The George Floyd verdict can lead to reform

It is premature to say that justice or even finality has been achieved over the killing of George Floyd last May. Convicted on Tuesday of the unarmed black man’s second degree murder, third degree murder and second degree manslaughter, former Minneapolis police offer Derek Chauvin will not be sentenced for several weeks still. His defence counsel may decide to appeal against the verdict, citing the outside pressures on a jury caught up in a case of worldwide infamy. Nor will his three alleged aiders and abettors face trial until the late summer.

For now, though, there is at least the promise of accountability. Given the rareness of murder convictions (or even charges) against US police, this was never inevitable. As hard as it is to watch, amateur video of Chauvin kneeling on the prone Floyd for what turned out to be a lethal period made all the difference in court. The speed with which the jury returned the verdict was a measure of its evidential power, as well as that of the autopsy report. Prosecutors could also count on a former police chief to declare Chauvin’s use of force a breach of training.

The “right” verdict, is what President Joe Biden called it, with unwise timing, given that jurors were still deliberating. But “not enough,” he said afterwards, in a televised address. His second observation is the one the US must dwell on.

All a court can do is reach a judgment on the specificities of a case brought before it. The wider work of ending police brutality is for politicians and law enforcement itself. Earlier this month, Daunte Wright, a 20-year-old black man, was fatally shot by another Minnesota officer during a traffic stop. In its literal sense, “defund the police” is no answer to these and other horrors, even if it were politically saleable. It is a blend of better training and speedier punishment of miscreants that is likelier to curb undue police violence. The George Floyd Justice in Policing Act, which has cleared the House of Representatives, contains some reforms to that end.

As for the yet broader fight against racism and racial inequities, advanced last summer by protests against the Floyd murder, criminal justice is just one (however vast) part of it. Access to housing and healthcare, and ever more to the vote itself, too often correlates with race. Any sense of relief at Chauvin’s conviction should not become a generalised complacency about the lot of black Americans.

Before the verdict, there were fears in a National Guard-reinforced Minneapolis of public disturbances. These were hardly frivolous. The Democratic Congresswoman Maxine Waters foolishly told protesters to “get more confrontational” if Chauvin was not found guilty, drawing the ire of the judge. But if a famous case can excite tempers, there is also the opposite risk: that its end is mistaken for the resolution of the underlying social problem. Biden, to his credit, seems alert to the danger that Americans will move on too blithely.

It is crass to speak of a death “meaning” something, but Floyd’s has been of profound consequence. The Black Lives Matter protests, or at least former president Donald Trump’s botched response to them, helped to turn the 2020 election. It certainly nudged once-shy corporations into a new social activism, and not just within the US. And this was all before the conviction of Chauvin, which should leave at least a dent in the culture of police impunity. It was the result of a fair, brisk and peaceful trial, conducted in the world’s exacting glare. A story that began with the very worst of law enforcement has come to exhibit its nobler potential.