Daily Archives: April 23, 2021

Throughout Boston, residents are greeted with the sight of benches divided by armrests that may look unassuming, but in reality prevent people from laying down on them. These restrictive seat dividers are a type of hostile architecture: a design approach that purposefully makes an environment uncomfortable to prevent individuals experiencing homelessness from frequenting these areas.

Hostile architecture is one of many ways the government and institutions work to push unhoused communities out of sight.

The pandemic has only exacerbated this kind of inaccessibility, especially on our campus. Access to areas that had previously been places of refuge for vulnerable populations has been heavily curtailed due to social distancing measures.

The George Sherman Union and the Mugar Library were previously open to non-students and used to be essential sources of food, warmth, bathroom facilities and water for the unhoused population. Now, no one can enter the GSU if they are not students and do not have a green badge.

Moreover, on-campus stores and dining facilities such as City Convenience do not accept cash, and in some cases, can only be accessed through GrubHub. These kinds of cashless payment restrictions have been shown to negatively affect low-income households, especially the individuals experiencing homelessness who may not have access to any other kind of funds.

The pandemic has provided a place for institutions to further pre-existing wealth inequality under the guise of protecting public safety whether intentional or not.

This is not to say that Boston University is not justified in enacting these restrictions. But the pandemic has exposed how these types of public health measures both at BU and the world at large do not consider its most vulnerable community members.

Whether it be through off-campus housing or simply walking around campus, students regularly interact with Boston residents. Students may even pose a significant risk to Boston residents with COVID-19 transmission: House parties held by college students in particular were a huge area of concern of community transmission for South Boston residents. Boston became a high-risk community after reports of these parties.

Opening access to BU community testing sites for Boston residents who need it would be a significant step in ensuring public safety for all.

BU holds significant power over the landscape of Boston. For years now, the University has significantly contributed to the gentrification of the city, particularly in Kenmore Square. BUs presence in the area has only grown since the pandemic: Due to the devastating effects of COVID-19 on restaurants, BU-affiliated properties are rapidly becoming the backbone of Kenmore.

Extending resources to the very communities BU helped push out of their neighborhoods is the very least it could do.

There are over 6,000 unhoused people in the city of Boston. From 2019 to 2020, there was a 6.8% increase in the number of families without a home, according to the 40th Annual Homeless Census. The pandemic has only worsened the housing crisis, making a population without resources to get treatment or get tested all the more vulnerable.

Taking care of those people does not work against public health measures, but rather should be an essential and central part of these plans and safety measures.

This is not to say that BU is solely responsible for addressing Bostons housing crisis, but as a prominent community member, BU has a responsibility to do better.

This can be enacted in small ways. For instance, people do not necessarily need to show their ID to get on the BU Shuttle, making this a resource available to everyone who regularly traffics our campus. BU could better distribute our resources by making other services such as our testing resources, dining services and buildings safely accessible to residents.

Last year BU opened part of its campus up to house staff from homeless shelters. BU could expand these efforts and offer housing to individuals without shelter during the summertime.

But it is not enough to simply remove hostile elements of our campus. It is also important to be actively anti-hostile towards our most vulnerable communities. BU should create spaces and resources that explicitly address the systemic roots of homelessness.

The Individual in Community HUB requirement requires students to learn to accept individual responsibility and work as engaged members of their communities.

Does our campus, as a major community member of Boston, reflect this shared responsibility?

BU should work on striking a balance between making campus regulations that are COVID-19 safe while also holding space for the most vulnerable members of our community.

Read more here:

EDITORIAL: Boston University should better support Boston's unhoused population - Daily Free Press

CINCINNATI--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Fifth Third Bank, National Association, has been named to the Forbes list of Best Employers for Diversity 2021. This prestigious award is presented by Forbes and Statista Inc., the world-leading statistics portal and industry ranking provider. The awards list was announced April 20 and can currently be viewed on the Forbes website.

Talent diversity is of upmost importance at every level of our Company, from our Board of Directors to our executive leadership team to our nearly 20,000 employees throughout our markets, said Peg Jula, Fifth Thirds chief human resources officer. Being named to the Forbes Best Employers for Diversity list demonstrates our commitment to cultivating an inclusive workforce that can effectively serve a diverse customer base and all communities.

We are intentional about creating an inclusive and trusting environment where all ideas are welcomed and where employees feel comfortable and empowered to have discussions about diversity and inclusion, said Stephanie Smith, the Banks chief inclusion and diversity officer. Accelerating racial equality, equity and inclusion is one of our strategic initiatives, and we believe in the power of leveraging our diversity and commonality as we strive to be the One Bank that people most value and trust.

The Best Employers for Diversity were selected based on Statista's innovative methodology, guaranteeing unbiased results and providing reliable insights. Over 50,000 U.S. employees were surveyed in companies with a minimum of 1,000 employees to identify the Best Employers for Diversity. The evaluation was based on four different criteria:

To learn more about Fifth Third Banks inclusion and diversity efforts, please visit: http://www.53.com/diversity.

About Fifth Third

Fifth Third Bancorp is a diversified financial services company headquartered in Cincinnati, Ohio, and the indirect parent company of Fifth Third Bank, National Association, a federally chartered institution. As of Mar. 31, 2021, Fifth Third had $207 billion in assets and operated 1,098 full-service banking centers and 2,383 ATMs with Fifth Third branding in Ohio, Kentucky, Indiana, Michigan, Illinois, Florida, Tennessee, West Virginia, Georgia, North Carolina and South Carolina. In total, Fifth Third provides its customers with access to approximately 53,000 fee-free ATMs across the United States. Fifth Third operates four main businesses: Commercial Banking, Branch Banking, Consumer Lending and Wealth & Asset Management. Fifth Third is among the largest money managers in the Midwest and, as of Mar. 31, 2021, had $464 billion in assets under care, of which it managed $58 billion for individuals, corporations and not-for-profit organizations through its Trust and Registered Investment Advisory businesses. Investor information and press releases can be viewed at http://www.53.com. Fifth Thirds common stock is traded on the Nasdaq Global Select Market under the symbol FITB. Fifth Third Bank was established in 1858. Deposit and Credit products are offered by Fifth Third Bank, National Association. Member FDIC.

See more here:

Fifth Third Bank Named to Forbes Best Employers for Diversity 2021 List - Business Wire

ST. LOUIS, April 22, 2021 /PRNewswire/ --Financial-services firm Edward Jones joined organizations across the U.S. to participate in CEO Action for Diversity & Inclusion's third annual "Day of Understanding and Reflection," the business community's largest movement to host candid conversations and help advance diversity, equity and inclusion in the workplace.

While CEO Action signatories continue to facilitate conversations with their people year-round, the Day of Understanding and Reflection in April provides leaders across the coalition's 1,600 organizations a collective opportunity to lead open dialogue and inspire change with more than 13 million employees.

Edward Jones invited its 49,000 associates to set aside time from their day-to-day work and learn more about one another's experiences through virtual group discussions, coffee chats, and a variety of other resources.

"At Edward Jones, our purpose is to partner for positive impactto improve the lives of our clients and colleagues, and together, better our communities and society," said Edward Jones Chief Human Resources Officer Kristin Johnson. "This day provided anopportunity for each ofus to spend time sharing,thinking and learning about what we can do to strengthen our sense of belonging for all, especially at a time when our colleagues and communities may be hurting. By encouraging an ongoing dialogue, we are helping to foster cultures of trust and belonging and reinforcing our commitment to greater inclusivity across our organization and the communities we serve."

Through CEO Action, Edward Jones will continue to work with leaders across the coalitionleveraging opportunities for greater collaboration, sharing leading practices and helping one another turn conversation learnings into bold actions. Together, these organizations have the power to change how millions of people talk to their colleagues about tough topics, fostering an inclusive culture and moving the needle toward a more just and equitable future.

In June 2020, Edward Jones bolstered its promise to diversity, equity and inclusion by making a Five-point Commitment to build a culture of belonging for its 49,000 associates and a more equitable world. First among those actions was to give everyone a voice, an experience the firm started in 2017 through a Courageous Conversations program on race and social justice.

These dialogues, which continue to this day, have included thousands of Edward Jones colleagues on topics designed to build empathy and create a deep understanding. This program has been so impactful, that in 2020 Edward Jones began taking these conversations into the communities it serves with community courageous conversations taking place in Kansas City, Raleigh-Durham and St. Louis in 2021.

"While these conversations are happening in our workplaces and communities year-round, this is a collective moment for us as human beings to be intentional and deliberate in how we support one another and through listening, learning and reflection challenge ourselves to build a more diverse, equitable and inclusive society one where everyone is able to be their authentic selves, has access to the same opportunities and feels a sense of belonging. Every Courageous Conversation I have participated in have been life changing for me," Johnson said.

For more information on the Day of Understanding and the "action" behind the CEO Action pledge, please visit http://www.ceoaction.com/dayofunderstanding.

About Edward JonesEdward Jones, a FORTUNE 500 firm headquartered in St. Louis, provides financial services in the U.S. and, through its affiliate, in Canada. Every aspect of the firm's business, from the investments its financial advisors offer to the location of its branch offices caters to individual investors. The firm's 19,000-plus financial advisors serve more than 7 million clients and care for $1.3 trillion in assets under management. The Edward Jones website is at http://www.edwardjones.com, and its recruiting Web site is http://www.careers.edwardjones.com. Member SIPC.

SOURCE Edward Jones

http://www.edwardjones.com

Read the original post:

Edward Jones Joins CEO Action's 'Day of Understanding and Reflection' - PRNewswire

Editors note: This editorial includes discussions of sexual abuse and violence. A list of sexual assault reporting options and on-campus resources can be found on the Notre Dame, Saint Marys and Holy Cross websites.

Last week, a conglomerate of tri-campus groups led by Saint Marys Belles Against Violence Office (BAVO) and Notre Dames Gender Relations Center (GRC) stood with sexual assault survivors and marched against sexual violence during this years Take Back the Night. The event corresponded with the recognition of April as Sexual Assault Awareness Month, a time dedicated to increasing public awareness of issues surrounding sexual assault, promoting educational opportunities and elevating the voices of survivors. This month is also a time to prioritize prevention by advocating for better public policy and cultural practices, in order to protect potential victims and survivors.

The issue of sexual violence is prevalent everywhere not only in our dorms and on our campus but around the world. According to a recent report from the U.K., 97% of women aged 18-24 have experienced sexual harassment. As of 2018, 81% of women in the U.S. have faced sexual harassment. In the U.S., one in six women will experience sexual assault.

