Developments in Criminal Cases Over Death of George Floyd

The four defendants in the criminal cases over the death of George Floyd last week made an unusual request for pretrial and trial audiovisual coverage which the court denied, in part. The issues in the cases were analyzed by criminal law experts. And some personal background information of the four defendants have been publicly discussed. After examining these developments, we will  await the results of the pretrial hearing in the four cases on June 29th.[1]

 Motion for Pretrial and Trial Audiovisual Recording [2]

On June 25 the attorneys for the four criminal defendants made a motion for audiovisual recording of pretrial and trial proceedings in the cases. Thomas Plunkett, the attorney for J. Alexander Kueng, on behalf of all defendants, asserted that such relief was “necessary to provide the Defendants with a fair trial in light of the State’s and other governmental actors multiple inappropriate comments and to assure an open hearing in light of the ongoing pandemic.” Those officials, said Plunkett, included “Public Safety Commissioner John Harrington, Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey and Minneapolis Police Chief Medaria Arradondo.”

More specifically, Plunkett said, “this relief is necessary to blunt the effects of the increasing and repeated media attacks from the various officials who have breached their duty to the community. These State comments have crescendoed to an extraordinary volume this week with the Chief pronouncing that ‘[w]hat happened to Mr. Floyd was murder.’ The State’s conduct has made a fair and unbiased trial extremely unlikely and the Defendants seek video and audio coverage to let a cleansing light shine on these proceedings. Doing otherwise allows these public officials to geld the Constitution.”

Attorney General Keith Ellison responded by saying that although he supports a public trial, “Cameras could alter the way the lawyers present evidence. Cameras in the courtroom could subject the participants in the trial to heightened media scrutiny and thereby be distracting to conducting the trial.” The chances of  “creating more sensation than understanding” was “very high,” Ellison said.

The Hennepin County District Judge, Peter Cahill, immediately denied the motion for such pretrial coverage while reserving decision on the motion for such coverage of the trial. The Judge stated that Minnesota court rules require both the defense and prosecution to agree for such coverage for pretrial proceedings and that the prosecution did not so agree. In addition, said the Judge, such coverage “would risk tainting a potential Hennepin County jury pool.”

Analysis of Issues in These Criminal Cases[3]

A journalist reports, “Veteran defense attorneys say the prosecution’s case against Chauvin is strong, while a series of unique circumstances pose challenges to both prosecutors and defense attorneys.”

Several facets of these cases seem to favor the prosecution. These cases do not involve “split-second” decisions on use of force which often lead a jury to avoid second guessing such decisions. Moreover, “Floyd warned the officers of his own impending death after repeatedly telling them he couldn’t breathe,” and bystanders were making the same warning. Finally the three officers charged with “aiding and abetting” could cause a crack in the alleged “blue wall of silence” protecting officers.

Indeed, at their initial appearances, the attorneys for Lane and Kueng argued that their clients were rookies who relied on Chauvin, a 19-year veteran and their training officer, for guidance at the scene.

A prominent local criminal defense attorney, Joe Friedberg, thought that Lane’s twice suggesting turning Floyd over and later performing CPR on him was strong evidence he had no intent for Floyd to die.

Another local criminal defense attorney, Robert Richman, had a different reaction. He thought that Chauvin “could direct the blame at Lane, who was holding down Floyd’s leg as Floyd lay stomach-down in the street, and Kueng, who was holding onto Floyd’s back. It seems that keeping someone … in a prone position on your stomach and having pressure placed on your back causes respiratory difficulties.” Perhaps “it was the other two officers holding him down that caused the breathing difficulties,” rather than Chauvin kneeling on the side of Floyd’s neck.

Another complication was the existence of two different autopsy reports. “The Hennepin County Medical Examiner’s Office found that Floyd died when his heart stopped  while he was being restrained, noting that the presence of fentanyl intoxication and recent methamphetamine were “other significant conditions” while the autopsy commissioned by the attorneys for Floyd’s family said he died of asphyxia. These provide bases for defense arguments that Floy had started to die before Chauvin put his knee on the neck.

