The prosecution wrapped up it’s case in the murder trial of Derek Chauvin on Monday, April 12.
Over the course of more than two weeks the jury heard extensive testimony about George Floyd's health problems and struggles with drug addiction. But thanks to an obscure legal doctrine, the jury was also allowed to hear testimony aimed at humanizing George Floyd.
Floyd’s younger brother, Philonise Floyd, took the stand on Monday to share some personal reminisces and reflections, which are permitted under Minnesota’s “Spark of Life Doctrine.”
To hear this kind of testimony during the evidentiary phase of a trial is unusual. That’s because whether George Floyd was a good brother, or liked to play basketball, or made snacks for his siblings, etc…none of that has any bearing on whether Derek Chauvin committed a crime. And, to be clear, it’s not supposed to.
So why is it allowed? Host Adam Allington speaks with Ted Sampsell-Jones, of the Mitchell Hamline School of Law.