Sexual assault also disproportionately affects marginalized communities in the U.S. According to a 2018 investigation by NPR, individuals with intellectual disabilities are seven times more likely to experience sexual violence. In addition, one in five Black women are survivors of sexual assault and over half of Native American women experience sexual violence in their lifetime. To advocate for survivors of sexual violence, we must consider and be aware of the intersections of oppression and rape culture.

While cisgender women are at an elevated risk of sexual violence, this affects many others. For instance, transgender college students are at higher risk for sexual violence. Twenty-one percent of transgender and gender-nonconforming college students have been sexually assaulted, compared to 18% of cisgender women and 4% of cisgender men. Additionally, cisgender men aged 18-24 in college are approximately five times more likely than non-students of the same age to be a victim of rape or sexual assault.

In Notre Dames 2020 campus climate survey, 4% of female respondents and 1% of male respondents indicated they had experienced non-consensual sexual intercourse as a student, and 16% of female students and 4% of male students said they had personally experienced other forms of non-consensual sexual contact while enrolled at Notre Dame.

At Notre Dame, there is limited transparent and accessible data on sexual assault. Because the Notre Dame Police Department operates as a private branch of a private University and not as a public agency, it is exempt by Indiana law from making records on the specific location of reported incidents such as dorms, among other student spaces publicly available.

This decision dates back to November 2016, when the Indiana Supreme Court ruled in favor of NDPD (which was NDSP at the time) in regard to a records request made by ESPN in 2015. The court concluded the department was not a public agency under state law. That same month in 2016, the South Bend Tribune and The Observer filed records requests with the NDSP, all of which the University denied, citing the ruling in the ESPN case.

Earlier that year, however, the Indiana General Assembly had changed the definition of public agency to include private university police departments. This had been the result of a technical printing error that was to be amended. After both the South Bend Tribune and The Observer filed a complaint with the PAC office (Public Access Counselor), it ruled in Notre Dames favor in February 2017. As a result, NDPDs crime log still contains very few details of reported incidents and, at the moment, the department is not required by law to make more specific information publicly available.

Yet having access to such information would better empower our communities to enact effective change and take the necessary steps to prevent future occurrences of sexual assault on our campuses. Thats why were calling upon the University and NDPD to be more transparent with students regarding reported incidents of sexual violence because members of our tri-campus community deserve transparency from the systems designed to protect them. Additionally, we call upon the administrations of Holy Cross College and Saint Marys College to allow for easier public access to sexual assault report data on their respective campuses both colleges have not updated their campus crime statistics since 2019.

As we approach the end of Sexual Assault Awareness Month, we also want to encourage our communities to continue increasing awareness, all year round, about sexual violence and how it relates to the tri-campus community. People in the age range of 18-24 are at higher risk of experiencing sexual violence, an issue that is particularly prevalent at colleges and universities.

But there is more to rape culture than sexual assault. Combating rape culture also involves shutting down language that perpetuates sexual violence which can take many forms, including derogatory jokes and off-handed comments that blame victims or make light of sexual assault. It involves being active bystanders even in spaces not commonly thought to be dangerous, because you never know what someone has been through and how that kind of atmosphere affects them. Most importantly, it means continuing to support survivors. Stand up against a culture of silence by listening to and believing survivors.

Next year, there will be two class years of undergraduate students who have never experienced a non-pandemic semester. Given the potential for a return to a more typical dorm and off-campus social and party culture, we strongly urge our tri-campus community to be intentional in protecting and caring for each other, especially our rising first-years and sophomores, in order to foster a safer, more welcoming community.

Link:

Observer Editorial: Speak up, this and every month - Observer Online

Grant Johnson said it was his brother, Mitchell Johnson, who started helping a family friend's daughter take care of Clydesdale horses.

Eventually, Grant Johnson's parents, Dennis and Linda Johnson of Springfield bought their first Clydesdale in 1990. The family stable, Linden Clydes, still has seven of the iconic horses.

Grant Johnson now works full-time for Anheuser-Busch-In Bev's eastern hitch of Clydesdales in Merrimack, New Hampshire, but he's back in Springfield this week for the 2021 National Clydesdale Sale that begins a three-day run at the Illinois State Fairgrounds beginning Thursday.

The sale is open to the public, Johnson said.

Johnson said his entire family, including another brother, Dustin from Morton, volunteers with the sale, which has a connection to Springfield and the fairgrounds going back to the mid-1980s.

"We'll do whatever we can to help the association and sale be successful," Grant Johnson said by phone earlier this week. "My parents are barn managers. They oversee the stalling and they do a lot for the association. This is unpaid work, but it's a passion.

"It's exciting to be back here. When you know the facility, you feel comfortable. It feels natural. We know staff on a first-name basis. It's great to have that home-base feeling."

Scott Dahl, director of the Springfield Convention & Visitors Bureau, said the sale is expected to attract about 2,000 to 3,000 attendees, still a little lighter from previous years because of concerns surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic and travel.

Dahl said other shows at the fairgrounds are on the horizon, including the Palomino World Championships July 6-16 and in 2022 and 2023, the National Appaloosa Show in 2022 and the American Truck Historical Society National Convention and Truck Show in 2023.

Springfield is also in the running for the Goodguys Rod & Custom Association national auto show, "a Bloomington Gold" type show as far as scope, Dahl said.

Most of those scheduled shows, Dahl added, were born out of an intentional partnership and collaboration between the SCVB and fairgrounds sales teams.

Some them, like the Clydesdales sale, had a history in Springfield, but had left for other cities. In more recent years, that show has been in Decatur, Lake St. Louis, Missouri and Shipshewana, Indiana, but sales teams in Springfield were able to "prospect" shows, that is, roll out out the welcome mat, for a return, Dahl said.

The fact that sales teams from the SCVB and the fairgrounds didn't furlough people because of the pandemic, Dahl added, kept the lines of communication open and in the end paid dividends.

Grant Johnson said the fairgrounds' facilities and stalling, including the Livestock Center, are probably "a significant reason why (the sale) came back here.

"The fairgrounds are immaculate and met the association's needs. A lot of exhibitors and breeders come from Canada, so Springfield is centrally located. There are plenty of hotels and restaurants. That's why it was here for so long (to begin with)."

The Clydesdale sale will include horse-related clothing, harness, barn and show supplies, wagons and trailers. There will be educational seminars on a variety of topics relating to owning and showing Clydesdale horses.

The Clydesdales' reputation, Johnson said, was built on what Anheuser-Busch and Budweiser did for the breed and marketing think St. Louis Cardinals baseball opening day, Super Bowl commercials or the Illinois State Fair parade.

But even Johnson admitted that Belgian and Percheron horses are more popular draught horses. Amish communities still use them for farming and in the show world and competitive world, people prefer both to Clydesdales.

A day's ration for the horses, which weigh between 1,800 and 2,300 pounds each, is 25 quarts of grain, 50 pounds of hay and 30 gallons of water.

The Clydesdales are a lot more work because of the white, flowing hairs on their legs, also called feathers.

"You have to wash the feathers every day," said Johnson, who oversees 10 Clydesdales in New Hampshire. "If you go into the show world, you have to do additional work to keep those feathers nice and clean."

In a normal year, Johnson, a former event administrator at the University of Illinois Springfield, spends about 40 weeks on the road with the hitch team.

Dahl said looking to 2022 and beyond, Springfield's convention bookings look "very strong. Our 2022 is shaping to look like (pre-COVID) 2019."

Dahl said the industry will see domestic leisure travel starting in June and moving through the summer, with anticipation that international travel returns some time in 2022.

See the original post:

Clydesdale sale returns to Springfield State Fairgrounds; more shows on the way - Cedar Valley Daily Times

Thursday, April 22, 2021 | 2 a.m.

The conviction of former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin in the killing of George Floyd provided a moments respite in a nation whose justice system has repeatedly failed to hold law enforcement officers accountable for abuses of authority against people of color.

But while the verdict offered a victory to build on in the quest for social justice, the exceptional circumstances that led to Chauvins conviction demonstrated how much more work needs to be done.

The jury arrived at the right outcome, but only after what President Joe Biden correctly identified as a unique and extraordinary convergence of factors in the trial.

This was a case involving massive amounts of evidence of a murder committed by an officer with clearly criminal intent. His actions were so obviously malicious and inappropriate that members of his own department broke the blue line to condemn them. This was about as well-documented and open-and-shut instance of intentional killing by a police officer as can be imagined. As the president of the nations largest police union said in reaction to the verdict, As we have said from the beginning, what Derek Chauvin did that day was not policing, it was murder.

And thats what it took to get a guilty verdict, leaving uncertainty about whether justice will be served in other cases with less overwhelming evidence.

The conviction let America issue a sigh of relief, but only because the alternative would have been beyond contemplation. An acquittal would have revealed our justice system as being fundamentally broken.

Still, the verdict was a step forward for justice, with the potential to further inspire Americans to press for enduring, systemic change.

That partly involves addressing police reforms from a legislative basis, by not only requiring departments to meet higher standards on use of force, training, hiring and screening, etc., but giving them the resources they need to make these improvements.

It also involves supporting leaders who recognize the imperative for progress on equality something that Southern Nevadans have been particularly wise about. In recent years, weve sent conscientious lawmakers to Carson City and Washington, D.C., where they have supported numerous equal-justice measures. Those include a sweeping package of judicial reforms at the state level in 2019 to undo policies from the War on Drugs era that resulted in mass incarceration of minorities in Nevada and across the nation. This year, lawmakers are considering several similar bills, including one that would reform police use-of-force policies and one that would decriminalize minor traffic offenses, which often lead to incarceration for low-income individuals because of their inability to pay fines.

Those are just a few examples of areas where Nevada is headed in the right direction.

Last summer, we saw another sign of progress when thousands of Las Vegas residents of all ages and ethnicities joined Black Lives Matter demonstrators in communities around the world to demand change. For those individuals and all like them, the Chauvin verdict offers a breath of wind in the sails of this movement.

Think of the joy we felt when those three guilty verdicts were read. This is the joy we could feel every day in a country where everyone can feel equally protected under the law and equally valued in society.

Unfortunately, were a long way from reaching that point. Systemic racism still plagues America, as we see it not only in the way minority communities are policed but in the wealth gap between whites and people of color, in gross discrepancies in health outcomes among minorities compared with whites, in relatively poor quality of public schools that serve communities of color, and in far too many other ways.

