News and current affairs => A look at the news stories currently making the headlines. => Topic started by: Wonderfulspam on March 29, 2021, 01:20:50 PM
Title: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on March 29, 2021, 01:20:50 PM
Trial begins today at 2pm(gmt) & is available to watch on Court TV, Freeview Channel 89.
Or live stream here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98NVpeNH6mQ
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 03, 2021, 12:32:36 PM
It is very clear that some of the British media in this case such as Sky and the BBC are acting in a manner wholly inconsistent with their primary function which is to report the news. The biased reporting on this trial by these two organisations is particularly appalling.
The trial of former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin in the murder of George Floyd commenced last week. He has been charged with second-degree unintentional murder, third-degree murder, and manslaughter. The murder charges could carry 40 and 25-year sentences, respectively. Mr Chauvin has pleaded not guilty to all three charges.
The trial heard from several prosecution witnesses last week including a man and woman who were in Floyd's car with him, Floyd's girlfriend, bystanders, shop assistants, medics, and two senior police officers.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 03, 2021, 12:57:13 PM
A Summary of the trial - Week 1 Day 1
The prosecution opening speech made the case that unreasonable force was used to subdue George Floyd resulting in his death by asphyxiation. They alleged that former police officer Derek Chauvin murdered George Floyd by keeping his knee on Floyd's neck for some nine minutes. They allege that the officers actions were not in keeping with Minneapolis Police Department training or protocol, that they were excessive and did not represent reasonable force.
The defence on the other hand argued that Floyd's death was due to pre-existing medical conditions exacerbated by chronic substance abuse and an attempt to orally conceal illegal drugs. They allege that Floyd was aggressive and non compliant and that officer Chauvin was entitled to take whatever measures he deemed necessary to protect himself and the other officers.
The first state’s witness was Jena Lee Scurry, the 911 dispatcher who handled the Floyd call. Prosecutor Blackwell had promised the jury that she would testify that she was so outraged by what she observed of the arrest via closed circuit camera that she felt compelled to call the police on the police. As already discussed above, the reality was far less compelling. Defender Nelson did a reasonable job on cross on undercutting her testimonial value for the state, and using her testimony to provide context helpful for the defence.
The state’s second witness was Alicia Oiler, a woman who at the time worked at the Speedway grocery store across the street from the Cup Foods where the struggle with Floyd occurred.
Her testimony was largely mono-syllabic and consisted of a large number of grunted “uh-huhs.” She also seemed remarkably unable to recall relevant events, especially considering how extensively the state surely must have worked to prepare their second witness for their case in chief.
Much of Oiler’s testimony was around a series of a half-dozen very short cell phone videos she had taken of the events of the day. None were anywhere as informative as the other much longer bystander and surveillance videos already available. The only apparent reason to include them at all was that the state had spliced the Oiler videos into a longer surveillance video, and so had an excuse to expose the jury yet again to a longer video of what happened.
Perhaps the most interesting facet of Ms. Oiler’s testimony was the apparent freak-out by television “commentators” afterwards, who seemed frantic to convince the audience that Oiler’s testimony shouldn’t be taken as a sign that the prosecution had decided to intentionally “throw the case.”
The state’s third witness of the day was Donald Williams, the bystander who purportedly has expertise in “security” and “martial arts.” Those of you who have watched the bystander video will perhaps best remember Williams as the “bro” bystander actively engaging with the officers while Floyd was restrained on the street.
Williams’ “security” background appears to consist primarily of being a bouncer and similar non-credentialed activities, and his martial arts background consists of some high school and junior college wrestling, and some mixed martial arts training in a local gym.
The state’s third witness of the day was Donald Williams, the bystander who purportedly has expertise in “security” and “martial arts.” Those of you who have watched the bystander video will perhaps best remember Williams as the “bro” bystander actively engaging with the officers while Floyd was restrained on the street.
