MINNEAPOLIS (AP) – Prosecutors said Tuesday that they will likely re-examine the audiovisual policy factor of the trials of four former Minneapolis police officers accused of the death of George Floyd.
The Minnesota attorney general gave no explanation Monday when he objected to allowing courtroom cameras for the ex rs trials. But in one case Tuesday, Assistant Justice Secretary Matthew Frank said that if the prosecution supports a public trial, prosecutors would possibly worry that visual and live audio policy in the courtroom “could create more disruptions than they solve.”
Audiovisual policy can simply replace the way lawyers provide evidence, subject participants to increased media scrutiny, distracting from the trial, and intimidating some witnesses, Frank wrote, reiterating the problems raised last month through Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison.
“Testifying in public is already difficult enough; visual and live audio testimony can potentially deprive the testimony of some witnesses,” Frank wrote. But he said the matter could be reviewed in the run-up to the trial.
Derek Chauvin and three other ex-worksmen are scheduled to stand trial in March. Under Minnesota court rules, a judgment handed down would likely authorize the recording and rebuttal of criminal proceedings if either party consents. Hennepin County Judge Peter Cahill has not yet ruled on the issue, but the state’s position, unless replaced, makes it unlikely to allow the cameras at trial.
Last month, Cahill made the decision that cameras would not be allowed in the initial proceedings, after prosecutors objected.
Floyd, who is black, died on May 25 after Chauvin, who is white, pressed his knee opposite the man’s neck for about 8 minutes. Chauvin is charged with momentary murder, third-degree murder and momentary-degree murder. J. Kueng, Thomas Lane and Tou Thao are charged with being accomplices to manslaughter and manslaughter at any time. All four officers were fired after Floyd’s death.
The defense suggests that they would be open to the audio and video trial policy, saying the recordings were mandatory to ensure a fair trial for officials, especially a pandemic when public access to the courtroom is restricted.