But the Chauvin verdict showed that the ideal of American justice remains attainable as long as we continue to seek it and the path to equality remains open as long as were willing to walk it.

Lets keep moving.

Here is the original post:

Chauvin trial offers nation relief but shows how far we still have to go - Las Vegas Sun

George Floyds death last May set off a ripple effect that spread across the globe, culminating in mass protests, cultural and political reckonings on race, and, on Tuesday, a rare conviction for the officer who killed him.

Bringing criminal charges and securing convictions against officers is notoriously difficult. From 2005 through June 2019, 20 out of 104 police officers charged with murder or manslaughter for on-duty shootings in the U.S. were convicted through a jury trial, according to a study from Bowling Green State University.

After a three-week trial, it took a jury about 10 hours to reach the unanimous decision to convict former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin of all three charges against him, including second degree murder.

The prosecutions case rested on a rare confluence of strong video evidence and damning testimony, including from the Minneapolis chief of police and a number of eyewitnesses.

In the aftermath of the verdict loom familiar questions about what it means and what comes next. Several criminal justice experts, including a former federal prosecutor and a former police chief, talked to the PBS NewsHour about what made this case stand out and what they see as the necessary steps toward greater accountability.

The 9-minute and 29-second video of Chauvin pressing his knee into Floyds neck became a signature piece of evidence in the trial.

In police-involved killings where there is video evidence, the footage is often blurry, showing frantic or quick movements, or an obstructed view, said Andrea Headley, an assistant professor who specializes in criminal justice policy at Georgetown University.

During the 2016 police shooting of Philando Castile in Minnesota, for instance, grainy police dash cam video captured Castile handing over his license to officer Jeronimo Yanez through his car window before saying, Sir, I have to tell you, I do have a firearm on me. Yanez is then heard warning Castile not to reach for the gun, before firing multiple shots in the car where Castiles girlfriend, Diamond Reynolds, and her four-year-old daughter were passengers. Castiles actions leading up to the shooting were out of view, and ultimately, a jury acquitted Yanez of all charges.

MORE: New federal action and greater calls for change follow Chauvin trial, conviction

In Chauvins case, the principle video shot by a 17-year-old bystander was clear and relatively still. It was almost like someones watching a movie, Headley said, speaking to the quality of the bystander video. I think having that video evidence in such a clear, distinct way, where you can see the vivid act of George Floyd losing his life slowly happening over time that evidence in and of itself is compelling.

Floyd can be seen telling the officers he cant breathe and calling out for his mother.

It was so long, so painful. I think that was super significant. It was a grisly death in a vicious time, during a pandemic, said Lenese Herbert, a former federal prosecutor who teaches criminal law and procedure at Howard University.

During the trial, prosecutors also showed video from police body cameras that allowed jurors to see multiple perspectives of Floyds murder, said Carol Archbold, professor of criminal justice at North Dakota State University. The video from officers Thomas Lane, J. Alexander Kueng and Tou Thao, who have also been charged in Floyds killing, showed the officers struggling to get handcuffed Floyd into a police car. Later, when Floyd is on the ground, the video showed Lane asking Chauvin twice whether they should roll Floyd on his side. Chauvin, whose knee was on Floyd, said no. At another point, Kueng can be seen checking Floyd for a pulse and telling Chauvin he cannot feel one, but Chauvins knee remains on Floyds neck.

Experts said the prosecution used the video footage and witness testimony effectively during the trial.

Even with the amount of video, the odds were still stacked against the prosecution given the low conviction rates for officers, said Hassan Aden, former chief of police for the Greenville Police Department in North Carolina who has served as a monitor for court agreements with police departments that mandate reforms.

The prosecution had an all-star team of lawyers, Aden said, led by Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison, who did not speak in court. Ellison, a civil rights attorney prior to becoming attorney general, assembled a group of local prosecutors and outside attorneys to work on the case.

MORE: Examining the police shootings of Black Americans and how leadership plays a role

The prosecutions case reflected an intentional use of video and a range of witnesses to lay out the timeline and the facts, Aden said. This includes highlighting how Chauvins actions in the video departed from the Minneapolis Police Departments policies and training.

One point of criticism throughout the trial that Herbert believes helped prosecutors is the invocation of the Minnesota Nice demeanor when questioning witnesses or challenging the defense. That cultural attitude of niceness in Minnesota has been accused of perpetuating a dismissal of racism in the community. But in this case, Herbert said it may have helped the prosecution connect with the jury.

The kind of prosecution and defense that is OK in some jurisdictions like the District of Columbia, for example, thats much more aggressive, much more in-your-face does not go over well in jurisdictions where the notion of politeness and gentleness and kindness are more significant, Herbert said.

Prosecutors presented a range of testimony, including emotional eye witnesses, first responders, medical experts and current members of the Minneapolis Police Department.

The defense team also called eye witnesses and medical experts in its attempt to claim that Floyd resisted arrest and that carbon monoxide exposure, a tumor in Floyds lower abdomen and fentanyl and methamphetamine in his system contributed to his death.

At one point, the defense called Minneapolis Park Police officer Peter Chang, who responded to the scene during Floyds arrest. He testified that the crowd grew more loud and aggressive toward officers, saying that he was concerned for their safety.

The defense tried to make some of the bystanders almost be responsible for the situation, Archbold said. I think that the prosecution did a really good job being able to show the video and you can hear the desperation in the voices of the people who are standing there watching this occur.

MORE: How the Chauvin verdict could become a defining moment for future policing

Charles McMillian, a 61-year-old eyewitness, began to cry on the stand while watching video of the incident, telling the court I feel helpless.

Perhaps most significant for prosecutors was testimony from Minneapolis police chief Medaria Arradondo, the departments medical training coordinator Officer Nicole Mackenzie, and Sgt. Jody Stiger, a use of force expert with the Los Angeles Police Department.

Arradondo said Chauvin violated policy in kneeling on Floyds neck, offering a rare public condemnation by a police chief of his own officer.

Once Mr. Floyd had stopped resisting, and certainly once he was in distress and trying to verbalize that, that should have stopped, Arradondo said during the trial.

Deborah Ramirez, a law professor with Northeastern University, said testimony of officers against one of their own is incredibly rare.

[Arradondo] crossed the blue line and walked into that courtroom and told the jury this is not what were trained to do, and then went through explicitly what [Chauvin] should have done and what he didnt do.

Criminal justice experts noted the significance of the Chauvin trial verdict, both in terms of the difficulty in prosecuting police and what this outcome means for the families of victims and members of communities that are disproportionately affected by police use of force.

I think that the world can breathe now, because they all stood behind George through a pandemic, through COVID marching. And justice for George means freedom for all, Floyds brother Philonise Floyd told PBS NewsHour correspondent Yamiche Alcindor the day after Chauvins conviction.

On Wednesday, U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland announced an investigation into the policies and practices of the Minneapolis Police Department.

When it comes to addressing police use of force on a systemic level, government officials and law enforcement agencies need to be less reactive and more focused on preventing and detecting these incidents before they occur, Ramirez said.

READ MORE: Democrats police reform bill faces opposition in the Senate but thats only the first hurdle

Headley described the prosecution of officers as an important back-end mechanism for police accountability, but emphasized the need for front-end solutions that will prevent unnecessary violence in the first place. Proposals for those solutions are highly debated and vary widely. Some activists want to dismantle and rebuild police departments. Others want to reallocate police funding for non-law enforcement services.

Ramirez supports mandating that officers hold professional liability insurance, that would rise in cost when officers engage in malpractice like using excessive force. Herbert said the Supreme Court can play a role by weighing in on the qualified immunity doctrine it created that legally protects public officials like police officers when performing discretionary functions of their jobs.

Headley said federal legislation and guidance will be important given the countrys fragmented policing system, comprising more than 18,000 departments. The Democratic-controlled House passed a major policing reform bill in March known as the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act. The bill would lower the legal standard required to convict an officer for misconduct, establish a national database to track police misconduct and provide grants to help states conduct investigations into alleged constitutional abuses by law enforcement. It has not received a vote in the Senate.

Experts said the nationwide conversations and protests sparked by Floyds murder may keep criminal justice solutions at the forefront of peoples minds.

Theres a lot of work to be done, Archbold said. I think that really requiring our government to step in and make real sweeping changes is the only way that were going to see a change. Because what weve been doing is not working.

See more here:

3 things that led to Chauvin's conviction, and what experts say is needed for more police accountability - PBS NewsHour

Two incidents in which police officers pulled Eroc Arroyo-Montano over and drew their guns revealed insights about police reaction and response, he said.

Ive been pulled over by police two times where they drew guns, Arroyo-Montano said. At one time, I missed a stop sign, and another time I hadnt updated my license plates. And both times they pulled guns on me, and to be very clear, I was also with Black folks.

Arroyo-Montano, a community activist, Kathleen OToole, police officer and lawyer, and Ricardo Arroyo, a Boston city councilor, spoke about criminal justice and police reform at a virtual panel on Tuesday sponsored by the African and African Diaspora Studies Program and the Irish Studies Program.

Also on Tuesday, Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin was found guilty of third-degree murder, second-degree murder, and second-degree manslaughter for the death of George Floyd. The verdict of this highly anticipated trial changed Tuesdays discussion, Arroyo-Montano said.

This panel wouldnt have been this panel, Arroyo-Montano said. This would have been a different moment.

In light of the Floyd protests, Arroyo-Montano said has seen more people recognize the impact of a police system powered by white supremacy and anti-blackness.

Those uprisings made me cautiously optimistic, Arroyo-Montano said. People were up in every state I saw a lot of participation from people who were saying enough is enough.

But Arroyo-Montano emphasized that conversations about the impact and traumatization of police brutality must continue.

OToole, BC 76, said she has seen policing evolve to some extent over the years, but that there is still significant room for improvement.

Yes, the last year has been particularly difficult, and I think it underscores the sense of urgency for all of us to undertake and to embrace more reform [and] more innovation in our police services, OToole said.

Arroyo, the first person of color to hold his position as city councilor of district five on the Boston City Council, said that people of color in the United States have often been taught to avoid making white people uncomfortable.

After Floyds death, Arroyo said he saw a noticeable shift in peoples abilities to have difficult conversations about race, aggressive policing, white supremacy, and oppression.

Ive seen more courage and more bravery in the way in which we talk about and handle these situations, Arroyo said.

Arroyo said he does not believe police make people feel safe or bring safety to neighborhoods.

And so our laws and what we do in this society often, is we criminalize poverty, addiction, mental health issues, Arroyo said.

Arroyo said he supports decreasing police interaction in neighborhoods and communities.