New Rule for Use of Bodycam Footage[4]

On June 27 Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey and Police Chief Medaria Arradondo announced a new rule for officers’ review of their body camera footage. Now the officer “as soon as practical” must write and submit his or her written report of the incident before looking at that footage and before talking with anyone other than the incident commander and the lead investigator. This new rule purportedly will provide a more accurate account of the officer’s recollection of the incident.

The Police Officers’ Backgrounds[5]

The police personnel files for the four officers and published articles reveal the following  details:

  • Derek Chauvin. He attended Park High School in Cottage Grove, Minnesota, but did not graduate. After getting his GED he attended Dakota County Technical College, Inver Hills Community College and Metropolitan State University, all in Minnesota. Previous jobs include working security, and food service including at a McDonald’s. Chauvin also had two periods of active service in the U.S. Army. From September 1996 to February 1997 he was stationed in Rochester, Minnesota with a job in military police. He served again from September 1999 to May 2000 in military police, at Hohenfels, Germany where his job duties as including criminal investigations, traffic enforcement and proactive patrol.

During his 19-year career with the Minneapolis Police Department, Chauvin was involved with several police shootings, includes both commendations and more than 15 conduct complaints. Almost all the complaints were closed without discipline, records show, suggesting the allegations weren’t sustained. The nature of the complaints wasn’t made public. The file includes a 2008 letter of reprimand Chauvin received for the two violations involving “discretion” and a squad car camera. “This case will remain a B violation and can be used as progressive discipline for three years,” the letter notes. Chauvin received a Medal of Commendation in 2008 for disarming a man outside the El Nuevo Rodeo club on E. Lake Street while working security off-duty in his uniform. He was also recommended for a Medal of Valor in 2006 related to the shooting death of Wayne Reyes, a stabbing suspect who fled in his truck with officers in pursuit. When Reyes stopped and climbed out of the truck, police said he swung his sawed-off shotgun toward the six officers, all of whom fired their weapons.

Chauvin his married , but immediately after his arrest for the Floyd death, she filed for divorce with her attorney saying, “She is devastated by Mr. Floyd’s death and her utmost sympathy lies with his family, with his loved ones and with everyone who is grieving this tragedy.”

  • Tou Thao. The 11-year veteran and native Hmong speaker from Coon Rapids, Minnesota first applied to the department as a community service officer following stints in food service and as a security guard. He was among those laid off three days before Christmas in 2009 as the police department faced a $13 million budget shortfall. In a termination letter, a supervisor assured him the action was not related to his job performance. Officials called him back to work almost exactly two years later.

Thao and another officer were the subjects of a 2017 police brutality lawsuit. Lamar Ferguson, a black man, alleged that in 2014 the two officers told him they were serving a warrant for his arrest, then beat him, breaking his teeth, while he was handcuffed. The city of Minneapolis paid $25,000 to settle the civil rights case.

  • Thomas Lane. A University of Minnesota graduate in sociology of law, criminology and deviance. He worked with at-risk youth as a juvenile detention guard and probation officer in the Twin Cities before applying as a police recruit at age 35. He also had volunteer work mentoring Somali youth and school kids.
  • Alexander Koenig. At age 26, he is the youngest of the four officers and is of mixed-race and identifies as African-American. In 2010 he and two siblings made several trips to Haiti to help at an orphanage, once after its 2010 earthquake.He was captain of the varsity soccer team at Patrick Henry High School in Minneapolis, where he graduated in 2012. He also played for the Cruz Azul Minnesota soccer club. He attended Monroe College, Minneapolis Community & Technical College and the University of Minnesota, graduating from the last in 2018 with a major in sociology of law, criminology and deviance and becoming conversational in the Russian language. His work history includes a job as security monitor at the University of Minnesota and working in loss prevention at Macy’s. He also worked at Target, and he coached youth baseball and soccer at the Brooklyn Center Community Center.

Kueng had seen a sibling arrested and treated poorly by sheriff’s deputies and had told friends he was joining the police to help protect people close to him from police aggression as the best way to fix a broken system.


[1] This blog has published posts about the Floyd death and related issues of police reform. See List of Posts to dwkcommentaries—Topical: George Floyd Killing; List of Posts to dwkcommentaries—Topical: Police Reform.

