Minnesota law originally defined third-degree murder solely as
depraved-heart murder ("without intent to effect the death of any person, caus[ing] the death of another by perpetrating an act eminently dangerous to others and evincing a depraved mind, without regard for human life").
[7][
No?
It looks like you have done some legal research and I will respect that the presenting information is factual. Here are my speculations (with my personal bias):
The injustice or perceived or anticipated injustice related to Floyd's death (for the sake of clarity in this discussion, I am treating as if Floyd's tragical death is an isolated event) is coming from a fearful place that the accused and arrested officer might plead guilty to a lower charge and serve a light sentence and walk away to live a free life. With good legal representation, he might even walk away as an innocent man. Again, these are my hypothesized explanations of the anticipated injustice. We really don't know what is going to happen but honestly many are anxious to see true justice served before greater damage and/or more innocent deaths.
A person charged with a crime is, by law, innocent. He is guilty of accused crime only after being convicted meaning that he has pleaded guilty or has been found guilty after trial.
To charge someone with a crime, the government needs minimum evidence to do so. That amount of evidence is referred to as ‘Probable Cause.’
To convict someone of crime(s), the government needs significantly more evidence. That amount of evidence is ‘Proof Beyond a Reasonable Doubt.’
The burden of proof is the exclusive province of the government. The accused has no obligation to offer evidence. As a matter of fact, his legal representative is entitled to review the evidence that will be presented in front of the jury if it is a trial by jury/ judge if it is a bench trial. This process is called pre-trial discovery. In a civil lawsuit, during pre-trial discovery, both parties (defendant(s) and plaintiff(s)) are required to provide the opponent side with evidence they have and plan to present. Evidence not made available to the opponent party in the pre-trial stage is not permissible in court unless the specific motion is filed and granted by the court. Since this is a criminal case, the accused has no obligation to present any evidence to prove his innocence therefore to disclose; however, he is entitled to have a copy of the evidence that the government has and plan to present.
How much evidence is needed to prove someone guilty Beyond a Reasonable Doubt? There is no direct answer to that. The jury must decide.
Officer Chauvin is perceived to have access and resources to be supported by a sophisticated defense team that will potentially help him to either walk free or gets a conviction of a lesser crime than a 3rd-degree murder. That is the root of the preassumed and/or anticipated injustice. That is where some people are basing on either their own previous experiences with the legal system or witnessing historical injustice.
In the business of ensuring emotional well-being, it is beyond the scope of our practice to determine who is right, who is wrong, or if someone is at wrong then what is the degree of the wrongness. However, it is our committed duty to illustrate and model the willingness to find some common ground and show an interest in trying to understand with or without agreement.