I dont think police interaction solves much, and I, you know, I struggle with what they do necessarily solve, but I certainly dont think that they solve issues with homelessness or mental health breakdowns or trauma or addiction issues, Arroyo said. I know they dont do that. And yet thats probably what they respond to the vast majority of the time.

Arroyo-Montano said that he supports defunding the police and reallocating resources toward people who are trained to help those in distress.

I am an abolitionist, Arroyo-Montano said. I do believe we need to defund the police. I think we need to reallocate.

OToole said that people should be intentional about reallocating resources.

I think we should be much more thoughtful about the way we allocate our resources, but I want to be certain that we dont just apply knee-jerk reactions and defund the police and cut their budgets by 50 percent, she said.

Everyone should come together with a community safety approach, rather than a policy approach, to harness resources and develop plans accordingly, OToole said.

Im just saying lets be really thoughtful so that when people do dial 911 we have an alternative for them, OToole said. If its not police, you know, lets be certain that we have the right systems in place before we make radical decisions that could actually cause greater harm than good.

In response to OTooles comment, Arroyo said that people need to focus on the reality that policing in the United States does not serve its citizens.

Its not for us, its not about us, its to control, Arroyo said. Its to deal with the reality that theres classism, theres racism in this country, theres hierarchies to that, and theres a specific control factor to ensuring that those things continue to exist unabated. And policing as it currently exists allows for that reality.

Arroyo said he believes reforming the system requires examining what the institution of policing does and reimagining budgets and systems to replace policing.

The people who are being defunded are not the police, according to Arroyo-Montano, but the people impacted by policing.

Right now, whos been defunded are the folks who work with addicts, teachers, schools have been defunded, Arroyo-Montano said. Community centers have been defunded.

Arroyo-Montano also said that Boston College itself has a history of racism, citing when the University denied the admission of two Black basketball recruitsElton Tyler and Jonathan DePinawho had already verbally committed to attend and passed minimum NCAA standards for eligibility in 1996.

It is important to have conversations about racism and be comfortable with the possibility of making someone else uncomfortable, according to Arroyo-Montano.

OToole said that it is important to recruit the right people for policing.

Unless you have a police service that reflects the community it serves, it will not be legitimate, it will not be credible, [and] it will not be effective, she said.

Featured Image by Amy Palmer / Heights Editor

The rest is here:

Panelists Talk Criminal Justice and Police Reform The Heights - The Heights

The Authoritarians War: Assessing Russian Intervention in the Syrian Civil War

By Connor Hirsch

Russian intervention in the Syrian Civil War braced the regime during its nadir and helped reestablish President Bashar al-Assads political dominance over much of Syria just two years later. Despite its importance, Russian intervention did not change the character of the counterinsurgency campaign. Rather, the similarities in Russian and Syrian approaches to counterinsurgency preserved Assads strategy and optimized Russian intervention, integrating formidable capabilities into an already brutal campaign. Leaders in Moscow and Damascus were aligned in their approaches. Effective patron-client politics facilitated strategic and tactical cooperation and enabled counterinsurgent forces to strike the insurgencies center of gravity by targeting Syrian civilians. Forced displacement and the intentional slaughter of noncombatants became a primary means for Russia and Syria to achieve key strategic objectives and turn the tide of the war. However, favorable short-term outcomes do not necessarily presage long-term success. The counterinsurgents punished civilians instead of addressing root causes. Assad has largely avoided addressing popular grievances and influential conditions and his brutality has left Syria ripe for insurgent exploitation. Although Assads short-term success seemingly demonstrates the efficacy of authoritarian approaches to counterinsurgency, the conflicts long-term outcomes remain unclear. As with all insurgencies and counterinsurgencies, it is essential to consider that the results of the Syrian Civil War may change over time.

Russias 2015 intervention proved a crucial turning point in the ongoing Syrian Civil War. While Syrian President Bashar al-Assads government appeared destined for collapse earlier that year, Russias deployment of weapons, air support, and specialists rejuvenated the regimes flagging counterinsurgency. This last-minute intervention helped Assads forces achieve military superiority over domestic rivals by the end of 2017. This article examines Russian and Syrian approaches to counterinsurgency, patron-client politics, and the strategic and tactical character of the Syrian Civil War from 2014when the rise of Islamist insurgents expanded the conflict to a transnational levelto 2017when the regime regained dominance over most Syrian battlefieldsthrough the end of 2020, when the regimes survival appeared all but assured.

In general, Russian intervention did not change the character of Assads counterinsurgency campaign. Russia and Syria have employed authoritarian approaches to counterinsurgency throughout their modern history. From Afghanistan to Chechnya, the Russians have intentionally punished civilians to undermine insurgent movements. Syria has also employed violent coercion against the Syrian population during campaigns against domestic rebel groups. The allies maintained these approaches throughout the Syrian Civil War.

Approach alignment fostered effective patron-client relations following Russian intervention. By embracing violence against civilians to extinguish popular support for the insurgencies, Russia and Syria reduced strategic friction and promoted tactical cooperation. This synergy allowed Russia to integrate deadlier capabilities into Assads already brutal campaign, inflict greater suffering upon the population, and ultimately turn the tide against the insurgents.

The short-term results may challenge the typical Western notion of good counterinsurgency. Russia and Syria have achieved notable tactical and operational successes and improved the regimes immediate strategic position while eschewing the population-centric principles that define the counterinsurgency doctrines of the United States and several European powers. Targeted violence against civilians has proven an effective short-term resolution to insurgency in Syria. The regimes short-term success may ignite debate about the most effective approach to counterinsurgency as a result. At the very least, the short-term outcomes of the Syrian Civil War demonstrate the advantages that authoritarian countries like Russia and Syria have over liberal democracies like the United States when waging counterinsurgency.

The long-term effects on Syrias internal stability are more difficult to discern. The counterinsurgents elected to approach the campaign by punishing civilians instead of addressing root causes. Assad largely ignored popular grievances through the end of 2020, while his heavy-handed actions have entrenched and exacerbated common drivers of insurgency. Although regime forces have regained control over much of Syrias territory and population, the country faces a long road to recovery. Many Syrians live in poverty and without access to basic services, while the remnants of insurgent groups still demonstrate potent military capabilities through attacks against regime forces and Syrian civilians. Despite the apparent efficacy of the counterinsurgency and favorable short-term results, it is essential to consider that the outcomes of the Russian intervention in Syria may change over time.

SYNERGISTIC AUTHORITARIAN APPROACHES TO COUNTERINSURGENCY

Permissive political and strategic cultures allow Russia and Syria to take authoritarian approaches to counterinsurgency campaigns. Many authoritarian regimes are largely unburdened by domestic and international judgement, enabling them to jettison concerns about appropriate use of force, legal norms, and political approval. The authoritarian approach permits counterinsurgents to attempt to resolve the wicked problems of insurgency with preponderant violence and cruelty.[1] Authoritarian synergy facilitated effective cooperation between Damascus and Moscow following Russian intervention in the Syrian Civil War.

Before and after Russian intervention, counterinsurgent forces used violence expressly to increase the costs for civilians supporting the insurgency or even simply living in rebel-controlled areas.[2] The continuity of violence against civilians demonstrates the operational freedom enjoyed by authoritarian regimes waging counterinsurgency. As leaders of two of the most authoritarian countries in the world,[3] Assad and Russian President Vladimir Putin were generally free to prosecute counterinsurgency as they saw fit. Although Assad espoused population-centric rhetoric about winning hearts and minds in 2015,[4] his words were duplicitous. Terrorizing, coercing, and massacring civilians remained integral to the counterinsurgency despite strategic shifts and evolutions in battlefield dynamics throughout the war.

Applying extreme violence against contested and insurgent-held areas has defined Syrias approach to counterinsurgency for decades. The regime kills rebel fighters and coerces the population to degrade bases of insurgent support and demonstrate its omnipotence. Both Hafez and Bashar al-Assad used sheer brutality to displace Syrians living in rebel-held areas during their respective campaigns against the Muslim Brotherhood in the early 1980s and opposition insurgents at the beginning of the Syrian Civil War.[5]

Brutalizing combatants and civilians alike remained the guiding principle of the younger Assads approach to counterinsurgency even as his strategy evolved throughout the conflict.[6] The regimes proclivity for indirect fire from massed artillery and restrained deployment of ground troops often decimated the population along with insurgents in urban areas.[7] In later years, the regime intentionally employed a myriad of coercive means against its own people to force civilians from rebel-held zones.[8] Assad intentionally bombed bakeries, hospitals, and schools to prevent insurgents from providing public services, drive Syrian civilians from rebel territory, and ultimately diminish popular support for opposition groups.

Russian counterinsurgency also generally shuns population-centric principles. Inherited from the Soviet approach to counterinsurgency in Afghanistan and honed during the Chechen Wars, the modern Russian approach relies heavily on air and artillery assets to inflict maximum suffering on rebels and local populations while limiting the exposure of infantry and mechanized units to close-quarter combat.[9] In Afghanistan, the Soviets sought to eliminate support for the Mujahedin insurgents by punishing rural Afghans. Soviet forces used violence as a tool of reprisal against populations suspected of supporting insurgents and intentionally destroyed economic and physical infrastructure in many communities across the country. The Afghan population suffered immensely, as Soviet counterinsurgency operations directly and indirectly killed over one million people and displaced over three million.[10]

Russia took a similar approach while waging counterinsurgency in Chechnya. During the Second Chechen War, Russian forces often encircled rebel-held areas before employing prolonged artillery bombardments to pound the enemy into surrender.[11] The Russians deployed overwhelming firepower against rebel positions during combat in Grozny and Komsomolskoye in 2000, and displayed little regard for killing or displacing civilians or destroying infrastructure. Both cities were depopulated and virtually obliterated during the fighting.[12]While the Russians took some steps to limit non-combatant attrition,[13] estimates still place the number of Chechen civilian casualties from 1994-2004 as high as 250,000 with around 300,000 more displaced. In fact, Russian forces were widely reported to have used cluster munitions and other banned weapons in populated areas.[14]

