Connect with us

Published

on

Derek Chauvin was tried in a Minneapolis courthouse surrounded by barbed wire, concrete block, two armored personnel carriers, and a squad of national guard troops, with hundreds of additional troops stationed throughout Minneapolis, all of which were there for one reason to quell a riot if the jury acquitted him.

Would you want to be tried before a jury bracing for a riot if it acquitted you? No one would and the Bill of Rights Sixth Amendment guarantee to a fair trial should prevent such a spectacle. However, that did not happen in Derek Chauvins case. Chauvin is now seeking to have the Supreme Court find his trial violated the Sixth Amendment and order that Chauvin be re-tried in a community which would not break out into riots if the jury acquitted Chauvin.

On May 25, 2020, George Floyd died while Chauvin and three other Minneapolis police officers attempted to arrest him. Presumably everyone reading this article knows who Derek Chauvin is and what happened on May 25, 2020. As one juror testified, you have to live in cave not to know what happened. However, there are details of what happened that were not widely reported in the media. For instance, the Minneapolis Police Department trained its officers to use the restraint technique Derek Chauvin and the other officers used in restraining Floyd. Below is a photograph of the technique from the Minneapolis police training manual:

Minneapolis Police Training Manual

When Derek Chauvins attorney tried to introduce this photograph into evidence, the state objected arguing there was no evidence Chauvin was trained on this technique and the court sustained the objection. However, whether Chauvin was trained on this technique was irrelevant the issue was whether the technique is an acceptable use of police technique to restrain a suspect and it is.

Virtually the day after Floyds death, the slogan Get off our necks went viral creating the narrative that Chauvin placed his knee on Floyds neck with such force that Chauvins knee choked off Floyds trachea causing Floyd to die of suffocation. That narrative is false and the state admitted it at trial. The states medical expert and Chauvins medical expert agreed: Floyd died of a cardiac arrhythmia his heart was beating so irregularly that he could not get sufficient blood pumping in his body. The states medical expert testified the cardiac arrhythmia was caused by positional asphyxia the weight of Chauvins knee on Floyds back, not neck restricted Floyds chest from expanding sufficiently for Floyd to breathe in enough oxygen. However, whether police officers placing their weight on a suspects back while handcuffed can cause someone to die from positional asphyxia has been refuted by numerous academic studies. A 2017 study ironically co-authored by a University of Minnesota professor concluded that scientific studies have thoroughly debunked this theory.

Individuals die of positional asphyxia when they have 1,000 pounds on their back not Derek Chauvins 145 pounds.

So what else can cause a cardiac arrhythmia? High blood pressure, 75% 90% blockage in coronary arteries, enlarged heart, recent use of fentanyl and methamphetamine, and stress all of which the states medical experts admitted Floyd exhibited when he died.

In order to convict Derek Chauvin, the jury had to believe two expert opinions the state offered: (i) Chauvin used force unreasonable for a police officer in restraining Floyd and (ii) that this unreasonable force was a substantial cause in Floyds death. As set forth above, these expert opinions were heavily contested at trial. Despite this, the jury returned a guilty verdict after deliberating for only a day. This is why the Sixth Amendments guarantee of a trial before an impartial jury is so important.

The Supreme Court has held in numerous cases that excessive pre-trial publicity can violate a defendants right to a fair trial. The courts concern is that the potential jurors exposure to pre-trial publicity and its effects in the community will cause the jurors to conclude the defendant is guilty before the trial even begins. Usually, the trial court will be able to ferret out such bias by questioning the potential jurors prior to trial. However, the Supreme Court has held that in some cases the pre-trial publicity and its effects in the community will be so overwhelming that the court must presume that the jurors will be irrevocably prejudiced against the defendant. If the court finds such a presumption exists, the court must move the case to be tried in a location which has not suffered from the effects of the alleged crime or been exposed to such massive pre-trial publicity. This is what happened with Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh his trial was moved from Oklahoma City to Denver, Colorado.

It is unquestionable that Floyds death, the riots in Minneapolis, and the state charging Chauvin arguably generated the most pre-trial publicity in American history. Everyone saw the viral video of Chauvin and the other officers using the restraint technique pictured above. Everyone knew of the riots in the Minneapolis metropolitan area which lasted for six days and caused over $500,000,000 in damage the second-worst riots in American history.

Media in the Minneapolis metropolitan area covered Floyds death and Chauvin literally every day from May 25, 2020, through the April 19, 2021, guilty verdict. More importantly, the coverage continued the false get off our neck theme and demonized Derek Chauvin. Thus, all of the potential jurors examined for the Chauvin trial 131 potential jurors said that they had been exposed to this pre-trial publicity. Many potential jurors were removed because the pre-trial publicity caused such jurors to be prejudiced against Chauvin. Ultimately, despite exposure to this pre-trial publicity, the trial court seated 13 jurors to try Chauvin.

