Today news
The same in other media
EXPLAINER: How is 'reasonableness' key to Chauvin's defense?
Reading now: 397
CHICAGO – Attorneys and witnesses have used the words “reasonable” or “unreasonable” often at the trial of the former Minneapolis police officer charged with murder and manslaughter in George Floyd's death.
It's no coincidence. The concept of reasonableness has been crucial at trials of officers ever since the landmark Graham v. Connor ruling 32 years ago by the U.S.
Supreme Court. Here is a look at the issue and the key role it's likely to play as Derek Chauvin's trial draws to a close. WHAT WAS GRAHAM V.
CONNOR ABOUT? Before the Graham v. Connor ruling in 1989, lower courts were often at odds about how to determine whether an officer on trial used an unreasonable, and therefore illegal, amount of force.
The website covid-19.rehab is an aggregator of news from open sources. The source is indicated at the beginning and at the end of the announcement. You can send a complaint on the news if you find it unreliable.
COVID-19
United States
|
Cases: 46 252 513
Deaths: 750 423
Recovered: 0
|
India
|
Cases: 34 321 025
Deaths: 459 652
Recovered: 0
|
Brazil
|
Cases: 21 835 785
Deaths: 608 235
Recovered: 0
|
United Kingdom
|
Cases: 9 215 683
Deaths: 141 607
Recovered: 0
|
Russia
|
Cases: 8 494 589
Deaths: 237 619
Recovered: 0
|