RUSSIAN AND SYRIAN COUNTERINSURGENCY STRATEGIES

The similar Russian and Syrian approaches to counterinsurgency allowed Assad to maintain his strategy following Russian intervention in the Syrian Civil War. Since the earliest days of the insurgency, the regime had followed the classic Syrian approach by pairing conventional military operations with punishment of populations in contested areas. Assads selective deployment of politically loyal military units, cultivation of supportive militia groups, and use of armored forces and indirect fire to clear and hold rebel population centers in 2011 and 2012 reflect the foundational elements of his fathers strategy against the Muslim Brotherhood during the uprising from 1979 to 1982.[15]During this campaign, the elder Assad relied on an Alawite-majority force while entrusting family members and close associates with military command to prevent defections. Hafez also cultivated a large and loyal paramilitary network, increasing the size of the counterinsurgencys fighting force and helping to counter the Muslim Brotherhood across the country. The regime used its loyal professional and militia forces to systematically clear insurgents from cities and hold on to the locality, but also displayed a propensity for using artillery to level urban areas when facing determined resistance. Notably, regime forces heavily bombarded Hama during the siege in 1982, killing many civilians and destroying much of the historic old city before retaking it.[16]

While Hafez decisively put down the Muslim Brotherhood, Bashar failed to reconcile the limitations of his available forces with his preferred strategic approach as the Syrian Civil War dragged on. Like his father, the younger Assad relied heavily on Alawites to form the core of the counterinsurgency, preventing mass defection but constraining the regime to using as little as one-third of its total military force in operations against insurgents.[17] It is difficult to ascertain the effect of combat attrition on regime forces because the government stopped publishing official figures at the end of 2012. However, the Syrian Arab Army had already suffered nearly 8,000 soldiers killed and an additional 30,500 wounded at that time, representing a sizable portion of Assads already reduced military.[18]

Selective deployment and combat attrition helped give loyalist militias prominent roles in the counterinsurgency, as Assad attempted to augment his limited professional combat forces with paramilitary fighters. This strategy decentralized the regimes control over counterinsurgent forces. As militias became enmeshed with army units, Assad sought to enhance operational capacity by empowering junior officers and militia commanders to pursue broad strategic goals independent of the Syrian Arab Armys chain of command.[19] Some militia groups used their operational freedom to massacre Sunni civilians.[20]

Assads selective deployment of Syrian Arab Army units hindered the counterinsurgencys ability to effectively execute clear and hold operations. Like his father, Assad became reliant on artillery and airpower to clear insurgents from population centers. This approach limited regime casualties but ultimately led to the large-scale destruction and depopulation of many urban zones.[21]In concert with militia atrocities, the regimes efforts to conduct clear and hold operations through air and artillery strikes contributed to the escalation of the insurgency.[22] Mass displacement from regime bombardments and paramilitary brutality compounded popular grievances, helped spread localized discontent across a greater geographic area, and prevented regime forces from establishing effective government control over the population. Opposition and jihadist insurgent groups benefitted from the regimes limited military capacity and violence against civilians to gain territory and build support.[23]

Early in 2015, Assad changed the counterinsurgencys strategy by replacing large maneuver operations against insurgents in population centers with more judicious campaigns designed to establish and maintain the regimes presence in key cities and the border areas. This new army in all corners strategy sought to preserve Syrias territorial integrity, assert regime control over the population, and project an image of political legitimacy domestically and internationally.[24] Moreover, the strategic shift indicated Assads acknowledgement of the inevitability of a prolonged and difficult struggle for survival. The regimes undermanned forces had become concentrated in the countrys south and west,[25] facilitating the emergence of extremist factionsincluding the Islamic Statewhich exploited the chaos to sweep through much of the country and push the regime to the brink by the end of 2014. Assad had even announced in early 2015 that a political resolution was necessary to conclude the conflict and that he was amenable to dialogue with insurgents.[26] The army and all corners strategy therefore represented a pragmatic alignment of ways and means to garner more favorable conditions for a political settlement.

Contemporaneously, Assad began working to rationalize his claims of political legitimacy and excuse his increasingly brutal tactics to the international community by casting Syrias insurgent movements as elements of a jihadist constellation and framing the counterinsurgency as a campaign against transnational terrorist groups. His efforts were effective, as Russia soon publicly announced military support for the regime while the discourse in the United States began to begrudgingly paint Assad favorably when contrasted with the Islamic State and al Qaeda affiliates.[27]

Assad did not replace the army in all corners strategy upon the arrival of Russian forces in Syria in 2015. Russias primary objective was not the immediate reconquest of the country, but rather to support Assads campaigns to recapture and defend key areas by providing the capabilities needed to gradually turn the tide in the regimes favor.[28] Moscow had assessed that ensuring Assads survival required military intervention and that a potential collapse would adversely affect Russian security interests. Given the unfavorable battlefield dynamics in 2015 and string of diplomatic failures, Russian planners deemed military intervention to be the only feasible resolution.[29] Ostensibly to roll back the rampant Islamic State, Russian forces formally entered the conflict to brace Assads regime and help expand his control over Syrias population and territory.[30]

Russias intervention assured Assads survival by bolstering the counterinsurgencys capabilities. Russian air assets and special forces augmented the Syrian Arab Army and loyal militia groups, which still served as the counterinsurgencys primary maneuver forces.[31] Almost immediately, Russian aircraft began targeting civilians to forcibly depopulate rebel-held areas, reportedly launching 1,292 combat flights against 1,623 targets in October 2015.[32]

Despite Moscows assertions that the intervention sought to destroy terrorist organizations in Syria, limited action against the Islamic State suggests that the counterinsurgents preferred to target more moderate opposition groups to reduce the number of politically viable competitors to the regime. Some reports indicate that Russian aircraft struck the Islamic State on just 26% of missions in the first quarter of 2016 and on just 17% of missions by the third quarter of that same year.[33] Instead, the counterinsurgency used Russian airpower to strike opposition positions in western Syria, reportedly targeting rebels around Aleppo, Idlib, and Homs more frequently than the Islamic State in Deir ez-Zor, even in the immediate wake of the ceasefire that began on February 27, 2016.[34] Human Rights Watch also accused the counterinsurgency of war crimes after airstrikes in Aleppo killed over 440 civilians in September and October 2016.[35]

The Russian military presence in Syria also shielded the regime from unilateral military intervention by foreign powers, who worried about escalation and potential confrontation with Russian forces.[36] Safe from meaningful Western reprisal, Assad increased his barbarism by unleashing cluster bombs, incendiary munitions, and poison gas upon Syrian civilians while targeting bakeries, hospitals, and schools.[37]

Although Russian intervention did not substantively alter Assads strategic approach to the war between 2015 and 2017, it gave him the necessary capabilities and security to ramp up the degradation of insurgent groups and coercion of civilian populations living under rebel control. Even by early 2016, Russian officials were pleased with the outcomes, believing the intervention had helped the regime gain control over more of Syrias territory and population at relatively minimal cost in Russian blood and treasure.[38]

RUSSIAN AND SYRIAN COUNTERINSURGENCY TACTICS

Congruent Russian and Syrian approaches to counterinsurgency allowed for tactical continuity following Russian intervention. Assads forces bombarded populated areas independent of operations against insurgents before and after the implementation of the army in all corners strategy. The counterinsurgency maintained the tactic after Russian intervention to forcibly displace civilians living under insurgent control.

Assads use of massed artillery against populated areas in rebel-held zones dates back to the 2012 siege of Homs, when regime forces encircled and bombarded the city for a month before sending infantry to systematically clear the remains.[39] Although pairing indirect fire from massed artillery with ground maneuvers brought operational success in the wars early stages, Assads forces revised their tactical approach after troop deficiencies ultimately voided the viability of the initial clear-and-hold strategy.[40] After first taking Homs in 2012, dwindling personnel led the regime to bombard civilians in opposition territory even though no ground troops were available to assault and occupy the zone.[41]

Assad has targeted civilians with great effect, employing cluster bombs, barrel bombs, and surface-to-surface ballistic missiles against populated insurgent territory, and specifically against nodes of infrastructure, to undermine insurgents ability to provide essential goods and services.[42] As large maneuver operations decreased under the more restrained army in all corners strategy, tactics designed to forcibly depopulate insurgent territory assumed greater prominence. In concert with targeted siege-and-starve operations and the selective use of chemical weapons, the regimes bombing of civilians in insurgent-held areas contributed to an enormous increase in civilian suffering.

Estimates of the number of displaced Syrians jumped from close to six-million in early 2013 to 11.5 million just over two years later. Of the 220,000 Syrians estimated to have been killed by early 2015, at least 76,000 were killed in 2014 alone.[43] The forced depopulation of insurgent territory helped the regime establish control over perhaps as much as 72% of Syrias remaining population by 2015, demonstrating progress towards Assads strategic goals of dominating Syrias human terrain and projecting political legitimacy by the time Russia intervened.[44]

Russian intervention enhanced the effectiveness of the counterinsurgencys tactics by providing greater capabilities for the recapture and defense of key locations and strikes against civilians in rebel-held areas. The first notable tactical improvement for the counterinsurgency was the superior coordination with fire support stemming from communication between Russian specialists embedded with regime forces and an integration center headquartered at Khmeimim Air Base near Latakia.[45]

Russian-led combined arms operations became integral to the counterinsurgencys efforts to win back territory. Russian specialists notably exploited human and signals intelligence and satellite imagery to direct a bombing campaign in support of regime ground forces battling to encircle Aleppo in mid-2016. Once the city had been surrounded, counterinsurgent airstrikes systematically destroyed rebel positions until resistance collapsed and the regime reclaimed the zone.[46] Throughout 2017, Russian and Syrian air assets provided crucial tactical support for Syrian ground forces fighting to recapture cities including Homs from opposition rebels and Palmyra and Deir ez-Zor from the Islamic State.[47]

The second key tactical improvement following Russian intervention was the counterinsurgencys enhanced capabilities when targeting civilians in rebel-held areas. While Russias intervention did not introduce new tactics for punishing civilians (regime hospital bombings date back to 2011, while Assads forces killed over 1,400 Syrians with sarin gas around Ghouta in 2013),[48] Russian capabilities and international political clout facilitated more brazen and efficient employment of the regimes brutality to make rebel-held areas essentially uninhabitable.