The pre-trial publicity made it impossible for Chauvin to get a fair trial in Minneapolis. The Sixth Amendment required the trial be moved out of Minneapolis. However, that is not the principal problem. The principal problem is that the jurors knew that their own and their familys personal safety was at risk if they acquitted Chauvin. Unlike the pre-trial publicity which the jurors read about the incident, the Chauvin jurors experienced the riots because they lived in the rioted communities. The rioters message was clear convict Chauvin or else.

As a result, the potential jurors and seated jurors expressed concerns for their personal security if they acquitted Chauvin. The state knew this threat was not theoretical. The state deployed soldiers not police soldiers to protect the courthouse during the entire trial and deployed soldiers throughout the city prior to the verdict. Moreover, the threats continued after the rioting ended. Prior to trial, protestors assaulted attorneys representing the other officers after a pre-trial hearing.

During the trial, another police incident sparked another set of riots in a Minneapolis suburb, Brooklyn Center, leading to another deployment of soldiers to quell the riots. One of Chauvins jurors certainly experienced this second set of riots when she returned home in the evening from the Chauvin trial because she lived in Brooklyn Center. California Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) spoke to the Brooklyn Center rioters telling them to get more confrontational if the jury acquitted Chauvin. One wonders how active rioters would interpret a lawmaker telling them to get more confrontational when they are already rioting.

Despite the fact that the court attempted to maintain the jurors anonymity during trial, one jurors identity was exposed and he requested the court excuse him due to concerns for his safety. The court refused despite telling the juror your concerns [with safety] are perfectly understandable. All of us on this case whose names are out in the public understand the concerns .

The Sixth Amendment prohibits trying a criminal defendant before a jury who has such a personal stake in te outcome of trial if you acquit, your community will be burned and your personal safety may be at risk. While the overwhelming pre-trial publicity justified moving Chauvins trial out of Minneapolis under the Sixth Amendment, the riots and threats of implicit and explicit violence to the jurors and the community they lived in demanded it.

William F. Mohrman is an attorney practicing in Minneapolis. Mr. Mohrman is representing Derek Chauvin on his appeal.

The views expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Continue Reading

Environment

Tesla (TSLA) down 5% on news it’s stuck with its bad CEO Elon Musk for a decade

Published

on

By

Tesla (TSLA) down 5% on news it's stuck with its bad CEO Elon Musk for a decade

In the morning after Tesla’s shareholder meeting, shares of the company dropped significantly on market open, likely signaling a selloff from reasonable investors who objected to a vote to retain and overpay its CEO, Elon Musk, who has been responsible for a drastic drop in sales and earnings.

Tesla held its shareholder meeting yesterday, and shareholders voted on several high-profile proposals, the most-publicized of which would give CEO Elon Musk hundreds of millions of shares worth up to potentially $1 trillion, contingent upon company growth.

The headline $1 trillion has been widely reported and would be the largest payday ever for any employee of any company by multiple orders of magnitude if the company grows enough for all 12 milestone tranches to be met. The milestone tranches depend on company performance, and span over the next 7.5-10 years, with the goal of retaining Musk as CEO for that time period.

But Musk can still manage to get paid tens of billions of dollars – again, the largest payday ever for any CEO – even if the company grows slower than the S&P average. And another proposal printed 208 million shares, which the board can give to Musk at their discretion, independent of any milestone requirements.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

The vote was framed by Tesla as a necessity to retain Musk, and Musk himself threatened to leave the company if the vote did not go his way. He was probably bluffing, but it was enough to get 75% of shares to vote in favor of the incentive plan.

Many TSLA shareholders felt like they had no option other than to vote for the plan, as Musk’s incessant stock pumping with fantasies of robots and self-driving cars has been responsible for a huge run-up in share price, even as sales and earnings have dropped precipitously under his direction.

Due to Musk’s stock-pumping and the drop in earnings he’s caused at the company, Tesla’s price-to-earnings ratio is currently over 300. P/E ratio is an indication of the difference between market expectations and the company’s actual ability to make money, and lower numbers are healthier and less speculative. Most healthy companies have P/E ratios of around 20, possibly a bit more if they are in a high-growth industry.

But Musk had trapped Tesla shareholders: his lies are what led to TSLA stock being so high, and his threats to leave made shareholders fear a selloff in the event he didn’t get his absurd pay package, regardless of the benefits that might lead to in terms of company performance and stronger corporate governance. Nobody knows what actually would have happened to share price in the event that shareholders saw reason before the vote, but the common wisdom suggested a crash.

