How the Charges in Minnesota Will Actually Play Out
Don’t expect a jury trial as in the George Floyd case.
Editor’s Note: This is the third installment in a series examining the fatal shootings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti. The first focused on the evidence and the state’s potential case in the Good killing; the second examined the likely defenses and the breakdown in federal–state cooperation. This piece provides a likely surprising analysis of what would actually happen on the ground if Minnesota brings criminal charges in either case, and why the decisive confrontation would likely occur well long before any jury trial.
Just a reminder that we have made some changes to the Talking Feds subscription model recently. Access to additional written pieces in weeks when we publish more than two columns is a paid subscriber perk. We’ll be back next week with more written pieces.
With the federal government leaving little confidence that it will thoroughly investigate, much less prosecute, the fatal shootings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti, all eyes turn to Minnesota. Will the State buck the federal government and bring state criminal charges?
The DOJ’s position has made Minnesota’s path far more complicated than in any similar episode in memory. Within hours of Good’s killing, the DOJ announced it would not investigate, a move that has led to a string of resignations within the ranks of the Civil Rights Division and the United States Attorneys in Minneapolis. Perhaps stung by the criticism, and the grotesque apparent execution of Alex Pretti, federal authorities have now announced an investigation into that incident; but it is hard to be confident that it will be wholehearted, and in any event the highest ranks of the federal government already passed judgment in the case, pinning the blame on Pretti and exculpating the swam of ICE officers.
All signs nonetheless suggest that Minnesota is investigating, and all signs suggest that it will—and should—charge in one or both killings. Under Minnesota law, prosecutors would likely look to second-degree unintentional murder or manslaughter, statutes that permit criminal liability when an officer uses deadly force without lawful justification.
Those charges, importantly, would frame the question in familiar terms: whether the use of force exceeded what the circumstances reasonably required. As I previously have explained, that standard is roughly congruent with the standards that come into play in civil rights prosecutions for excessive force, as well as motions for federal immunity.
That’s about as far as most analyses have taken things. There may well be a common assumption that if Minnesota charges, the case will unfold along a familiar path, modeled on prosecutions such as the Chauvin case arising from the killing of George Floyd, or earlier still, Rodney King—in which the central drama played out before a jury in open court.
But it won’t work that way here.