Although Moscow fervently denies such claims, international sources verified 172 attacks on hospitals or other medical facilities in the second half of 2016, 73 of which occurred in insurgent-controlled areas of Aleppo as counterinsurgent forces battled to reclaim it.[49] Russian air superiority also enabled the regimes use of sarin gas against civilians, notably in the town of Khan Sheikhoun in Idlib province in April 2017.[50]

OPERATIONAL AND TACTICAL SUCCESS

Throughout 2014 and much of 2015, the regime struggled at the strategic, operational, and tactical levels, leading observersincluding analysts in Moscowto assess that Assad faced a serious threat of defeat.[51] The troop deficiencies that unraveled Assads initial clear-and-hold strategy had also enabled the emergence of more numerous and powerful rebel factionsmost notably the Islamic Statewhich exploited the chaos and scant government presence in much of the country to grow into serious challengers throughout 2014.[52] Early the following year, the Islamic State conquered Palmyra while an extremist coalition led by Jahbat al-Nusra commenced an offensive in the countrys northwest. The head of Russias General Staff assessed that Assads regime controlled just 10% of Syrian territory in 2015 and was just months away from falling to the Islamic State.[53] While that claim may be dubious, it demonstrates Russias belief that Assad was at best navigating dangerous waters in the face of several strong insurgent movements.

Russian intervention helped turn the operational and tactical tides by providing counterinsurgent forces more capable means to degrade insurgent fighters and supportive populations. In the short-term, the intentional targeting of civilians often effectively separated the population from the insurgents either by forcibly depopulating the rebel-held zones or even turning Syrians against the rebels, who they blamed for their suffering at the hands of the regime.[54] Russian military and logistical capabilities also improved the counterinsurgencys combined arms operations by deploying more air assets and facilitating more effective communication between air and ground forces.[55]

Tactical and operational success defined the period of Russian intervention and made it a vital phase of the Syrian counterinsurgency. Superior capabilities and logistics improved tactics and operational art and steadied the regime during its nadir in 2015. Tactical improvements empowered a string of operational triumphs in subsequent years, including the recapture of Aleppo, Homs, Palmyra, and Deir ez-Zor, reducing opposition rebel territory to Idlib and a few small pockets in the west while virtually eradicating the Islamic States territory. By 2017, Russian support had helped Assad reassert himself as Syrias preeminent political leader. Assads political longevity seemed assured by the end of 2020 largely because the Russians backed the counterinsurgency through perhaps the most complex and violent years of the conflict.

However, Russian intervention was not solely responsible for the counterinsurgencys successes. Several antecedent conditions existing in Syria between 2014 and 2020 also contributed to the result. First, the U.S.-led coalition and U.S-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) shouldered substantial responsibility in the campaign against the Islamic State, which was perhaps Assads greatest threat at the time of Russian intervention. Although Assad excoriated coalition airstrikes against the Islamic State in Syria, the regime used the coalitions commitment to reallocate significant air assets deployed against Raqqa and Deir ez-Zor to strike rebel positions and civilians in Idlib, Daraa, and Hama.[56]

Second, many of the oppositions international backers began to sever ties as the regime gained momentum throughout 2017. That year, the United States canceled a Central Intelligence Agency program which had supported opposition insurgent groups against Assad since 2013.[57] Jordan also began pressuring Syrian rebels to relinquish the vital Nasib border crossing, which they had held since 2015.[58]

Finally, the insurgency in Syria was a splintered patchwork of diverse groups with differing objectives. The general lack of coordination and centralization between rebel elements led to fighting between groups and allowed the counterinsurgency to more effectively isolate and destroy insurgents.[59] While these conditions should not eclipse the significance of the tactical and operational successes which followed Russian intervention, their importance should be recognized in the context of the counterinsurgency environment.

APPROACH ALIGNMENT AND PATRON-CLIENT POLITICS

Russias successful intervention in the Syrian Civil War demonstrates the importance of alignment between host and expeditionary nations counterinsurgency approaches for both patron-client politics and campaign outcomes. By embracing authoritarian approaches to counterinsurgency, Russiathe patronand Syriathe clientavoided many of the pitfalls that can compromise counterinsurgency alliances. As a result, approach alignment and effective patron-client politics proved vital to the strategic, operational, and tactical cooperation that yielded favorable short-term results for Assads regime.

Misaligned counterinsurgency approaches can prevent even the most capable expeditionary powers from helping an allied host government to wage effective counterinsurgency. Although clients and patrons may broadly share the goal of defeating an insurgency, they can still possess fundamentally different interests and may not necessarily have consensus on their approach. Kings College Londons Walter Ladwig III relates the issue of patron-client politics in counterinsurgency to the classic principal-agent problem: divergent priorities can create friction between partners.[60] Disparate approaches to waging counterinsurgency can damage patron-client relations and inhibit strategic, operational, and tactical cooperation.

Recent American counterinsurgency expeditions demonstrate the potentially deleterious effects of misaligned approaches and ineffective patron-client politics in counterinsurgency alliances. Approach alignment is often overlooked or taken for granted in American expeditionary counterinsurgency planning.[61] As a result, the United States has seen several expeditionary counterinsurgency endeavors undermined by the divergent priorities and illiberal tendencies of the host government.

In American doctrine, expeditionary counterinsurgency operations work to confer legitimacy to the host government by preparing it to meet basic local expectations for acceptable governance.[62] However, host governments approaches and priorities often differ from Washingtons, leading to ineffective patron-client politics and impeding the United States expeditionary counterinsurgency efforts. Ladwig III notes that host governments in counterinsurgency warfare tend to have certain unscrupulous aspects which often fueled the insurgency in the first place.[63] Retired U.S. Marine Colonel T.X. Hammes contends that the United States insistence upon population-centric approaches to counterinsurgency can cause friction with host governments which often democratize slowly and may prefer more authoritarian measures during counterinsurgency campaigns.[64] In Iraq, Prime Minister Nouri al-Malikis sectarianism marginalized many Iraqi Sunni, which helped galvanize support for Sunni insurgencies like the Islamic State. Likewise, Afghan President Hamid Karzais cronyism largely alienated Afghanistans population from the counterinsurgency, diminishing popular support.[65] In both countries, misaligned approaches and priorities meant the counterinsurgency could not confer legitimacy to the host government, and thus could not achieve its strategic objectives.

In contrast to the United States recent expeditionary experiences, congruent Russian and Syrian approaches to counterinsurgency helped the allies largely avoid the principal-agent problem, foster effective patron-client politics, and achieve successful results in the Syrian Civil War. The two countries had few reservations about strategies of punishment, purposefully unleashing conventional and banned weapons against non-combatants to eliminate the insurgents sources of support. Effective patron-client politics facilitated Russian integration into Assads army in all corners strategy and allowed Russia to maintain a light footprint throughout its intervention. The counterinsurgency used preponderant aerial and artillery force to brutally demonstrate that the rebels could not provide effective security for the people, helping to reestablish Assads omnipotent image in the eyes of the population. The improvements in capabilities also led to tactical and operational successes which expanded Assads control over Syrias population and territory. As a result, even fervent supporters of political opposition begrudgingly accepted Assads leadership, if only as a means of survival.[66]

LINGERING STRATEGIC QUESTIONS

The outcomes at the strategic level are more ambiguous for the counterinsurgency. At first glance, operational and tactical success had mostly achieved the aims of the army in all corners strategy. The regime ended 2017 in control of the cities of Aleppo in the northwest and Qamishli in the northeast and within striking distance of Daraa in the southwest and Abu Kamal in the east.[67]

However, two notable challenges complicate assessment of the counterinsurgencys strategic results. First, the SDFs emergence as a domestic rival and Turkeys entrance into the conflict complicated Assads plans to regain control of Syria. While Assad was focused primarily in the west, the SDF had established control over northeast SyriaQamishli being the notable exceptionand had taken Raqqa and Syrias largest oil field during the campaign against the Islamic State.[68] Favoring decentralized governance, the predominantly Kurdish SDF proved unwilling to relinquish the de facto autonomy it had claimed, even when facing the threat of conflict with the regime.[69] Hundreds of Turkish soldiers had also entered Syrian territory in late 2017 to establish a buffer along the border zone in Idlib.[70] The involvement of powerful foreign states with diverse interests prevented Assad from merely pursuing further military action and forced another protraction in the conflict.

Second, the long-term effects of Assads brutality against civilians had transformed Syria into a fertile recruiting ground for extremist groups and opposition insurgencies.[71] The partnership with Russiaan infamous adversary of Islamist movementsfurther reduced the number of reconcilable rebels with whom the regime could hope to reach a political settlement.[72] The authoritarian approach to counterinsurgency and intentional slaughter of the population undoubtedly yielded tactical, operational, and even short-term strategic advantages while likely incurring long-term strategic costs. Such a tradeoff is common for counterinsurgents employing an authoritarian approach, as the reliance on coercion often precludes consideration of root causes and appropriate remedies while obfuscating the future price of brutality.[73]

SHORT-TERM AND LONG-TERM PROSPECTS FOR INSURGENCY IN SYRIA

The counterinsurgents authoritarian approach prioritized short-term stability over long-term sustainability. In the short-term, there can be little question that Russian intervention helped the counterinsurgency decimate opposition and extremist insurgents alike. The oppositions loss of Aleppo and Homs and the Islamic States loss of Palmyra and Deir ez-Zor left the insurgent groups with control over just a small share of Syrias population. Counterinsurgency scholar David Galula famously opined that insurgency is a war for the population,[74] and thus through forced displacement and improved tactical effectiveness, Assad and Russia managed to deprive the rebels of their center of gravity. As a result, Russian intervention may have catalyzed the inexorable decline of this iteration of opposition and extremist insurgents in Syria.

The short-term success of Assads authoritarian campaign is also notable because it demonstrates the potential efficacy of violent counterinsurgency while challenging the tenants of the oft-lauded population-centric approach. Russian and Syrian achievements support some scholarly arguments that brutality is central to effective counterinsurgency. International security scholar Jacqueline Hazelton notably contends that deliberate violence against civilians can be vital for governments seeking to defeat insurgencies.[75] By contrast, population-centric orthodoxy typically seeks to ameliorate the conditions that lead people to take up arms against their government.[76] Assads campaign suggests that such efforts may be needless. While it is almost certain that the regime will continue brutalizing Syrian civilians while waging counterinsurgency, future studies could assess the pervasiveness of authoritarian approaches globally, as governments seek short-term resolutions to insurgencies instead of long campaigns to establish human security, political participation, and economic vitality.