On other proposals, shareholders voted mostly lockstep with recommendations from Tesla’s captured board filled with Musk’s friends and family (and drug buddies). This included maintaining a supermajority voting requirement such that 67% of shares must agree to any change – an extremely high bar, now that Musk has been given incentives that could see his ownership share raise to over 25%.

The only significant measure on which shareholders broke with the board was a proposal to elect each company director annually – which would theoretically allow shareholders to respond more swiftly to problems in corporate governance (though they have as of yet shown disinterest in doing so).

Vote results lead to selloff in Tesla stock

Now, the market is responding to what happened yesterday, and it’s not nearly as enthusiastic as Elon Musk’s soldiers (yes, that is how one questioner referred to shareholders – they cheered, just before Musk referred to shareholders as “parasitic” in his response) in the room were.

At market open today, the stock immediately dropped nearly 5%, down 20 points from yesterday’s pre-meeting closing of $445.91 (which was already a down day for the company). The stock has moved up and down during the day, but as of this writing is at $424.

The drop was likely led by a selloff of the few investors who held out hope that shareholders might see reason. Given the news yesterday included a drastic pullback in shareholder voting rights, some shareholders might not want to keep their money in a company where they have effectively no say (this recent exodus of reasonable people probably influenced the vote results in the first place, too, as many people interested in healthy corporate governance sold their shares long ago).

The plan’s dilution may also have spooked shareholders. When new shares are printed, that reduces the value of all current shares, as all it does is cut the “pie” of the company’s market capitalization into smaller pieces. This means each share is worth less.

And the plans voted on involve the printing and granting of hundreds of millions of shares to Musk, which will dilute current shareholders. While this dilution hasn’t happened yet, the market can react ahead of time to the expectation of dilution.

Finally, the stock awards mean the company will be stuck with Musk for the foreseeable future. While this was the goal of the vote, to ensure that Musk not follow through on his threat to leave the company, he has also acted recently as the company’s chief saboteur, with most of his influence for more than a year being negative on company performance.

He’s spent $288M of his own money to cost Tesla $1.4B in lost profits and to harm the EV industry as a whole, he’s ruined Tesla’s formerly-shining brand, he’s made it harder for the company to do business overseas, he’s spread climate disinformation (and plenty of other types), he’s cost Tesla a million sales in the US alone with further drops overseas leading to cratering earnings, he pushed through a flop of a vehicle (that he’s had to sell spare inventory of to himself) and cancelled one that would have been successful, he fired the most important team in the company which caused chaos with suppliers, he’s distracted himself at all manner of other companies he owns (and with his social media addiction), he’s diverted Tesla resources to his own private companies while making threats to Tesla, he’s spent company resources to advertise for his own pay (rather than to sell Tesla products), he’s embarrassed and pushed away owners by trying to stoke civil war in other countries and engaging in corrupt government activities that killed hundreds of thousands of people… and then there’s the Nazi stuff.

That’s quite a list of fireable offenses, all within the last year or two, and it’s not an exhaustive list either. And Tesla has ten more years of that to look forward to, if this stock award runs its course.

The shareholders selling off their shares today probably held some vain hope that “Elon Musk’s soldiers” might see some amount of reason, and push back against some of the greater excesses reflected in yesterday’s shareholder votes. But alas, that did not happen.

And so, another straw has been added to the camels’ backs, with some of them finally breaking. Thus today’s selloff, as the “to the moon” enthusiasm seen in the room yesterday meets with a small semblance of reality.


The 30% federal solar tax credit is ending this year. If you’ve ever considered going solar, now’s the time to act. To make sure you find a trusted, reliable solar installer near you that offers competitive pricing, check out EnergySage, a free service that makes it easy for you to go solar. It has hundreds of pre-vetted solar installers competing for your business, ensuring you get high-quality solutions and save 20-30% compared to going it alone. Plus, it’s free to use, and you won’t get sales calls until you select an installer and share your phone number with them.

Your personalized solar quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisors to help you every step of the way. Get started here.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Environment

Honda wants to sell you an EV for under $30,000, eventually

Published

on

By

Honda wants to sell you an EV for under ,000, eventually

Honda wants in on the growing demand for affordable EVs. With the company’s CEO saying EVs selling for under $30,000 will be the main competition in the US, Honda may offer one of its own.

Honda mulls launching a sub-$30,000 EV in the US

Honda currently sells one fully electric vehicle in the US, the Prologue, which shares the same Ultium platform as the Chevy Equinox EV and all of GM’s electric cars.

