Was the evidence at trial sufficient to establish the willfulness of the petitioner?

QUESTION PRESENTED The Petitioner was convicted of two counts of deprivation of rights under color of law resulting in bodily injury and death in connection with the death of George Floyd, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 242. This section makes it a crime to “willfully subject any person ... to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution of the United States.” 18 U.S.C. § 242 (emphasis added). To prove willfulness the jury had to find that the government has proven that the petitioner acted with the specific intent to deprive Mr. Floyd of his constitutional rights. In this case the prosecution failed to present sufficient evidence to prove that petitioner’s actions and inactions were willful or specifically for a bad purpose. Was the evidence at trial sufficient to establish the willfulness of the petitioner? The United States Constitution guarantees the right to a fair trial to a criminal defendant. In this case the prosecution engaged in numerous, varied, and pervasive acts of misconduct at trial beginning with its opening statement, continuing throughout the presentation of evidence, and culminating in the closing arguments. Did the prosecutorial misconduct act to deprive the petitioner of his right to a fair trial? i