I was trying to get the facts straight with regards to the officers.
How long they were officers will matter to their defense, as can be seen by the lawyers bringing it up. It makes their deference appear more reasonable and them more sympathetic to a jury.
From what I saw of the videos, the two rookie officers did an entirely credible job of dealing with Mr. Floyd, until the time Chauvin showed up, pulled Floyd out of the police vehicle and pinned him down. Assisting him with that could be deemed reasonable as well, though you don't need three officers to pin a guy who is handcuffed behind his back and not resisting. While deferring to a superior officer is normal as well. So most or all of their actions can be portrayed as reasonable. Meaning they were trying to be responsible police.
It really comes down to the length of time they helped pin Floyd, and whether they knew exactly what Chauvin was doing (how much pressure, where, etc). They'll probably also say they relied on Chauvin's partner a 9 year vet who presumably knew Chauvin well, to monitor the situation and keep things under control. Though that could depend on if their trials are together or separate and what Tao testifies to.
The two rook officers certainly heard Floyd's distress and bystanders complain of the harm being done. That audio plus obviously the video is the evidence that damns them. 3 guys pinning a handcuffed man face down for such a long time is unreasonable and certainly bad judgment. I'm not sure what standard will be used, perhaps gross negligence. And before you can charge anyone with aiding and abetting 2nd degree murder, I assume you need to prove the 2nd degree murder charge first.
I certainly wouldn't want to be a policeman who gets sent to jail. Especially Chauvin in such a notorious case. I assume if convicted he wouldn't be mixed with the regular prison population, because he wouldn't last too long that way.
Poll
5 (45.5%)