CNN Senior Legal Analyst Mocked for Baffling Take on Chauvin Trial

CNN Senior Legal Analyst Mocked for Baffling Take on Chauvin Trial
(Photo by Mario Tama/Getty Images)

CNN’s senior legal analyst Laura Coates was widely mocked after she advertised her complete misunderstanding of the entire premise upon which our legal system is built while commenting on the Chauvin trial.

In fact, her ignorance was presented as an argument. “Defense begins by defining reasonable doubt, not with why Derek Chauvin is innocent. Think about that” she wrote.

There, of course, isn’t much to think about. Coates’ comment roughly translates to “Legal defense does their job” – she just doesn’t realize it. The standard for criminal defense doesn’t require them to prove innocence, just reasonable doubt.

Her comment was widely mocked:

Somehow, Coates wasn’t the only legal expert confused by the legal process.

MSNBC legal analyst Glenn Kirschner chimed in with a similar take:

NBC News legal analyst Barb McQuade parroted the misinformed take too:

Meanwhile, PBS’ Yamiche Alcindor was bemused that the defense would dare contradict the prosecution.

One is left to wonder how it is that someone can be a legal analyst for a major news network and yet make such an obviously bogus legal argument like this. Is it the case that they do know better but know their audience doesn’t, or are they really just clueless?

Matt Palumbo is the author of Dumb and Dumber: How Cuomo and de Blasio Ruined New YorkDebunk This: Shattering Liberal Lies, and Spygate

Don’t miss The Dan Bongino Show

Apple to Let Parler Back Into App Store
Trump Discusses 2024 Run, Biden Border Crisis, and More in Hannity Interview