The long-term prospects for Syrias insurgents are more ambiguous precisely because the counterinsurgency focused on punishing and coercing civilians, rather than addressing root causes. Though many Arab Spring protesters in Syria did not initially call for Assads ouster, the regime did not attempt to treat root causes by meeting demands for political and economic reforms. Instead, Assads violent response to the demonstrations in 2011 sparked outright rebellion, facilitated easier recruitment for opposition insurgent groups, and accelerated extremist proselytization. The regimes subsequent reliance on Alawites and other Shia to staff the military entrenched sectarian divides that further alienated the Sunni majority, while the intentional slaughter of hundreds of thousands of Syrians ensures many will never accept a social contract with Assad.[77] Though the insurgents lost most of the cities, tens of thousands of internally displaced Syrians remain in refugee camps or detention centers with few prospects for political assimilation.[78]

Assads neglect of Syrias economic privation offers another grievance which insurgent movements could exploit in the future. Although the regime moved swiftly to rebuild power grids and attract foreign investment as it won back territory in 2017,[79] the United Nations estimated that 83% of Syrians lived below the poverty line two years later.[80] Rampant poverty is compounded by high inflation, which has reached historic levels. At points during 2020, the average Syrian could only afford just over two watermelons with one months wages.[81] Across regime-held territory, Syrians wait in line for diminishing amounts of increasingly expensive subsidized bread.[82]

Although successful Russian and Syrian counterinsurgency cooperation and Assads brutality may have suppressed insurgents in the short-term, the Syrians living in informal settlements and experiencing crushing poverty are ripe for incipient opposition and extremist ideas. The Islamic States massacre of nearly 40 regime soldiers near Deir ez-Zor on December 30, 2020 demonstrates the lingering will and capacity of Syrias insurgents.[83] Despite tactical and operational success following Russian intervention, Assads long-term position is far from unassailable.

[4] Bashar al-Assad, Syria's President Speaks: A Conversation With Bashar Al-Assad,Foreign Affairs94, no. 2 (2015): 64, http://www.jstor.org/stable/24483482.

[7] Holliday, The Assad Regime, Institute for the Study of War: 19-26.

[8] Kozak, An Army in All Corners, Institute for the Study of War: 11.

[11] Oliker, Return to Grozny, in Russia's Chechen Wars, 57-58.

[12] Oliker, Return to Grozny, in Russia's Chechen Wars, 79.

[13] Oliker, Return to Grozny, in Russia's Chechen Wars, 43, 58.

[15] Holliday, The Assad Regime, Institute for the Study of War: 10-19.

[16] Holliday, The Assad Regime, Institute for the Study of War: 10-12.

[17] Holliday, The Assad Regime, Institute for the Study of War: 14-15.

[18] Holliday, The Assad Regime, Institute for the Study of War: 28-29.

[19] Holliday, The Assad Regime, Institute for the Study of War: 29.

[20] Holliday, The Assad Regime, Institute for the Study of War: 21.

[21] Holliday, The Assad Regime, Institute for the Study of War: 19-20.

[22] Holliday, The Assad Regime, Institute for the Study of War: 9-10.

[24] Kozak, An Army in All Corners, Institute for the Study of War: 10-11.

[25] Holliday, The Assad Regime, Institute for the Study of War: 10.

[26] Al-Assad, Syria's President Speaks,Foreign Affairs.

[27] Kozak, An Army in All Corners, Institute for the Study of War: 9.

[29] Samuel Charap, Elina Treyger, and Edward Geist, Understanding Russia's Intervention in Syria (Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 2019), 12, https://doi.org/10.7249/RR3180

[31] Jones, Russias Battlefield Success in Syria, Combating Terrorism Center Sentinel.

[32] Jones, Russias Battlefield Success in Syria, Combating Terrorism Center Sentinel.

[33] Daher, Three years later, Atlantic Council.

[37] Jones, Russias Battlefield Success in Syria, Combating Terrorism Center Sentinel.

[39] Holliday, The Assad Regime, Institute for the Study of War: 15-16.

[40] Holliday, The Assad Regime, Institute for the Study of War: 16.

[41] Holliday, The Assad Regime, Institute for the Study of War: 20.

[42] Holliday, The Assad Regime, Institute for the Study of War: 24-25.

[44] Kozak, An Army in All Corners, Institute for the Study of War: 10-11.

[45] Jones, Russias Battlefield Success in Syria, Combating Terrorism Center Sentinel.

[46] Jones, Russias Battlefield Success in Syria, Combating Terrorism Center Sentinel.

[47] Jones, Russias Battlefield Success in Syria, Combating Terrorism Center Sentinel.

[49] Czuperski et al., Breaking Aleppo, Atlantic Council.

[50] Jones, Russias Battlefield Success in Syria, Combating Terrorism Center Sentinel.

[51] Charap et al., Understanding Russia's Intervention in Syria, 4.

[52] Kozak, An Army in All Corners, Institute for the Study of War: 10-11.

[53] Charap et al., Understanding Russia's Intervention in Syria, 4.

[54] Holliday, The Assad Regime, Institute for the Study of War: 20.

[55] Jones, Russias Battlefield Success in Syria, Combating Terrorism Center Sentinel.

The rest is here:

The Authoritarians' War: Assessing Russian Intervention in the Syrian Civil War - smallwarsjournal

The jury started deliberating in Derek Chauvin's murder trial, who faces three charges in the death of George Floyd. USA TODAY

MINNEAPOLIS Attorneys for the prosecution and defense in the murder trial of former police officer Derek Chauvin, charged in George Floyd's death,were presenting their closing arguments Monday, summarizing their respective evidence and witness testimony andtrying to focus jurors on the most important elements.

Prosecutor Steve Schleicher said Chauvin "chose pride over policing" last Memorial Day, calling Chauvin's knee on Floyds neck "unnecessary, gratuitous and disproportionate."

"And he did it on purpose. This was not an accident. He did not trip and fall and find himself on George Floyds neck," Schleicher said, adding,"Believe your eyes. What you saw, you saw."

Lead defense attorney Eric Nelson, meanwhile, urged jurors to take into account "the totality of the circumstances." He said focusing on the 9 minutes and 29 seconds Chauvin's knee was on Floyd's neck"ignores the previous 16 minutes and 59 seconds."

Assault or 'reasonable' policing? Takeaways from Derek Chauvin murder trial closing statements

Prosecution attorney Jerry Blackwell countered some of Nelson's arguments in his rebuttal andtold jurorsabout a46th witness, one more than the number of people who testified: "Common sense."

"You can believe your eyes, ladies and gentlemen," Blackwell said. "It was unreasonable use of force, it was homicide."

The prosecution rested its case last weekafter calling 38 witnesses and playing dozens of video clips over the course of 11 days. The defense rested Thursday after calling seven witnesses over two days.

Stay updated on the Derek Chauvin trial: Signup for text messages of key updates, follow USA TODAY Networkreporters on Twitter, orsubscribe to the DailyBriefing newsletter.

Latest updates:

Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz cited the potential for "further civil unrest" following protests over the police shooting death of Daunte Wright and the anticipation of additional events following the Chauvin jury verdict in issuing a peacetime emergency declaration for seven Minnesota counties.

The action enables federal law enforcement agencies and police agencies from other states to assist Minnesota state agencies in quelling any violence.

Since Wright's April 11 death, "many Minnesotans have expressed their frustrations in a peaceful and constructive manner," wrote Walz. "However, some individuals have engaged in unlawful and dangerous activity, including looting and damaging public and private property."

He added, "Local and state resources have been fully deployed, but they are inadequate to address the threat."

Judge Peter Cahill dismissed the defense's request for a mistrial based on statements made Saturday by Rep. Maxine Waters, but said her comments could be grounds for the defense to appeal.

The California Democratjoined protests over the weekend in Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, where shetold the press"we are looking for a guilty verdict" in Chauvin's trial.Waters encouraged demonstrators to "get more active,""more confrontational" and "to make sure that they know that we mean business"if Chauvin is acquitted.

"If nothing (happens), then we know ... we've got to not only stay in the streets, that we've got to fight for justice. That I am very hopeful, and I hope that we're going to get a verdict that is a guilty, guilty, guilty. And if we don't, we cannot go away," Waters said,according tovideoobtained by local CBS affiliate WCCO.

After attorneys presented theirclosing arguments,Cahill said protestersinfluenced by Waterscould get more confrontational if there is not a guilty verdict. He called some of the comments "abhorrent."

Congresswoman Waters may have given you something on appeal that may result in this whole trial being overturned,Cahill told Chauvin's attorney, Eric Nelson.

He added, I wish elected officials would stop talking about this case, especially in a manner that is disrespectful to the rule of law and to the judicial branch."

The judge denied Nelson's verbal motion for a mistrial, noting he trusted jurors are following his instructions to avoid all news about the trial.

"A congresswoman's opinion really doesn't matter a whole lot," Cahill said.

The protests followedtheshooting death of 20-year-oldBlack motorist Daunte Wrightin Brooklyn Center, a Minneapolis suburb,by former police officer Kim Potter during a traffic stop. She later resigned from the Brooklyn Center Police Department.

Derek Chauvin's defense attorney argued that Rep. Maxine Waters' comments regarding the trial could have been grounds for a mistrial. USA TODAY

Attorney Jerry Blackwell delivered the rebuttal for the state Monday afternoon, reviewing what he characterized as "stories" told by the defense to the jury.

He referred to trial testimony that in half or more cases where someone has died of insufficient oxygen, there's no sign of that in body tissues during autopsies. Blackwell also made a point of repeatedly noting the prosecution argument that "subdual, restraint and compression of the neck" caused Floyd's death.

And he sought to focus the jurors on testimony fromthe prosecution's star witness, Dr. Martin Tobin, an expert in the physiology of breathing. Tobin testified that a healthy person would have died if subjected to the same restraint and pressure as Floyd.

Of police officers who do not provide medical aid for a suspect who passes out under pressure by arresting officers, Nelsonsaid,"That's wrong."

Answering defense arguments that bystanders posed a potential threat to Chauvin and the other officers, Blackwell said the group, including young children, were "torn" between concern and inability to help Floyd, and respect for the Minneapolis Police Department.

"They didn't deserve to be called unruly, because they weren't," he said.

Blackwell also displayed for jurors an exhibit with one dot for each of the 17,026 days of George Floyd's life.

"He was living, he was breathing, he had a being, every day," despite the medical conditions and drug issues the defense argued caused his death. The difference, argued Blackwell, was that on the last day of Floyd's life, "deadly force was applied" by Chauvin.

Blackwell countered Nelson's argumentsthat Chauvin and other officers had to make quick decisions during the struggle saying, "There was no split seconds, there was no moment to moment."

Cahill interrupted Blackwell twice, once to tell him not to repeat subjective descriptions ofdefense arguments as "stories," and again to strike from the record a statement that the defense was "shading the truth."

However, Blackwell got the last word as he ended his rebuttal.

"You were told, for example, that Mr. Floyd died because his heart was too big," he said."The truth of the matter is that the reason George Floyd is dead is because Mr. Chauvin's heart was too small."