Williams’ “security” background appears to consist primarily of being a bouncer and similar non-credentialed activities, and his martial arts background consists of some high school and junior college wrestling, and some mixed martial arts training in a local gym—where, Williams said, he trained not only with members of the Minneapolis Police Department, not only with members of the FBI, but also with members of the CIA. Having had the opportunity to meet my share of CIA personnel, color me skeptical that they are announcing themselves as such at the local MMA gym. Further, much of Williams’ purported MMA expertise was substantially undercut by his apparent ignorance of the techniques he testified about, but more on that in a moment.
Williams spent much time describing how small movements on the part of Chauvin were intentional “shimmies” intended to “tighten” the “blood choke” that Chauvin was demonstrably not applying. The notion that Chauvin’s body might have been moving slightly in order to maintain the neck restraint of the continually squirming and very large Floyd appears not to have occurred to Williams.
The court only got partially through Williams’ testimony on the first day with the last couple of minutes of his testimony not beng broadcast due to a technical problem.
(Summary acknowledgment Attorney Andrew Branca)
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 03, 2021, 03:01:13 PM
A Summary of the trial - Week 1 Day 2
Today saw the Chauvin court wrap up the testimony of martial arts and security “expert” Douglas Williams, a bystander witness to Floyd’s in-custody death. It also saw the state proceed through four female minor witnesses because they were bystander witnesses who were under 18 years of age at the time of the incident. Finally, the state brought the firefighter bystander witness to the stand, with the court recessing partway through her cross-examination.
The most interesting event of the day however was certainly during the testimony of the firefighter, when Judge Cahill cleared the jury from the room and scolded her for being argumentative with the defense during cross, before excusing her meantime.
As was the case with most of the state’s witnesses today, the purpose of Williams testimony seemed to be largely to share emotive observations of Floyd’s in-custody death—albeit at least in Williams’ case there may have been a secondary motive to attempt to leverage his purported martial arts and security “expertise.”
Much of Williams direct testimony focused on Floyd’s demeanor as he died: “He was in pain, his mouth was wide open, with drool and slob, and dryness, and eyes rolling back, and trying to gasp for air and trying to be able to breath, and trying to move his face from side to side.”
Williams also made several comparisons between Floyd’s demeanor and the death of the fish he’d captured earlier in the day and kept in a plastic bag as they died, a story he’d first recounted yesterday.
Williams denied engaging in any threatening behavior, but then in an effort to make Officer Thau look bad he recounted how Thau had put a hand on his chest to push Williams back to the sidewalk—which action was only required because Williams had stepped off the sidewalk and aggressively approached to within a foot or so of Thao.
In a further effort to make himself look good, Williams described how he was obliged to restrain other members of the bystander crowd to keep them from aggressively approaching the officers—which, of course, would suggest that the officers had good reason to believe the bystander crowd was inclined to close aggressively on them.
Before he closed out direct examination of Williams, Prosecutor Frank made sure to dive into how Williams felt about the whole experience—that feeling was of course, negative, as was the case with all the state’s witnesses. How Williams or the other witnesses felt, however, has little to do with whether Chauvin violated any of the criminal statutes under which he has been charged.
It’s also notable that Williams would describe making his 911 call after the ambulance left with Floyd as “calling the police on the police”—a catch phrase used repeatedly by Prosecutor Blackwell during opening statement. The message, of course, is that Chauvin’s conduct as a police officer was purportedly so egregious that it was necessary to take the extraordinary step of calling the police on the police.
Nelson took up cross-examination of Williams for the first time. It was here that Nelson took notice of Williams’ notes, and an extensive exchange took place.
Nelson did a good job exploring relevant use-of-force issues such as the disparity in weight between Floyd—some 230 pounds—and the police officers—the largest of whom, Chauvin, reportedly weighed 140 pounds. He did this by exploring the use of weight classes in wrestling and martial arts, which obviously divides competitors by weight differences of as little as 10 or 20 pounds, much less the nearly 100-pound difference between Floyd and Chauvin.
