Hey folks, another busy week of legal news lessons. Weeks after being convicted of murder in Minnesota, Derek chauvinist. And indicted by a grand jury on federal civil rights charges. The indictment also Just three other officers in connection with the killing of George Floyd Meanwhile, there is more news in the Deirdre Investigation of Rudy Giuliani in an unsealed letter prosecutors Southern district of New York asked a judge to appoint an outside lawyer to review the materials seized in the rate of Julie on his home and Bill BAR is back in the news Courtyard has taken the unusual step of criticising him for being ingenuous about a secret internal deirdre, memo, choice, vans and I discussed all this and more on they insider, podcast today were sharing a clip from the episode with listeners of stay tuned to hear our food conversation and access all Kathy insider content try the membership free for two weeks

you can do that had carried out com, Slash insider, that's coffee, dot, slash insider and for a limited time use the code noise for fifty percent of the annual membership price, we look forward to having you as part of the insider community. Ok during Derek children who murdered, George Floyd was convicted on all three state counts, but since we have last met there been a pretty significant development, and I wonder if its confusing the people and its, even though the confusing as we were discussing earlier to you and me dirt. Chauvelin and the three other officers who were involved in the incident with George Floyd have all been indicted. Federally on federal civil rights charges and people might ask the question of users view questions. Why

if there was a successful prosecution of Eric Shovin in the state, isn't there something in this country called double jeopardy protection, which means that you can't be charged twice for the same conduct involving the same facts. What's the point of the success of prosecution? Wiser being done now, etcetera, We really do have to take a shot, it's complicated and interesting, and it something. Within the discretion of the civil rights division at the Justice Department. Before we get to what the particular federal charges are, why isn't this a double jeopardy issue? So the reason that the federal government can bring this criminal cases because of something called the separate sovereign principle. That means that double jeopardy only apply to the same sovereign, and if that language is confusing to you, it was confusing to me until I first had this explained to me a really long.

I'm ago, is as a young prosecutor when we encountered this situation, this state Alabama can't bring two different prosecutions for the same crime federal government. Can say, lose a trial and then re indict the defendant but separate sovereigns, Hannan, Diet, the stuff Alabama Burma could bring one case. The federal government could bring one case and that would not violate the principle of double jeopardy I mean there have been cases about this. There's a supreme court case not that long ago, in two thousand and nineteen gamble the United States that reaffirm this doctrine, it. Basically, it may not make a lot of sense to some folks, but the concept in the principle is their distinct offences, because there are different statutes and they are different jurisdictions. I e different sovereigns, and so those kinds of things can be done. However, you might be asking what does that make sense? What then prevents federal government when they have

jurisdiction and venue from just prosecuting everyone to stay prosecutes all the time, for example, that could be true of all drug offences. That could be true of many gun offences, and I wish you don't see that and part of the reason you don't see, that is as a general matter, it would be a waste of resources. It's not the best way for the government to spend its time, the federal government, if the rights of victims and if justice was indicated through the state and local, proceeding and in fact, there's a policy within the Justice Department, I call the petty policy there was a key policy spell PETE. This is again we're going back to these. These word choices and pronunciation. That's it spelled peaty idee. I've always wanted pronounced in the southern district as petted policy, although It's spelled the way that you're saying quickly says as a matter of discretion,

guidance within the department. Some conditions must be met for the federal government to take the time and effort and resources to prosecute something a course of conduct that has already been prosecuted. By the state and usually, as you and I were discussing earlier, that's done in civil rights. Cases. In other cases where there was a result that was against justice below so, for example, the Randy King case right there's an acquittal, state that would normally mean always mean that the state can be prosecuted the federal government. Can you understand why they would want to do that, because the feeling was that justice was not done and those folks escaped accountability to the federal government comes in. It is less common when you have a success, prosecution in the state as we had in the direction of a case and, among other things, the policy in its current form says that federal pro

it is our generally not allowed to initiate or continuous settle prosecution following a prior state or federal prosecution, unless three substantive prerequisites for satisfy one, the matter must involve substantial federal interest to the prior prosecution must have left that interest demonstrably on vindicated and that's an interesting one and three applying the same tests that is applicable to all federal prosecutions. The government must believe that a defendants conduct constitutes a federal offense and the admissible evidence probably will be sufficient to obtain a conviction, etc, etc. Nor those things met here, I think starting with Rodney King, is the right place.

Explain petite, because you have a situation where there is an enormous federal interest in having constitutional policing and it doesn't get vindicated in that case, in LOS Angeles couple of decades ago, and so fast forward. To this case, it's a very different situation. You, how the conviction of one of the four police officers involved. It makes sense to me that d, O J had gone to the grand jury, gotten indictments and sealed them so that in the event Chauvelin had been acquitted or the jury had hung, they could have immediately arrest Damn what's a little bit more interesting here is why they feel like this, and when I say the white, why D, O J and the current leadership thinks that the federal interest in this case wasn't vindicated by this conviction. Right, that's a little bit of an open question.

