Derek Chauvin Asks Federal Judge to Throw Out Conviction In George Floyd’s Murder Based on Theory By Pathologist Who Hasn’t Examined Body: ‘Can’t Go to My Grave with What I Know’

Former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin, who is serving a 21-year sentence for violating George Floyd’s civil rights during a fatal arrest more than three years ago, filed a motion this week in federal court to overturn his conviction, citing an alternative theory on the cause of death.

In the appeal filed on Monday, Chauvin cites the opinion of Kansas pathologist Dr. William Schaetzel, who suggests Floyd died not due to asphyxia from Chauvin kneeling on his neck for more than 9 minutes but rather from complications related to a rare tumor known as paraganglioma, which has potential to trigger a sudden and deadly surge of adrenaline.

Derek Chauvin's Attorney Asks Judge Not to Allow George Floyd to be Called a 'Victim' or Compared to Jesus
Derek Chauvin faces second-degree murder and manslaughter charges. Photo KARE 11 YouTube Screenshot

Chauvin claims that Schaetzel contacted his defense attorney, Eric Nelson, about the theory in April 2021, when Chauvin was on trial for state murder charges in Floyd’s death, saying Nelson didn’t take the claim seriously and never reached out to the pathologist for his sworn testimony.

After nearly two years, Schaetzel said he reached out to Chauvin in February to speak with him personally about his conclusions after he reviewed Floyd’s autopsy report but admitted that he never examined the body.

Asked Monday to explain why he contacted Chauvin at the federal lockup in Arizona, Schaetzel told The Associated Press: “I can’t go to my grave with what I know … I just want the truth.”

Based on Schaetzel’s conclusions, Chauvin has asked the judge overseeing the federal case to throw out his conviction and order a new trial more than 16 months into his sentence for killing Floyd.

In the court filing, Chauvin further claims that the jury in his state criminal case would have found him not guilty in 2021 if they had heard the evidence from Schaetzel.

The Hennepin County Medical Examiner ruled Floyd’s death a homicide that was likely caused by the knee restraint.

The fatal incident occurred on May 25, 2020, when then-officer Chauvin, who is white, subdued the 46-year-old Black man by pinning his neck to the ground with his knee after Floyd tried to pass a counterfeit $20 bill at a convenience store moments earlier.

The episode was filmed by several witnesses who shared the viral videos on social media, sparking months of violent protests around the world while strengthening the Black Lives Matter movement in the United States.

When Chauvin pleaded guilty to federal charges in December 2021, he forfeited his right to an appeal except under the condition of asserting that his defense attorney was inadequate or incompetent to represent him.

The agreement is notable as Chauvin, in his newest appeal, claims Nelson failed to inform him about Schaetzel’s theory during the state trial and never challenged the constitutionality of the federal civil case against him based on the evidence.

Previously, a federal appeals court twice rejected Chauvin’s request for a new evidentiary hearing on other legal grounds.

Democracy needs journalism it can trust.

This election season, the stakes are higher than usual — and so is the pressure on newsrooms to soften their coverage, stay quiet, or just disappear. Independent reporting, the kind that answers to readers instead of advertisers or political pressure, matters more in a moment like this, not less.

For over 14 years, Atlanta Black Star has stayed independent and reader-funded. We have no corporate owner and no shareholders telling us what to cover or how to cover it. That independence is also our biggest vulnerability: nothing protects it except readers choosing to fund it directly.

Newspaper ad revenue has fallen more than 80% since 2005, and local newsrooms are closing at a rate of roughly two a week nationwide. When outlets go under in a moment like this, it's rarely the independent, reader-funded ones that get to stick around.

We know a request for support isn't why you came here. But without readers choosing to fund this work directly, the depth of reporting we can do at home and abroad shrinks along with everyone else's. If you're not in a position to give, that doesn't change how much we value you as a reader.

If you are able to, a recurring contribution does more for us than a single one-time gift, because it lets us plan the next investigation instead of just the next invoice. It takes about 30 seconds, no long form, no account. Thank you for continuing to support independent journalism and freedom of the press.

Back to top