Nelson also explored some of the more technical aspects of various choke holds, including distinguishing “air chokes” and “blood chokes,” as well as attempting to get Williams to concede that an effective carotid (blood) choke requires constriction of the carotid arteries on both side of the neck. Here it should be recalled that Chauvin was applying pressure to only one side of Floyd’s neck, not both.
Williams’ responses here were largely incoherent and confusing and often self-contradictory, and he insisted a carotid choke required constricting only one side of the neck. Obviously, the defense has its own use-of-force expert witness it intends to call, and presumably he’ll be more articulate and better informed on these matters than was Mr. Williams.
Williams did agree that a carotid choke results in loss of consciousness in a matter of seconds, which is obviously a vastly shorter time period than the 9 minutes or so in which Chauvin had his knee on Floyd’s neck. Clearly Chauvin could not have been applying a carotid choke for that 9-minute period, during nearly all of which Floyd was demonstrably conscious and moving.
Nelson also was able to undercut much of Williams’ testimony claiming that he’d merely been “professional and professional” while a bystander witness, by referring both to video footage of Williams at the scene as well as to the transcript of an interview Williams had with police investigators.
Nelson noted that Williams had called the officers “such a man,” and “bogus,” and “such a tough man,” and “a f’ing p*ssy,” and a “f’ing bum.’ Indeed, Nelson pointed out that Williams had called the officers “a bum” no less than 13 times. When asked if this was true, Williams became thoroughly hostile as a witness, repeatedly responding “if that’s what the video shows,” until Judge Cahill finally had to order him to answer the questions.
On re-direct by prosecutor Frank, Williams described the police at the scene as being a “human sh*t show,” to which Judge Cahill naturally sustained a defense objection. Frank attempted to undercut some of Nelson’s cross about weight classes and such by asking Williams whether in MMA fights or wrestling one’s opponent was handcuffed. Naturally the answer was no—unless, I suppose the opponent had just attempted to pass a bad $20 bill and then fought off lawful arrest.
Finally, the defense decided to re-cross briefly, by asking Williams if any time he had ever been choked out in martial arts he’d been able to hold a conversation while that was happening. The prosecution made a silly objection based on hearsay, which Judge Cahill overruled. Williams simply answered that he hadn’t previously been engaged in conversation when he was being subject to a carotid choke.
The state then decided to do a re-re-direct. Here, the state asked Williams about whether in martial arts one was obliged to stop their choke hold if an opponent tapped out, and Williams laughingly said yes. It’s not clear what the corollary to police use of force is here—are the police supposed to release a restrained suspect if he taps out?—but in any case we were finally finished with Williams as a witness.
Next up came a series of four bystander witnesses who were female minors (under 18 years of age) at the time of George Floyd’s in-custody death. Although two of the four have since achieved adulthood, Judge Cahill nevertheless allowed all four some special treatment, such as not having to give their names while on public broadcast. Accordingly, I refer to them as Minor 1, Minor 2, Minor 3, and Minor 4, respectively. (Their names are, however, public knowledge, if anyone cares enough to look them up in public media reports.)
Frankly, these witnesses added very little of substance to the trial, although they did through plenty of coal onto the emotive steam engine, each being emotionally distraught, sobbing, even crying on the witness stand. After all, the common theme went, they’d stood there and watched as the police killed George Floyd.
Indeed, two of these witnesses were not even subject to any cross examination by the defence. In the case of one, Minor 2, this was almost certainly a prudent strategic decision by the defence, as she was only 9 years old as of this day of testimony. She had little to add that the other bystander witnesses wouldn’t separately testify to, and one wonders what level of cruelty it required to have her subject to such traumatic recollection for not very good purpose.
Another of the four “minor” witnesses, Minor 4, was also not subject to cross, likely because it would have served no substantive purpose for the defence.
Minor 1, however, was subject to direct, cross, and re-direct. This witnesses’ actual first name appears to have been Darnelle, and she was the older (at the time 17, now 18, year old) cousin of the very young Minor 2.
Minor 1 and Minor 2 had travelled together to the Cup Foods convenience store for snacks, and like the other bystanders largely saw the same things occur.