Chauvin took his face mask off during the first part of closing by lead defense attorney Eric Nelson, who took aim at the states case for about two and half hours before Judge Peter Cahill called for a lunch break.

Most of Nelsons argument focused on urging the jury to consider the totality of the events of the evening of May 25, 2020 not just the nine minutes and 29 seconds that the state argued is the heart of the case and the charges against Chauvin.

Nelson walked jurors through his views on the videos, police policies and cause of Floyds death.

"The proper analysis is to take those 9 minutes and 29 seconds and put it into the context of the totality of the circumstances. The proper analysis starts with what did the officers or what would a reasonable officer know at the time of dispatch," he said.

In this image from video, former Minneapolis police Officer Derek Chauvin listens as his defense attorney Eric Nelson gives closing arguments as Hennepin County Judge Peter Cahill preside Monday, April 19, 2021.(Photo: AP)

Nelson, who noted Floyds large size at over 200 pounds, said Chauvin followed the policies in place at the time of Floyds death, including the knee restraint he used something barred by Minneapolis police in the wake of Floyds death.

Nelson said Floyds death was "tragic," but argued Chauvin did not cause his death. He drew the jurys attention to Floyds history of drug use, including fentanyl and methamphetamine, and his heart problems.

Nelson also took aim at Dr. Martin Tobin, a pulmonologistand star witness for the state who testified that Floyd died of asphyxia, or low oxygen, because of the police restraint. Noting that Tobin had many hundreds hours to review videos and other evidence, Nelson argued Tobin was misleading the jury by giving an incomplete picture of the struggle. "His entire testimony is filled with theory, speculation, assumption, Nelson said.

On the toxicology, Nelson said it's clear that Floyd had taken drugs soon before the struggle. "For the medical experts to minimize the timing and the amount of illicit drugs that were found in Mr. Floyd's bloodstream, is just simply incredible to me, is incredible," he said.

After lunch, Nelson apologized yet again to the jury for the length of his argument and continued to argue that Floyd's death was "multifactorial."

"I would submit to you that it is nonsense to suggest none of these other factors had any role," Nelson said.

Nelson concluded by telling the jury that when they finish their "thorough, honest"analysis of all the evidence, they will conclude "the state has failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt."

"And, therefore, Mr. Chauvin should be found not guilty," Nelson said.

Closing arguments began in the trial of former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin in the death of George Floyd. USA TODAY

Prosecutor Steve Schleicher gave the closing argument for the state Monday morning, repeating "9 minutes and 29 seconds" through his one-hour and 45-minute remarks.

"George Floyd's final words on May 25, 2020, were: 'Please, I can't breathe.' He asked for help with his very last breath," Schleicher said. "This was a call about a counterfeit $20 bill. All that was required was compassion."

Schleicher's argument evoked the testimony last week ofTobin, who described Floyds last minutes indetail, pointing out his scraped knuckles against the back tire of the police squad car. "He was trapped," Schleicher said."He was trapped with the unyielding pavement underneath him as unyielding as the men who held him down. Pushing him."

Calling Chauvins actions a "shocking abuse of police power," Schleicher recalled testimony from previous weeks horrified bystanders calling the police on the police, and the presence of a 9-year-old watching Floyd restrained under Chauvins knees.

Schleicher said Chauvin's actions were "not policing" but "an assault."

"This is not a prosecution of the police, its a prosecution of the defendant," he said. "And theres nothing worse for good police than bad police, who doesnt follow the rules, who doesnt follow training."

Schleicher reminded jurors Chauvin had hundreds of hours of training over his 19 years with the Minneapolis Police Department. Schleicher said Chauvin should have known how to handle someone in crisis, reminding jurors Floyd told police about his anxiety and claustrophobia. But just because he couldnt comply doesnt mean he was resisting, he said.

Schleicher told jurors Floyd did not die of a heart attack, drug overdose, "excited delirium" or carbon monoxide poisoning, as the defense has suggested. He told jurors that they must decide: "Would but for the defendant's actions, pushing him down, would George Floyd have died that day?"

He urged jurors to "use your common sense. Believe your eyes. What you saw, you saw."

In this image from video, prosecutor Steve Schleicher gives closing arguments as Hennepin County Judge PeterCahill presides Monday, April 19, 2021, in the trial of former Minneapolis police Officer Derek Chauvin at the Hennepin County Courthouse in Minneapolis.(Photo: AP)

Using a chart and checklist, Schleicher walked jurors through the definitions and elements of second-degree murder, third-degree murder and second-degree manslaughter. He reminded jurors of testimony and replayed video and provided still images to substantiate each element. As Schleicher spoke, Chauvin appeared to take notes on a yellow legal pad, as he has been doing for weeks. As did the jurors, who watched Schleicher attentively.

Schleicher wrapped up his argument with an emotional appear to jurors. "Random members of the community all converged by fate at one singe moment in time to witness something, to witness 9 minutes and 29 seconds of shocking abuse of authority, to watch a man die, and there was nothing they could do about it because they were powerless," Schleicher said."

"All they could do was watch and gather what they could, gather their memories, gather their thoughts and impressions, gather those precious recordings. And they gathered those up and they brought them here. ... They gave it to you, randomly selected people from the community."

In closing, Schleicher told jurors: "This isnt policing this is murder. The defendant is guilty of all three counts, all of them, and theres no excuse."

Autoplay

Show Thumbnails

Show Captions

Heres a breakdown of the Minnesota criminal charges against Derek Chauvin.

Second-degree murder is causing the death of a human being, without intent to cause that death, while committing or attempting to commit another felony. In the Chauvin case, the alleged felony was third-degree assault. Chauvin is charged with committing or intentionally aiding in commission of this crime.

To convict Chauvin on this count, Judge Peter Cahill told jurors Monday that they only must find that the former officer intended to commit an assault that could cause bodily harm, or intentionally aided in committing such an assault. "It is not necessary for the state to prove the defendant had an intent to kill George Floyd. But it must prove that the defendant committed, or attempted to commit, the underlying felony,"the judge said.

Cahill added that the state must prove that the assault either inflicted bodily harm on Floyd, or was intended to commit bodily harm.

Third-degree murder is unintentionally causing someones death by committing an act that is eminently dangerous to other persons while exhibiting a depraved mind, with reckless disregard for human life. Chauvin is accused of committing or intentionally aiding in the commission of this crime.

Under Minnesota law, an act that is eminently dangerous is one that "is highly likely to cause death,"Cahill told jurors. "The defendants act may not have been specifically intended to cause death,"and "it may not have been specifically directed at the person whose death occurred, but it must have been committed with a conscious indifference to the loss of life," the judge said.

Second-degree manslaughter is culpable negligence where a person creates an unreasonable riskand consciously takes the chance of causing death or great bodily harm to someone else. Chauvin is charged with committing or intentionally aiding in commission of this crime.

Culpable negligence means that Chauvin allegedly "created an unreasonable risk and consciously took a chance of causing death or great bodily harm,"Cahilltold jurors. "Culpable negligence is intentional conduct that the defendant may not have intended to be harmful, but that an ordinary and reasonably prudent person would recognize as having a strong probability of causing injury to others,"said the judge.

If convicted of the most serious charge, Chauvin faces 12 1/2 years or 150 months in prison under sentencing guidelines for a first-time offender. But, the prosecution argues there are aggravating factors that require a longer prison term. That means Chauvin may face longer than that sentence.

Over about two weeks last month, lawyers for the prosecution and defense quizzed potential jurors about their knowledge of Floyds death, their opinions of Chauvin, and their attitudes about police, racial injustice, and the protests and rioting that followed Floyds death.

Some of them questioned how much force was used against Floyd, who lay on the ground for more than nine minutes as Chauvin pressed his knee into Floyd's neck. Several believe the criminal justice system needs to be reformed. More than one questioned the movement to defund police departments. Discussing her opinion about Black Lives Matter, one woman responded, I am Black, and my life matters."

Before being selected, the jurors pledged to set their opinions aside. But their answers provide a glimpse into how they might respond to the evidence they heard over the past few weeks. Read more about the jurors here.

Agroup of people vandalized the former Northern California home of anexpert witness who testified for the defense, police said, throwinga pig's head on the front porch and blood splatter on the house.

The incident occurred in Santa Rosa, California, where retired police officer Barry Brodd once lived and worked. Brodd last week testified in Chauvin's trial, saying the former Minneapolis police officer was "justified" in his use of force against Floyd.

The Santa Rosa Police Department said Brodd no longer lives at the residence nor in California, but that, "It appears the suspects in this vandalism were targeting Mr. Brodd for his testimony."

Brodd was the first witness to say he believed that Chauvin was following proper police practice when he knelt on Floyd's neck. However, several Minneapolis police officers,including the police chief, along with local police trainers and national use-of-force experts, testified that Chauvin's actions were not justified. Read more here.

Ryan W. Miller

More than a hundred people gathered in George Floyd Square onSunday afternoon for a rally to show solidarity between the Black and Asian communities ahead of closing arguments.

Organizers advertised the event as "a safe space for sharing grief and also creating joy" during tense times in the city and dedicated it to Daunte Wright, the 20-year-old Black man who was fatally shot by a police officer during a traffic stop in nearby Brooklyn Center last week.

Tri Vo, 25, said he usually visits George Floyd Square when there are no crowds so he can reflect and because he feels that space is reserved for Black and indigenous people. Vo, a digital organizer with Southeast Asian Diaspora Project, said he came Sunday to help educate southeast Asians about "what their stake is in this." Read more.

Jurors must decide whether or not the government proved all of the elements of a given charge beyond a reasonable doubt. The defense bears no burden of proof, and Chauvin is deemed innocent unless convicted at trial.

The jurors will be sequestered during deliberations.The court will provide meals for the jurors and put them up for the night in a hotel, where security will be provided by marshals. The jurors are not allowed to discuss the case with anyone else, or even with each other when they're outside the deliberation room.

They are allowed to review any of the exhibits that were entered into evidence. They also are allowed to re-hear specific testimony from any of the witnesses. The jurors may send written messages out to the judge with any questions that arise.

"If I were you, I would plan for long (deliberations) and hope for short,"Cahill told jurors Thursday. More on how jury deliberations will work here.

Read or Share this story: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2021/04/19/derek-chauvin-trial-live-george-floyd-jury-closing-arguments/7123640002/

Read more from the original source:

Derek Chauvin trial closing statements: Prosecutors tell jurors to 'believe their eyes'; defense emphasizes 'totality of the circumstances' - USA...