is the right word. we have torture is the right word. we have all seen torture is the right word. we have all seen it torture is the right word. we have all seen it. mr floyd did not want to be all seen it. mr floyd did not want to be in all seen it. mr floyd did not want to be in the all seen it. mr floyd did not want to be in the back seat. that is it. that to be in the back seat. that is it. that is to be in the back seat. that is it. that is the to be in the back seat. that is it. that is the rub. to be in the back-seat. that is it. that is the rub. that is the rub. you are watching bbc world that is the rub. you are watching bbc world news. that is the rub. you are watching bbc world news. welcome - that is the rub. you are watching bbc world news. welcome to . that is the rub. you are watching | bbc world news. welcome to our that is the rub. you are watching - bbc world news. welcome to our pbs viewers in the us. you join us as we take live coverage of the sen
that george floyd family to have to endure. the state of minnesota likewise prosecutors in this case have endured quite a bit. likewise prosecutors in this case have endured quite a hit. as has derek chavin s family. this is a case that has changed the world to some degree. and i hope it s positive. but it s my hope that the court follows sentencing guidelines and applies the law in a reasoned manner and imposes a just sentence. derek chavin, would you join mr nelson derek chavin, would you join mr nelson at derek chavin, would you join mr nelson at the lectern? derek chavin, this is nelson at the lectern? derek chavin, this is your nelson at the lectern? derek chavin, this is your opportunity if you wish to give this is your opportunity if you wish to give any this is your opportunity if you wish to give any input to the courts and so i to give any input to the courts and so i turn to give any input to the courts and so i turn it to give any input to the courts and so i turn
with the public impact. as i believe we are all cognizant of, this case is at the epicentre of a cultural and political divide. we try to keep and political divide. we try to keep a lot of that out of the court and make his case about the facts. but we recognise what has happened as a result of this case. there are a great number of people who will review any sentence you pronounce as overly lenient and insufficient to satisfy justice. overly lenient and insufficient to satisfyjustice. but there are an equal number of people who will view any sentence you pronounce as draconian or overbearing. either way, some percentage of the public will view your sentence as a miscarriage ofjustice. the intensity of the public interest in this case cannot be understated. i
serious than a typical second degree unintentional murder. for reasons the court found reflect that and get this court more than adequate basis to do that. your honour, we asked the court to impose a sentence of 360 months to the commissioner of corrections and as you know there are no findings in murder cases and he would ask that the court to reserve the issue of restitution and clarify that it is not family and present that to the court for 30 days. thank you your honour. anything further from the state? h0. anything further from the state? no, our anything further from the state? no, your honour-
law. the court is very familiar with the facts of this case and the parties have fully briefed the court relevant to sentencing factors and he recognised that in any case, and thinking that comes before the court, the court is taxed with a difficultjob. the court must craft a sentence that serves the interest of justice, a sentence that serves the interest ofjustice, a rather nebulous term. the court must take into consideration that they can impact, public interest, as well as the circumstances and history of the defendant. in this case, more than any other, that task is exceedingly more difficult. in my remarks today, i wish to briefly address each of those three considerations. starting