As noted, there was lots of emoting, lots of mind reading, lots of conclusory statements of fact—“We all knew what was happening was wrong.” “Objection.” “Sustained, jury will disregard.”—but little of genuine substance that the video didn’t reveal on its face. Floyd was restrained by three officers, including Chauvin’s knee, complained about breathing and being in pain, called for his moma, worsened physiologically, and apparently died on the street, and Chauvin never “let up to get up.”
Like every other bystander witness, none of the “Minor” witnesses had a full understanding of what was occurring even during the limited period they were watching Floyd’s arrest, and none had any idea whatever of all of Floyd’s conduct that led up to him being restrained on the street.
On cross-examination, Nelson did a good job getting out of Minor 1 what he could. Indeed, Minor 1 provided more substantive value to the defence than she did to the state.
As with Williams, Nelson was able to wheedle out of Minor 1 testimony consistent with the bystander crowd being an arguably threatening mob to the police. She denied they were threatening, but then conceded conduct, such as repeatedly stepping off the sidewalk towards the police, and becoming increasing loud and angry, that could readily be perceived as threatening.
Indeed, at one point Chauvin and Thau each reached for their OC spray, conduct that Minor 1 and other of the day’s witnesses professed was utterly unnecessary, but which was certainly circumstantial evidence that the officers felt they might imminently need to defend themselves from any physical assault.
There was little of value in Minor 2’s testimony, as one would expect from a 9 year old. She was not even subject to cross-examination.
Minor 3 was another female, now 18 years old, and in high school. She was subject to direct questioning by a female prosecutor Eldridge.
Minor 3 was one of a pair of girls who drove to the Cup Food to buy an “aux cable.” The other of the two girls would testify immediately afterwards as Minor 4. Neither Minor 3 nor 4 added much of substantive value to the trial, though there was of course a great deal more emoting.
Interestingly, when the various videos are played during Minor 3’s testimony, we can clearly hear MMA witness Williams telling Officer Thau, “I will kick the f*ck out of you. I will kick the f*ck out of you. You’re a b*tch, bro.” We can also clearly hear the firefighter Hansen, who will be the last witness of the day, also calling Officer Thau a b*tch.
On cross examination Nelson referred to a transcript of a phone interview Minor 3 had with investigators shortly after the event, Nelson pointed out that she told those investigators that she had seen the police restraining Floyd check his pulse multiple times before the ambulance got there. She also repeated this narrative of the police checking Floyd’s pulse in discussion with the prosecution only days prior to her testimony, to which the defence apparently had discovery access.
Minor 3 claimed she had no clear recollection of saying the officers checked Floyd’s pulse “multiple times,” but had to concede the point when Nelson handed her the transcript of her interview.
She also conceded that the bystander crowd around the officers was genuinely angry, which will be an important circumstantial factor in the officer’s reasonable perceptions of their practical options in that context. Indeed, it’s worth noting again that not even the paramedics stayed on scene to treat Floyd, but rather immediately loaded Floyd into the ambulance and drove a safe distance away from the angry crowd before doing so.
State’s witness Minor 4 was again questioning by Prosecutor Eldridge. She repeated much of what had already been stated by other bystander witnesses in relation to the police interaction with bystanders. She called the police aggressive when they put their hands on their Mace canisters. She denied that the bystanders were threatening towards the officers. The defence chose not to cross-examine her.
State’s witness fire fighter Genevieve Hansen appeared on the witness stand in her full dress uniform, presenting quite a different sight than she had as a bystander witness clad in sweatpants on the sidewalk.
Before even direct questioning of Hansen began, the prosecution submitted to the court some video evidence of the scene and audio evidence of a 911 call made by Hansen.
Prosecutor Frank spent much time polishing Hansen’s training and experience, albeit as of today she’d only been a firefighter for two years, and so for barely one year at the time of Floyd’s arrest.
Most of Hansen’s testimony was little different than that of the Minor witnesses: a lot of emoting and mind-reading, but little of substantive value. Like them, she had only a limited view of what was happening and had no knowledge of what had led to Floyd being restrained on the street in the first instance or of the scuffle in the back of the police car.
