What is the goal of imprisonment in this country? It is to punish and rehabilitate. In the case of Derek Chauvin, he will be punished for his violence against another human being, and rightfully so ("Chauvin term is 22.5 years," front page, June 26). Rehabilitation, however, will remain a question mark. Chauvin will also continue to be restricted to a form of solitary confinement while occasionally being allowed inside a courtroom for upcoming appeals. So far, he has kept his sanity throughout this horrendous, self-inflicted ordeal. Due to possible threats on his life he will remain in isolation for months and years, making his life pure torture. Consequently, severe mental illness is the probable outcome and a justifiable punishment for killing a local citizen ... I suppose. Sadly, George Floyd's family, Derek Chauvin, and of course, taxpayers are all the losers here because of Chauvin's despicable act. Case closed.

Still, I harbor a vision, perhaps even a fantasy, that in a better world we could imagine a repentant Chauvin and a forgiving judicial system that would allow this "bad cop" to do some good. After a period of time and due punishment, a remorseful Chauvin might speak out against racism in schools and workplaces throughout the country. In Black communities he might volunteer at food shelves, sweep the sidewalks, scrub floors and so on. He could become a loud and proud advocate for all people of color on so many levels. Yes, this is my imagination running away with me because there is so much hope in the air.

Leaving Chauvin in prison to rot for many years serves as punishment with no rehabilitation, and that's too bad.

Sharon E. Carlson, Andover

•••

Although a disgraced former police officer being sentenced to 22 1/2 years in prison for the murder of a criminal suspect is a punishment whose magnitude we have not seen before, it is light given the enormity of the crime — the fact that George Floyd suffered a hideous and slow death at the hands of someone who wore a badge and toted a gun in our name, the life squeezed out of him over a long period of time as he lay helpless on the ground. The defendant refused to relinquish his hold on Floyd long after he lost consciousness, brushing aside the pleas from an assembled crowd to allow anyone to render aid and ignoring the request of his nervous fellow officers to turn Floyd on his side. The defendant's cold, callous, cruel treatment of Floyd was evident in his demeanor during the killing. It was simply another day at work for him, dealing with someone he had seemingly come to regard as subhuman.

The defendant can be expected to be a model prisoner if he survives his time in prison without anyone killing him, and he will be eligible for supervised release after just 14 1/2 years, at which time emotions over this highly charged case can be expected to have cooled. His attorneys will argue with likely success that he poses no danger to the public.

Oren Spiegler, Peters Township, Pa.

The failure by the Minnesota Legislature to pass meaningful police reform is appalling ("Police reform takes back seat in Capitol bill," front page, June 28). The statements of Senate Majority Leader Paul Gazelka betray a complete misunderstanding of the problem. "We made a commitment to not take any anti-police measures or make it harder for law enforcement to keep people safe. The recent increase in violent crime has all of us on edge, but this agreement keeps our promise," said the senator from East Gull Lake. What promise and to whom?

The broad-daylight street murder of George Floyd and initial police statement revealed the confidence and sense of entitlement that police could get away with their crime. That is the problem. That betrays public safety. That defies police policies and procedures on the books.

Instead of reform, Gazelka "plans to increase pay for state law enforcement and have tougher penalties for people who injure officers, among other provisions."

How much more international embarrassment can Minnesota take on?

•••

Democracy, dignity and honoring human life are major tenets of what most of us believe to be a baseline in this state. Yet our statewide officials are unable to land on important police reform and accountability measures in public safety because the GOP seems to have confused honoring life with being anti-police. Minneapolis is ready to do more than just celebrate a guy getting locked up when at any point another Minneapolis Police Department officer could do this again. We keep saying we want the pain to stop. We want to be safe, and yet our political leaders statewide and locally are dragging their feet and saying they're running sprints.

Let's pass these bills that actually do something to protect us all. Maybe our city can lead the way for the world to change for the better. Let's stop admiring the problem and finally take bold action on solutions.

Haley Haupt, Minneapolis

The opinion piece by Michael Friedman ("The blackout incentive," Opinion Exchange, June 24) was a great illustration of a phenomenon I have been following for over 40 years — how far government officials will go to hide activities and incidents that will make them or their political bosses look bad.

In the instance of the Minneapolis Police Department, this is a long-term problem that is a function of how political the department has been over the years and why a variety of remedies never seem to address the real problem. Management professionals in the city of Minneapolis negotiated a contract with the Police Federation that had the objective of using the clever concept of "coaching is not discipline" to hide misconduct from the public — bad for the public but good for the federation and its "sign pounders" and contributions.

My best guess is that this approach resulted from the political power that the federation is able to wield in dealing with the city. This may be good politics for some, but it results, as Friedman points out, in bad management of problematic employees. We do not know how many of the complaints against former officer Derek Chauvin led to his being coached about use of excessive force. However, we do know that coaching, if any, was not effective.

One small clarification in Friedman's piece: He mentions that the Minnesota ACLU is suing the city about the coaching issue. It is actually the Minnesota Coalition on Government Information that is the plaintiff in this case, ably represented by the ACLU.

Don Gemberling, St. Paul

The writer is spokesperson, Minnesota Coalition on Government Information.

Friedman needs to understand that the city (the employer) has lost its unilateral right as an employer to do and decide a number of things when it comes to wages, hours, benefits, conditions of employment, etc., because of the union. In most cases, this legal prohibition applies to the practices the parties (union and employer) agree to follow during the negotiation process. Consequently, the writer should be equally critical of the Police Federation for not demanding transparency. Remember, it is a signatory to the labor agreement as well. If the intent of the writer is to hang this criticism solely upon the city, may I suggest he request that the Police Federation propose "transparency" negotiation procedures to the city and allow the city to reject, counter or accept the federation's proposals. It would be a great move by the federation to demonstrate its commitment to social justice for all its members. Talk is cheap. Actions are measurable!