[2]  Xiong & Montemayor, Judge denies audiovisual coverage of hearings for former officers charged in George Floyd killing, StarTribune (June 26, 2020).

[3] Xiong, In trial over George Floyd’s killing, both defense, prosecution face unique challenges, StarTribune (June 27, 2020).

[4]] Klecker, Minneapolis mayor, police chief announce tighter body-camera rules, StarTribune (June 29, 2020).

[5] Bjorhus & Sawyer, Personnel records shed light on four Minneapolis police officers charged in George Floyd’s death, StarTribune (June 4, 2020); Bjorhus, A deeper look at the four officers fired after George Floyd death, StarTribune (June 1, 2020); Barker, Eligon & Furber, Officers Charged in George Floyd’s Death Not Likely to Present United Front, N.Y.Times (June 4, 2020); Barker, The Black Officer Who Detained George Floyd Had Pledged to Fix the Police, N.Y. Times (June 27, 2020); Wernau, The Other Police Officers Charged in George Floyd Killing, W.S.J. (June 29, 2020).


The Flight Transportation Corporation Litigation

In June 1982, all kinds of litigation erupted in Minnesota’s federal court[1] involving Flight Transportation Corporation (FTC), a Minnesota-based company that purported to provide small-aircraft charter service.

The first case was by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) against FTC, its subsidiaries, and its CEO and Chairman of the Board, William Rubin. The SEC alleged that the defendants had violated and aided and abetted violations of antifraud, reporting, and record-keeping provisions of the federal securities laws. The SEC sought an injunction prohibiting further violations by the defendants of these provisions, the appointment of a receiver to take possession of and marshal the assets of FTC and its subsidiaries, an accounting of all proceeds of FTC’s allegedly fraudulent securities offerings, and an order of disgorgement of all funds received by FTC as a result of those sales of securities. With respect to Rubin, the SEC sought a temporary freeze of most of his personal assets, an accounting of all funds received from FTC and its subsidiaries, and disgorgement of such funds.[2]

Shortly thereafter, two underwriters of FTC securities, on their own behalf and on behalf of all persons who purchased FTC’s securities in the June 1982 offerings, commenced a class action seeking, among other things, imposition of a constructive trust on the $22 million in proceeds of the offerings.

Thereafter other private lawsuits were also commenced against FTC, its officers and others, including its external auditor and the New York City law firm for the underwriters of the public offerings of FTC securities.[3]

Norwest Bank Minnesota (n/k/a Wells Fargo Bank Minnesota) had been providing working capital financing to FTC and brought a claim against FTC to collect that debt, and I was in charge of the Faegre & Benson team for Norwest. Later some of the other plaintiffs asserted claims against the Bank because its collateral review personnel had discovered certain problems at FTC; later the Bank reached a settlement over all of these claims.

Because there were so many different kinds of claims against FTC and others, the attorneys for the plaintiffs concluded that they needed to stop fighting among themselves and instead focus their collective efforts in prosecuting the claims against the defendants. As a result, the plaintiffs negotiated a complex Sharing Agreement whereby any monetary recoveries would be shared among the plaintiffs. This agreement was approved by the court.[4]

The SEC’s request for the appointment of a receiver was granted. A Minnesota attorney, Thomas Bartsch, was so appointed. I participated in many meetings with him and thought he was doing an excellent job. I, therefore, was shocked later when he was convicted of stealing money from the FTC assets under his control as receiver and then disbarred as an attorney.

At the conclusion of the private litigation, the district court awarded the various plaintiffs’ law firms $7.8 million of attorneys’ fees. The court recognized the superlative work of the lawyers that resulted in recovering $52 million for the various plaintiffs.[5]

I also was the attorney for Norwest Bank in a related case where a co-founder, outside director, shareholder and director of FTC sued the Bank for collecting and paying a check that allegedly had his forged endorsement. The district court entered judgment in favor of the Bank, and the appellate court affirmed.[6]


Finally there were criminal prosecutions of FTC’s principal officers: William Rubin, Janet Karki, Brian Miller and James McGovern. Rubin, the CEO and Chairman of the Board, was convicted on 10 counts of securities fraud and two counts of filing a false securities registration statement with the SEC and sentenced to 35 years in prison plus a $120,000 fine. There also were convictions on similar charges against Karki, the Chief Financial Officer (20 years in prison); Miller, the Financial Controller (three years); and McGovern, a Minnesota lawyer and FTC’s General Counsel (six years).[7]

I still find it difficult to believe that two fellow Minnesota lawyers with whom I had professional dealings ended up in prison as convicted felons.

