01 chauvin trial 0331 Charles McMillian
'Oh my God': Trial goes to break after witness breaks down on stand
03:43 - Source: CNN

Editor’s Note: Elliot Williams is a CNN legal analyst. He is a former deputy assistant attorney general at the Justice Department and a principal at The Raben Group, a national public affairs and strategic communications firm. Follow him on Twitter @elliotcwilliams. The views expressed in this commentary are his own. View more opinion on CNN.

CNN  — 

Not every piece of evidence presented in a criminal trial is relevant to its outcome. Over the course of the trial of former Minneapolis Police officer Derek Chauvin thus far, we have heard a number of witness statements that are irrelevant to the central legal matter at issue in the case: is Chauvin legally responsible, under Minnesota’s murder statute, for the death of George Floyd?

Elliot Williams

The defense could have objected to some of this witness testimony or the judge could have easily struck it down, but they didn’t. And that’s a good thing.

Under Minnesota law, which governs Chauvin’s trial, “relevance” is a term that doesn’t track with our colloquial understanding of the term. “Relevant evidence” there is defined as “having any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence.” This is a nebulous concept, but it means that to be admissible in court, evidence must prove or disprove a fact that is of consequence to the litigation. This is, of course, subject to the interpretation of imperfect people who are often trying to make strategic decisions. Evidence that is not deemed relevant can make it into court if a judge allows it or neither of the parties object.

Very few consequential facts are in dispute in Chauvin’s trial. It is not up for debate that on May 25, 2020, Chauvin knelt on Floyd’s neck for more than nine minutes; graphic video evidence of this fact was seared into the public consciousness nearly a year ago and that footage, along with other clips from different angles, have already been admitted into court. It is not up for debate that Floyd died on that day, or that his name became an eponym for a galvanizing movement against America’s centuries-long failure to treat Black people – and particularly Black men in the criminal justice system – with basic dignity.

Up for legal debate is whether Chauvin “caused” Floyd’s death under Minnesota law. Prosecutors need not prove that Chauvin’s actions were the sole cause of Floyd’s death, but that his actions were a substantial causal factor in the death.

The answer to this question is obvious to me. I, however, am not one of the 12 jurors in this trial.

Nevertheless, what will matter most in the trial will be the testimony of medical professionals and toxicologists who will provide evidence about Floyd’s body and physical condition. The jury will then be tasked with deciding whether they are convinced, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Chauvin, who pleaded not guilty to charges of second-degree murder, third-degree murder and second-degree manslaughter, ought to be convicted. (Chauvin’s attorney said in his opening statements on Monday that the only “just verdict” would be to find Mr. Chauvin not guilty.)

The witness testimony we’ve seen thus far has been fascinating. However, some of the most powerful moments did not speak to any material fact at issue in the trial, but were gripping expressions of emotion as eyewitnesses worked through their guilt, and even shame, in front of a national audience. Jurors, of course, are human and could likely be swayed by such powerful human testimony.

For instance, Charles McMillian, a man who watched officers detain Floyd, broke down after watching a video of the arrest. McMillian, who is Black, said that he interacted with Chauvin just days before Floyd’s death, and attempted to engage Floyd as he was being detained, shouting, “Mr. Floyd, Mr. Floyd just comply, get in the car because you can’t win.”

Christopher Martin, a 19-year-old cashier at the convenience store Cup Foods, testified that Floyd’s death could have been avoided had he responded differently to what he thought was a $20 counterfeit bill Floyd used to pay for cigarettes (the store manager later asked another worker to call the police). Similarly, both Genevieve Hansen, an off-duty firefighter and EMT at the scene, and Darnella Frazier, the 17-year-old who filmed Chauvin kneeling on Floyd’s neck, shed tears on the stand and questioned what more they could have done to prevent his death. Frazier told the court, “It’s been nights I stayed up apologizing and apologizing to George Floyd for not doing more and not physically interacting and not saving his life.”

Despite its emotional impact, none of this evidence proves or disproves any material questions about whether Chauvin’s actions were the substantial causal factor behind Floyd’s death. Had the defense objected to some of these witness statements, the judge would probably have had reasonable grounds to disallow them. We can’t be sure if the defense made a tactical decision not to object – after all, perception matters at trial and it would have been damaging to Chauvin for his lawyers to be seen as combative towards grieving members of the community.

That said, while much of the testimonial evidence has not been legally consequential thus far, it does speak to important aspects of the nation’s reactions to Floyd’s death. Some of the witnesses highlighted the widespread guilt that so many felt over their failure to confront the gross inequalities baked into our daily lives that led to Floyd’s death. They wondered whether they were complicit in perpetuating racial injustice, and whether they could have done anything more to combat it.

McMillian, meanwhile, might not have been conscious of it, but he spoke to the fears of just about every Black man in America when he shared that interactions with law enforcement are so often fraught with peril. His advice to Floyd just moments before the 46-year-old’s death is one many Black Americans have internalized: it may just make more sense to get into the car or do whatever else an officer asks – however unreasonable – because you just can’t win.

Stay up to date on the latest opinion, analysis and conversations through social media. Join us at Facebook/CNNOpinion and follow us @CNNOpinion on Twitter. We welcome your ideas and comments.

No one can say whether Chauvin will be convicted. The trial is still ongoing, and the central legal dispute at the heart of the case – the technical cause of Floyd’s death – remains an open one. Layer on that the fact that it is difficult to convict police officers for their on-duty conduct, and it is clear that this proceeding is far from over.

So far, Chauvin’s defense team has not objected to some testimony that has made it into the trial. In doing so, they have provided us with a window into a nation’s grief and the fact that we can, and should, all do better.