OK, the popular line is that "I support the police, but Derek Chauvin was a rogue cop."
I'm not sure if they watched the entire video of the arrest since George Floyd was actively resisting arrest. And there's an interesting take that none of the bystanders tried to step in to protect Floyd's life.
And there was Fetanyl and other drugs in Floyd's system. People ignore that this is a dangerous drug. The RAND think tank calls it the most dangerous drug in the US. Fetanyl is a highly lethal drug, which was one of the many things that the defence should have pointed out. Especially since the amount in Floyd's body was well into lethal levels from what I heard.
That's what "reasonable doubt" is about. Is there enough of a doubt that Chauvin's actions were the cause for Floyd's death? Maybe the defence didn't want to chance it, but perhaps pursuing that line of inquiry would have resulted in a different outcome.
On the other hand, the climate was such that the Judge commented that Chauvin might have a good chance of winning on appeal. That's the outcome I expect to see to this. Chauvin's conviction will be overturned on appeal and he will be quietly acquitted.
The real place where this should be tried is in the criminal justice system, not the court of public opinion. The fact that this was a political football surrounded by riots removed any objectivity from the matter. In fact, the politics surrounding this will make this a travesty if people want to see any sense of "order".
Police forces were already seeing officers leaving and having problems with recruitment. It's going to get harder and harder to find decent people who will want to do the job for the salary they get.
I'd rather have a Derek Chauvin doing his job than someone like a Kyle Rittenhouse stepping in because there is no police. The US may learn the lesson of the Murray Hill Riot the hard way.