When asked what she would have done had she been permitted to “treat” Floyd, most of what she recited was action actually taken by the officers, like calling 911 and checking Floyd’s pulse. Other proposed actions would have been effective only if Floyd’s cause of death was actually Chauvin’s knee, which of course is a key issue in dispute and appears to be an unlikely cause of death on the available evidence.
Other possible actions suggested by Hansen were of a sort that neither the officers on scene, nor Hansen in sweatpants, was in a position to provide, like use of a breath bag or of Narcan for drug overdose. In short, if Floyd required such care, he’d need to wait for the paramedics already called for by the officers.
It is notable that at no time did Hansen make any reference to Floyd’s ingestion of a three-fold fatal dose of methamphetamine/fentanyl speedball, to prevent discovery of the illicit drugs by police—a far more likely cause of death than Chauvin’s knee.
Like Williams, Hansen had also called 911—called the police on the police—to report her conclusion that she had just seen police kill a man, but then had hung up before completing her report to a police sergeant. She had no good reason for hanging up, other than getting distracted by events with other bystanders and the late-arriving fire department personal at the scene.
Things went less well for Hansen on cross examination by Nelson, however, largely because she proved rather outrageously hostile and uncooperative—to the point where a very irate Judge Cahill would eventually clear the jury from the court room and chastise her directly before sending her home for the day and adjourning court.
Nelson touched on the substantial training required to be a fire fighter and rhetorically placed Hansen into a hypothetical situation similar to that of the officers. Would it be difficult for her to follow her training and do her job putting out a fire if she was being shouted at by a threatening mob? Hansen insisted it would not negatively impact her ability to do her job at all, but the protestations came across as entirely insincere.
He also explored whether she had ever before sought to interfere with police securing a scene for called medical personnel, and Hansen had to concede she had not.
An interesting exchange occurred when Hansen insisted to Nelson that a main reason for her concern was that she believed fire fighter EMTs could have been on scene prior to Floyd’s death, and that the delay in medical personnel suggested something had gone wrong. Nelson pointed out that the police merely call for medical, period, and it’s the dispatcher who determines whether paramedics or fire fighter EMTs gets sent.
This whole exchange opened an entirely new narrative for the defence, in that the fault of providing timely care to Floyd might have been that not of the officers, who called for care promptly, but of other components of the city’s response system.
Hansen gradually became increasingly hostile and uncooperative. When asked if she remembered making particular statements to investigators, she denied knowledge. When offered a transcript to refresh her recollection, she refused to look at it. When compelled to look at it, she conceded that she’d made the statement, but then attempted to provide a lengthy, complex, and legally irrelevant explanation for why she made the statement she’d initially denied remembering having made.
Eventually Judge Cahill had had enough of Hansen, he cleared the jury, and chastised Hanssen directly. Even while he was chastising here, she continued to be argumentative, this time directly with Judge Cahill.
As you might expect, that went poorly for her.
That chastisement closed out the court for the day.
(Summary acknowledgment Attorney Andrew Branca)
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 03, 2021, 04:16:00 PM
A Summary of the trial - Week 1 Day 3
The court began the day with the not-yet-completed cross-examination of firefighter Hansen by the defence. It appeared that Hansen had been spoken to overnight because she was all “Yes, sir,” and “No, sir” today.
As it happened, the defence really had only one additional question for her on cross: Had she shown the police officers on scene anything identifying her as a firefighter? Her answer: She had not.
The state took the opportunity to re-direct, asking Hansen if the reason she hadn’t shown identification was because she didn’t have it on her person, this being her day off. She agreed that was the reason.
It is clear that the officers on scene had no basis to believe she was a firefighter other than her word—the word of an unknown woman who was part of an angry crowd and who herself was referring to the officers as “b*tch.”
Next up was Christopher Martin, a 19-year-old black male who was the clerk in Cup Foods to whom Floyd attempted to pass the counterfeit $20 bill, and to whom Floyd’s passenger had similarly tried to pass a bad bill earlier in the day. (Martin no longer works at Cup Food.)