And the timing of it. I mean there's some criticism, notably Andrew Andrew Mccarthy. National Review online here. There is an argument that have been critical of this, but there is an argument that, especially since there is a conviction, and there remains a trial pending with respect to the three other officers that this has an effect on the jury, pool and prejudices them in a situation where it's hard enough to find people who have not already formed an opinion of the conduct of these officers or about the guilt of these officers, the Sacho mutations is very far from running out and what you often have is the Justice Department. As a backstop, like you had an ironic in case and they wait in the wings and they see what's gonna happen and that there is an argument. Enveloped causes a Europe new, pre, breathing, interesting and smart conjecture that, with respect to the three other officers

who have not yet been tried, maybe there's a hope and an aspiration to get a global resolution. With respect of those three officers who would have an incentive maybe to plead guilty and not that a trial to resolve both the state charges and the federal charges right, that's is not your theory that things like the logical assumption in this situation. Everybody wants to plead guilty. Everybody wants to serve their time in federal, tested, he not in state custody, and so these, indictments are a vehicle for those sorts of global plea agreements to happen. It would be a little bit unusual to indict, usually when people are going to plead guilty, and you know that before their charged, you use and info, nation. You don't go to the grand jury, so people understand an indictment of something is a charging instrument that is voted upon by a grand jury which, as members of the community twenty three of them sitting

federal grand jury. Defendants have the right or subjects have the right to waive indictment by grand jury and they can consent to having a charging insulin filed against them, which is just an allegation by the United States attorney, and that's called an information. So more talking about. A global resolution which are but a simultaneous resolution of multiple charges by the separate sovereigns estate and the federal and everyone agrees jointly, that there is repose for the defendant going forward, in other words, you don't settle? One thing resolve one thing and then have the other one pending. You do them all together this. The among other things has a general understanding of how they're going to ferret sensing and and not be surprised by resolving one case, believing other case open and by resolve. Obviously I mean plead guilty to the charges. We should also point out. I forgot to mention that there are two charges

two separate charging documents against Derek Chauvin one in connection with what everyone is familiar with the killing of George Floyd, but the other with respect to a different incident from twenty seventeen, where dirt chauvinist alleged to have violated the rights of an adolescent. By putting his knee on the back of that adolescent during a confrontations. So that's sort of separate. We can put that to the side, there's a clear reason why you want to do that, because no authority has charged Eric Chauvelin with the earlier incidents that makes sense, but with respect to recharging, shelving charging Jovan federally with respect to the George Floyd murder, how do you explain that? Here's my rank? Conjecture? Ok, if, if there is a global player, agreement, One of the terms of that play agreement would be that the defendants, including Chauvelin, would waved their right to take an appeal. In other words, they would get the benefit of.

Serving their time in federal prison, which is a pretty good benefit if you ve ever seen most state prison systems. And there's no litigation risk the prosecutors, federal or state from the appeal that seems like smart resolution here and since based on what we ve already seen, there's really shaven doesn't have any great grounds for, P M in his lawyers can make arguments, but they don't look like the kind of arguments that are successful. That would probably be a good resolution for everybody. Do you think this up? else going on here and will we know some of the people involved Benita Gupta, who used to have habits of rice Vision to deal J is now the associate attorney general. The number three percent, the Justice Department who I am positive is closely overseeing this LISA Monica whose adapt attorney. General America has taught at some length them great conviction about the need to be more aggressive with respect to civil rights, prosecutions in to reinvigorate the civil rights division.

The justice department that this is one of a series of things that the Justice Department has done to both whole people accountable and a signal to the country That they're not messing around anymore Mean Morocco has announced to pattern a practice, investigations, respect to Louisville Kentucky and Minneapolis police departments, thereby multiple other things that they have announced. They ve been pretty forceful in the rhetoric they have used. And do you think there's just something to the to the idea that they're going to take every opportunity to bring federal resources to bear on anything resembling police brutality? Whether or not the state has done something already, I think, that's, absolutely right leadership matters and when you ve got the native Gupta, who didn't just run the civil rights Division but who spent her career aggressively, mitigating civil rights cases and she's the one suddenly his advising the attorney general along with LISA who, although her

I think, has been more in the mainstream of criminal prosecutions. She's, always national security, a national security and you know LISA, has always, I think, maintained a personal interest in a focus on civil rights issues, so that kind of leadership makes a big difference, It's worth underlining the fact that these cases oh and the others were originally indicted by the state. And the Minnesota attorney General stepped in and became the lead prosecutor on these cases. Dear J was nowhere near this situation in, at least in my district. This is the kind of setting where we might have talked with state prosecutor's and agreed that the cases, would go federal initially in some ways. This action signifies that deal J really is back and really is going to be intentional in the civil

space would you make it any Mccarthy's criticism this with unnecessary, premature and may prejudice the rights of the remaining defendants? Well, it doesn't matter if there is going to be a plea agreement and part of the plea agreement, as you point out that Conjecture on our part. I think he has a fair point if this case goes on appeal and if they argue pre trial Prejudice than there is no doubt that deal J announcing new indictments is something that the council will argue. But you know the reality- is D J like it doesn't all press conferences and in all press releases, new indictments? There really careful to say that these are just charges that their data indicate proof. They dont indicate you know any any sort of assumption of guilt. So there's that, and also this

it's a tough case. It was always going to be tough to get a jury where no one had heard about George Floyd's murder, so that's baked in to some extent. I would feel pretty good on appeal about winning those arguments as the prosecution federal charges are against these folks and some of the counts apply to Derek Chauvin. Some of the accounts applied to the other officers were at the scene and there were three of them and they all Thanks for listening to hear the full episodes at the Capitol calm, slash insider and try out the membership free for two weeks and for a limited time use, the code Joyce for fifty percent of the annual membership price, that's coffee, dot, com, slash insider!

the many of you who have chosen to join the insider community. Thank you for supporting our work.