The company confirmed that the Acura ZDX will not return for the 2026 model year, as it prepares for a new lineup over the next few years.

During the Japan Mobility Show last week, Honda unveiled the Super-ONE, a prototype of its smallest and most affordable EV set to launch in Japan next year, followed by Europe, the UK, and other global markets. Although the Super-ONE is not expected to arrive in the US, Honda may still offer an EV for under $30,000.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

Honda’s CEO, Toshihiro Mibe, told reporters in Japan last week (via The Drive) that looking ahead, the main competition in the US will be affordable EVs, priced under $30,000.

Honda-EV-$30,000
The Honda Super-ONE (Source: Honda)

“So, for the future, we will consider coming up with EVs under $30,000 as well,” Mibe said. However, don’t expect to see it anytime soon.

Thanks to the Trump administration killing off the $7,500 federal tax credit and ending other policies promoting EV adoption, Honda believes it has some time before it needs to launch it.

Honda-Prologue-EV
2026 Honda Prologue Elite (Source: Honda)

“What’s making it difficult, of course, is with the IRA subsidies now gone, with the Trump administration in place, we have the sense that maybe EV growth has been moved back out, maybe out five years in the further future,” Mibe said.

Due to the changes, Honda is aiming to launch more affordable EVs priced under $30,000 closer to the end of the decade.

Honda-EV-$30,000
Honda tests next-gen mid-size hybrid platform (Source: Honda)

“If we think about whether we have to really come up with those affordable EVs right away, we get the feeling not really,” Mibe said, adding it will be around 2030 before we see it.

In the meantime, Honda will focus on hybrids. The company is set to introduce its next-gen mid-size hybrid platform in 2027, promising it will be more efficient, less costly, and free of rare-earth materials.

Although it’s still not under $30,000, Honda is offering over $16,500 off with stackable savings on the 2025 Prologue in most US states.

Want to see the Prologue in person? You can use our link to find the Honda Prologue at a dealership in your area (trusted affiliate link).

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Technology

Affirm CEO says furloughed federal employees are starting to lose interest in shopping

Published

on

By

Affirm CEO says furloughed federal employees are starting to lose interest in shopping

Affirm CEO: We're not seeing a degradation in Affirm's consumer

Affirm CEO Max Levchin said Friday that while the buy now, pay later firm isn’t seeing credit stress among federally employed borrowers due to the government shutdown, there are signs of a change in shopping habits.

“We are seeing a very subtle loss of interest in shopping just for that group, and a couple of basis points,” Levchin told CNBC’s “Squawk on the Street.”

At least 670,000 federal employees have been furloughed in the shutdown, and about 730,000 are working without pay, the Bipartisan Policy Center said this week.

Levchin said he’s closely watching employment data for signs of major disruptions, but the company is “capable” of adjusting credit standards when needed.

“Right now, things are just fine,” he said. “We’re not seeing any major disturbances at all.”

The federal funding lapse, which began Oct. 1, is the longest in U.S. history and has halted work across agencies with an impact beyond those who are government employees. The SNAP food benefit program, which serves 42 million Americans, has also been cut off.

Read more CNBC tech news

The comments from Levchin followed a fiscal first-quarter earnings report that blew past Wall Street’s estimates. Affirm posted earnings of 23 cents per share on $933 million in revenue. Analysts polled by LSEG expected earnings of 11 cents per share on $883 million in sales.

Revenues climbed 34% from a year ago, while gross merchandise volumes jumped 42% to $10.8 billion from $7.6 billion a year ago. That surpassed Wall Street’s $10.38 billion estimate.

The fintech company, which went public in 2021, also lifted its full-year outlook, saying it now expects gross merchandise volume to hit $47.5 billion, versus prior guidance of $46 billion.

Affirm also said it renewed its partnership with Amazon through 2031. The company has also inked deals with the likes of Shopify and Apple in a competitive e-commerce landscape.

Long-time partner Walmart recently ditched Affirm for Swedish buy now, pay later firm Klarna, which went public in September after delaying its public offering due to market uncertainty caused by President Donald Trump‘s tariff plans. Worries of a pullback in discretionary spending due to tariffs ignited fears across the fintech sector.

Levchin said categories such as ticketing and travel have seen an uptick in interest, and consumer shopping remains strong. Active consumers grew to 24.1 million from 19.5 million a year ago.

“We’re every single day out there preaching the gospel of buy now, pay later being the better way to buy, and consumers are obviously responding,” he said.

Affirm shares jump 11% as transaction volume surges 42% in the quarter

Continue Reading

Trending