Martin’s later testimony was largely as a sidewalk bystander witness of Floyd’s arrest, and that portion of the testimony added little value, in the sense that we’ve already heard from numerous bystander witnesses with essentially the same viewpoint.
His earlier testimony centered on his personal interactions with Floyd inside Cup Foods, and outside by Floyd’s car when trying to get Floyd to make good on the cigarettes he’d purchased with the bad bill, did add new substantive value to the trial narrative..
Several key facets of Martin’s testimony could really only be characterized as favorable to the defence, including:
Floyd had indeed passed a rather obviously fake counterfeit bill (after his friend had failed to pull this off in the very same store) Floyd appeared substantively impaired while in the store (“He did look high,” as Martin put it) Floyd was an unusually large man (it was what made Martin take exceptional notice of Floyd in the first place) Floyd had refused repeated offers to simply make good on the bad bill, pay for his cigarettes with actual money, and the whole incident would be forgotten Certainly, it’s hard to imagine how any of that testimony could be characterized as favorable for the prosecution.
That said, the testimony was going to happen, so the state did its best to underplay it. While Floyd may have high, for example, he wasn’t so high that he couldn’t communicate verbally with enough dexterity to order cigarettes. On the other, Martin had told police investigators that Floyd’s speech was noticeably delayed, and that Floyd struggled saying words like “baseball” while in conversation with Martin.
The state played a rather lengthy video of Floyd while he was inside the Cup Foods, and throughout Floyd’s demeanor is one of someone under the influence. Swaying, weaving, odd stretching motions, wincing, lots of erratic upper body movement, a little dance step performed in the middle of the store—to the point that other store customers backed up to give him additional space—and so forth.
Martin recounted that while he had immediately recognised as counterfeit the bill offered by Floyd’s friend earlier in the day, and rejected it as payment, when offered an essentially identical bill by Floyd he initially accepted the bill as payment for cigarettes. Knowing that he himself was going to be obliged by his boss to make good on the bad $20 bill personally (this was store policy), Martin had second thoughts about letting Floyd get away with this fraud.
Martin alerted his boss to the fake bill, and seeing that Floyd was still sitting in the driver’s seat of the Mercedes SUV parked across the street, Martin’s manager sent him out to ask Floyd to come back into the store and make good on the purchase. Martin did so, but Floyd refused to return to the store, or even discuss the matter.
When Martin returned to the store having been unsuccessful in his mission, the store manager sent out two different employees to speak with Floyd, and make the same offer. Again, Floyd refused to make good on the purchase.
It was at this point that the manager had a store employee call 911 to report the crime, the call that resulted in the first two officers, Lake and King, arriving on the scene, followed shortly by Chauvin and Thau.
At that point Martin’s testimony reverted to that of being a sidewalk bystander, which again was of little additional value.
On cross-examination by defence counsel Eric Nelson, Martin was obliged to re-affirm statements he’d made to police investigators that Floyd appeared to him to be intoxicated during their interaction in Cup Foods.
Nelson also had Martin affirm that the store manager carried a pistol in his back pocket—this pistol is quite clear and obvious in the surveillance video reviewed during Martin’s testimony—which undercuts the insinuation the state has made with previous witnesses that the neighborhood of Floyd’s arrest was reasonably safe, and in no way high crime in nature.
Naturally, to the extent that the neighborhood could be characterized as unusually dangerous, that again would contribute to the officers’ reasonable perception of the need to use perhaps more force and be more focused on the gathering angry crowd and thus distracted from the care of Floyd, than would otherwise have been the case.
Further, Nelson had Martin recount to investigators how he described the neighborhood around Cup Food as a “hot block,” to indicate that “a lot of situations” occurred in the neighborhood. It’s perhaps worth noting here that Martin not only worked at Cup Foods, he and his mother lived in an apartment immediately above the store, so he would be intimately familiar with criminal events in the immediate neighbourhood.
