Chicago cop’s trial could come down to jury’s view of video

That video will almost certainly be played again Thursday. Prosecutors also will likely stress that none of the nearly dozen other officers who encountered McDonald after police responded to a report of someone breaking into vehicles opened fired.

If defence attorneys show the video, it will be to remind the jurors that as an erratic McDonald walked down the middle of a street, the knife flashing in his right hand, one sudden movement and he could have been upon the officer with a deadly weapon. They may talk about what Van Dyke said he saw but that the camera could not have captured — that McDonald was “without expression,” his eyes “bugging out of his head” and looking “right through me.” They are likely to point out that the hallucinogenic drug PCP was found in McDonald’s system and point to other people who testified about previous violent encounters with McDonald.

Defence attorneys also may point to Van Dyke’s own words on the stand: “The video doesn’t show my perspective.”

It isn’t the first time jurors at a high-profile trial in Judge Vincent Gaughan’s courtroom are being told by defence attorneys to not entirely believe their eyes. Prosecutors made video the centerpiece of R&B star R. Kelly’s 2008 child pornography trial, telling jurors it showed the singer engaging in sex acts with an underage girl. The defence told jurors the man in the 27-minute video wasn’t R. Kelly and jurors ultimately acquitted him.

In Van Dyke’s case, the video already has made an impact in the city since its release in November 2015. Chicago’s police superintendent and Cook County’s top prosecutor both lost their jobs — one fired by the mayor and the other ousted by voters. It also led to a U.S. Justice Department investigation that found a “pervasive coverup culture” and prompted plans for far-reaching police reforms.

One witness who could figure prominently in closing arguments is Dr. Laurence Miller, a psychologist who interviewed Van Dyke for his legal team. After Miller testified, as expected, that Van Dyke firing his weapon was a “reasonable response” to what he perceived as a deadly threat posed by McDonald, he said two things that prosecutors might seize on to show Van Dyke’s state of mind before he even climbed out of his squad SUV. First, said Miller, after hearing about what was happening on his radio, Van Dyke told him that he told his partner, “Oh my God, we’re going to have to shoot the guy.”

Then, testified Miller, Van Dyke recounted to him how he wondered aloud why other officers at the scene had not already shot McDonald after he punctured the tire of a police cruiser.

Prosecutors could be expected to use both statements to help show the jurors Van Dyke’s state of mind, and perhaps suggest he had already made a decision on what he was going to do.

___

For the latest developments: https://bit.ly/2xVm8Ub

For the AP’s complete coverage of the case: https://apnews.com/tag/LaquanMcDonald

Don Babwin And Michael Tarm, The Associated Press

by Canadian Press

Chicago cop’s trial could come down to jury’s view of video

What's Happening