveThirtyEight. "And even if a civilian doesn't have a weapon, it's hard to charge a police officer if [the officer] can credibly say they feared for their life."
Police also enjoy the protection of unions that provide high-priced legal services immediately after an incident. There is also a built-in conflict of interest in the legal system. Prosecutors often depend on police so they're inclined to protect those relationships.
Police defendants are more likely to refuse plea deals because their high-quality representation makes them more likely to win a trial. "The quality of the lawyering is very different from regular criminal cases," Brandon Garrett, professor law and Duke University, told CNN. "For the typical criminal defendant, it's incredibly risky to go to trial."
Finally, police are protected from being held accountable by qualified immunity, a judicial doctrine that makes it nearly impossible for individuals to sue public officials. "Qualified immunity fosters an environment where government agents, including police, may feel empowered to violate people's rights with the knowledge they will face few consequences," the ACLU said. "Under qualified immunity, lives can be taken with impunity."
Officers are able to hide behind qualified immunity because of a clause that says their misbehavior must be "clearly established" somewhere in case law.
Lawmakers across the country are working to hold police accountable by striking down qualified immunity. In 2020, former Republican and current Libertarian Representative Justin Amash of Michigan unveiled the first bill to end qualified immunity on a federal level for all public officials. Unfortunately, it went nowhere.
However, it looks like qualified immunity's time could be coming to an end at the local level. Bills addressing qualified immunity have been introduced in 19 states and Connecticut, Colorado, and New Mexico have all passed laws curtailing its power. New York City recently became the first municipality to restrict its use.
It's too early to say whether the Chauvin decision marks the beginning of a new era where police are held accountable for their on-duty behavior. But the result of the trial is a great example of what can happen when Americans come together in support of truth and justice.
"For so many people, it seems like it took a unique and extraordinary convergence of factors, "President Biden said, "a brave young woman with a smartphone camera; a crowd that was traumatized — traumatized witnesses; a murder that lasts almost 10 minutes in broad daylight for, ultimately, the whole world to see; officers standing up and testifying against a fellow officer instead of just closing ranks, which should be commended; a jury who heard the evidence, carried out their civic duty in the midst of an extraordinary moment, under extraordinary pressure."
- Three teenage girls have a question for brilliant comedian Tig ... ›
- Powerful new testimony shows how George Floyd died, putting all ... ›
- 'Police officers' of Reddit share honest opinions on George Floyd's ... ›







A woman is getting angry at her coworker.via
A man with tape over his mouth.via
A husband is angry with his wife. via 
a man sitting at a desk with his head on his arms Photo by
Can a warm cup of tea help you sleep better? If you believe it, then yes. Photo by 
Three women sit on a blanket in the park. 
Two women engaging in a pleasant conversation inside a coffee shop
Two men engaging in a peaceful disagreement.
Resurfaced video of French skier's groin incident has people giving the announcer a gold medal
"The boys took a beating on that one."
Downhill skiing is a sport rife with injuries, but not usually this kind.
A good commentator can make all the difference when watching sports, even when an event goes smoothly. But it's when something goes wrong that great announcers rise to the top. There's no better example of a great announcer in a surprise moment than when French skier Yannick Bertrand took a gate to the groin in a 2007 super-G race.
Competitive skiers fly down runs at incredible speeds, often exceeding 60 mph. Hitting something hard at that speed would definitely hurt, but hitting something hard with a particularly sensitive part of your body would be excruciating. So when Bertrand slammed right into a gate family-jewels-first, his high-pitched scream was unsurprising. What was surprising was the perfect commentary that immediately followed.
This is a clip you really just have to see and hear to fully appreciate:
- YouTube youtu.be
It's unclear who the announcer is, even after multiple Google inquiries, which is unfortunate because that gentleman deserves a medal. The commentary gets better with each repeated viewing, with highlights like:
"The gate the groin for Yannick Bertrand, and you could hear it. And if you're a man, you could feel it."
"Oh, the Frenchman. Oh-ho, monsieurrrrrr."
"The boys took a beating on that one."
"That guy needs a hug."
"Those are the moments that change your life if you're a man, I tell you what."
"When you crash through a gate, when you do it at high rate of speed, it's gonna hurt and it's going to leave a mark in most cases. And in this particular case, not the area where you want to leave a mark."
Imagine watching a man take a hit to the privates at 60 mph and having to make impromptu commentary straddling the line between professionalism and acknowledging the universal reality of what just happened. There are certain things you can't say on network television that you might feel compelled to say. There's a visceral element to this scenario that could easily be taken too far in the commentary, and the inherent humor element could be seen as insensitive and offensive if not handled just right.
The announcer nailed it. 10/10. No notes.
The clip frequently resurfaces during the Winter Olympic Games, though the incident didn't happen during an Olympic event. Yannick Bertrand was competing at the FIS World Cup super-G race in Kvitfjell, Norway in 2007, when the unfortunate accident occurred. Bertrand had competed at the Turin Olympics the year before, however, coming in 24th in the downhill and super-G events.
As painful as the gate to the groin clearly as, Bertrand did not appear to suffer any damage that kept him from the sport. In fact, he continued competing in international downhill and super-G races until 2014.
According to a 2018 study, Alpine skiing is a notoriously dangerous sport with a reported injury rate of 36.7 per 100 World Cup athletes per season. Of course, it's the knees and not the coin purse that are the most common casualty of ski racing, which we saw clearly in U.S. skier Lindsey Vonn's harrowing experiences at the 2026 Olympics. Vonn was competing with a torn ACL and ended up being helicoptered off of the mountain after an ugly crash that did additional damage to her legs, requiring multiple surgeries (though what caused the crash was reportedly unrelated to her ACL tear). Still, she says she has no regrets.
As Bertrand's return to the slopes shows, the risk of injury doesn't stop those who live for the thrill of victory, even when the agony of defeat hits them right in the rocks.