Two memories of this case stand out.

At a posh Beverly Hills hotel, I participated in the deposition of Michael Milken from a FTC underwriter (Drexel Burnham Lambert). Known in the securities industry at the time as the King of Junk Bonds, Milken later pled guilty to securities fraud and tax violations and was sentenced to imprisonment. After release, he has concentrated his efforts on philanthropy, especially research regarding prostate cancer and melanoma. (Wikipedia, Michael Milken,

I attended the criminal trial of Rubin and Karki. I was there as an attorney for a Norwest banker who was testifying about the Bank’s relationship with FTC. During her testimony two prominent Minnesota criminal defense attorneys, Ron Meshbesher[8] and Joe Friedberg, objected to the receipt into evidence of certain Bank documents because they were photocopies and thus not the best evidence. While the attorneys had a sidebar conference with the judge regarding this objection, I went to the U.S. Attorney’s table and whispered to an FBI agent that the originals were in my office and were destroyed in the Northwestern National Bank fire on Thanksgiving Day 1982. The FBI agent then went to the sidebar conference and relayed the information to the U.S. Attorney, Tom Hefflefinger.

The judge then asked me to leave the courtroom, presumably while foundation questions were asked of the banker. I assume her examination went something like this: “Do you know Mr. Krohnke? (Yes.) Was he involved in any way with the Bank and FTC? (Yes.) How was he involved? (He was an attorney for the Bank regarding litigation over FTC.) Did he have any original Bank documents in his office? (Yes.)”

I was then readmitted to the courtroom and put on the witness stand. The U.S. Attorney asked me a few questions along the same lines and established that the original documents in question were destroyed in the fire. There was no cross-examination by Meshbesher or Friedberg. The photocopies of the Bank documents were received into evidence.

[1] See Post: Minnesota’s Federal Court (June 28, 2011).

[2]  SEC v. Flight Transportation Corp., 699 F.2d 943 (8thCir. 1983).

[3]  Id.; In re Flight Transportation Securities Litigation, 593 F. Supp. 612 (D. Minn. 1984).

[4] In re Flight Transportation Securities Litigation, 730 F.2d 1128 (8th Cir. 1984), cert. denied sub nom. Reavis & McGrath v. Antinore, 469 U.S. 1207 (1985); In re Flight Transportation Securities Litigation, 794 F.2d 318 (8th Cir.), cert. denied sub nom. Subclass IV v. Fox & Co., 481 U.S. 1013 (1987).

[5]  In re Flight Transportation Securities Litigation, 685 F. Supp. 1092 (D. Minn. 1987).

[6] Lund v. Norwest Bank, 669 F. Supp. 284 (D. Minn. 1985), aff’d, 825 F.2d 1249 (8th Cir. 1987), cert. denied, 485 U.S. 936 (1988).

[7] U.S. v. Rubin, 836 F.2d 1096 (8th Cir. 1988); U.S. V. McGovern, 822 F.2d 739 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 956 (1987). I knew McGovern; he was one of the attorneys for the Wisconsin breeders cooperative in a lawsuit in which I was an attorney on the other side of the case. (See Post: The Artificial Insemination of Cattle (Aug. 16, 2011).

[8] I once had a civil case in which Meshbesher was the opposing lawyer, and the case settled soon after I took his client’s deposition. The recent movie, A Serious Man, by Joel and Ethan Coen, takes place in the Minneapolis area. When a character needs a criminal defense lawyer, he is told to hire Ron Meshbesher. The line was inspired by the Coen brothers’ memories of growing up in St. Louis Park, Minnesota and seeing attorney ads for Meshbesher. (Wurzer, Twin Cities lawyer is a Coen brothers punch line, MPR News (Oct. 9, 2009),