Four years after the trial that gripped the world, the judge who oversaw Derek Chauvin’s case has finally broken his silence.
Peter Cahill, the man in charge during the 2021 trial following George Floyd’s death, sat down for a revealing interview.
He shared candid thoughts about the pressures, challenges, and controversies he faced throughout one of the most watched and debated trials in recent history.
Balancing Bias and Duty in a High-Stakes Case
Cahill admitted upfront that he has a pro-police bias — something he constantly worked to keep in check during the proceedings.
Interestingly, he said that despite this, the details of the case sickened him.
When he first learned he might be assigned to the trial, he wasn’t thrilled.
In fact, he swore at his boss out of frustration, hoping someone else would take it on.
But when duty called, he stepped up, knowing that he couldn’t say no.
Livestreaming the Trial for Transparency
One of Cahill’s most significant decisions was to allow the trial to be livestreamed.
This was groundbreaking at the time, especially given the pandemic restrictions limiting courtroom attendance to just six people.
He believed the public had a right to see the trial firsthand, so they wouldn’t doubt the outcome.
Millions watched the trial unfold in real time, with over 23 million tuning in to see the verdict.
Facing Intense Backlash and Personal Threats
The trial took a huge toll on Cahill’s personal life.
He received an overwhelming amount of hate mail — enough to fill two boxes — with messages from angry extremists on both sides of the political spectrum.
Some criticized the sentence as too light, while others demanded an impossible pardon.
Threats even extended to his family, and strange requests like autograph letters showed up at his home.
Despite all this, his family, friends, and neighbors stood firmly by his side, often sending care packages and support.
Heightened Security and Constant Vigilance
Because of the threats, Cahill’s home was regularly monitored by security with police cars frequently patrolling.
He upgraded his home surveillance, and even his neighbor’s tree got a police-installed camera for extra protection.
For years, he admitted, he slept with a steel pipe under his bed — a habit that continued through the trial.
Managing External Pressures Amid City Turmoil
The trial unfolded against a backdrop of unrest, including protests sparked by the killing of Daunte Wright in the same state.
Cahill had to navigate not only the courtroom but also intense media scrutiny and political interference.
He criticized city council members who pushed slogans like “defund the police” during the trial and urged jurors to avoid the news to stay focused.
Attempts by the defense to move the trial were denied because the entire state was affected.
Handling Criticism and Defending the Judicial Process
Even years later, Cahill’s handling of the case remains under scrutiny.
Some media personalities and outlets claim the trial was unfair or influenced by public pressure.
But Cahill maintains that the jurors based their verdict solely on the evidence presented.
He recalls talking with jurors who confirmed they were not swayed by outside protests or noise.
The criticism, he says, is part of a troubling trend of undermining trust in the justice system itself.
Reflecting on Regrets and Lessons Learned
Cahill did express regret over his initial decision to impose a gag order preventing attorneys from publicly commenting on the case.
The order proved ineffective as officials continued to make social media statements.
He also revealed frustration when law enforcement leaked details of a potential plea deal to the press, calling it a breach of trust.
Preserving History and Moving On
Now retired, Cahill has donated memorabilia from the trial — including his robes, notes, face masks, and even the hate mail — to the Minnesota Historical Society.
Looking back, he stands by his actions during the trial and hopes that public confidence in the judicial process will endure despite the controversy.