It was here during cross examination that Martin discussed, or Nelson referenced, in some detail how Floyd’s speech was slow and delayed, and he had difficulty saying the word “baseball.”
Nelson also highlighted that whereas Martin had immediately rejected the fake bill offered by Floyd’s friend earlier in the day, on the grounds that it was obviously fake, he initially accepted an essentially identical bill from Floyd, despite agreeing that it was equally fake in appearance. Could the difference in response be due to Floyd’s unusually large size and intoxicated demeanor—both factors the officers would also consider in making use-of-force decisions when Floyd refused to comply with lawful arrest? If such considerations were reasonable for the clerk, could they be unreasonable for the police?
When asked about his perception of the anger of the bystander witness and MMA/security “expert” Williams, Martin told Nelson that it wasn’t so much that Williams was angry, he was just defending himself, because Officer Thau had pushed him. This would be when Williams aggressively advanced off the curb into the street and towards Thau, and Thau held out his hand to stop Williams’ progress.
Nelson also managed to get Martin to describe how he physically restrained another bystander witness who was apparently sufficiently heated and angry to require physical restraint. This undercuts the state’s claims—and the claims of the same sort by the state’s witnesses—that the crowd was in no way conducting itself in a manner the officers might reasonably perceive as threatening.
The state did do a very brief re-direct of Martin, in which they had Martin describe Floyd as having a friendly demeanor, just living life. Unfortunately for the state, Martin closed these remarks by saying: “But he did seem high.”
There was a similarly brief re-cross by the defence, in which it was once again emphasised how readily Martin had rejected a counterfeit bill offered by Floyd’s friend, but then reluctantly accepted an equally obvious fake from Floyd himself.
Up next was state’s witness Richard Belfrey, a 45-year-old black male, as he didn’t add much. Indeed, the defence did not even bother to cross-examine him.
In brief, Belfrey and his fiancé had driven to Cup Food to buy food. He drove a red SUV and initially pulled up behind Floyd’s black Mercedes at the kerb outside China Wok in time to observe Floyd’s interaction there with Officers King and Lane. During this time his fiancé went into Cup Food to pick up their meal. Belfrey took the opportunity while parked behind Floyd’s Mercedes to make a short video recording. When he heard sirens he grew concerned about ending up trapped in that spot, and decided to move his vehicle.
Belfrey drove across the street, parked at the opposite kerb by Cup Foods, where his fiancé, who had gone inside Cup Foods to pick up their meal, rejoined him, and video recorded a bit more, this time of Floyd, now handcuffed, being walked across the street to the squad car outside Cup Foods. Shortly after this, Belfrey left the scene.
Neither Belfrey’s two short videos nor his personal observations added anything to the narrative of the case that isn’t better noted from other sources of evidence. There was no cross examination.
Up next was state’s witness Charles McMillian, a 61-year-old black male who provided very emotional testimony about the events of that day, at one point breaking down in sobbing and tears, to the point that Judge Cahill recessed the court for a short time, to allow him to recover.
McMillian’s testimony as a bystander witness was a bit different than that of the other bystanders, because he was on the scene well before the rest of the crowd began to gather. He is seen in videos as standing in the street, but a good 10 to 20 feet (varies over time) from the squad car, and never attempts to approach the officers in any aggressive way whatever.
McMillian can be heard in the various videos as the voice urging Floyd to comply, not resist, to get in the squad car, and to make things easy for himself. When asked his motivation for this, McMillian said he’d had his own interactions with police, and had learned that once the cuffs were on it was best to just accept that you were going to be arrested, and to stop resisting.
Unlike many of the prior bystander witnesses, McMillian gave no sense that he was attempting to slant his testimony in a manner to favour the prosecution. Certainly, his perception was that Floyd had been badly treated by the police, and perhaps even that the police were responsible for Floyd’s death, but he appeared to be telling the whole truth as he believed it.
Nevertheless, there were several moments during McMillian’s testimony that very much favored the officers, despite the emotional scene of McMillian’s breaking down in tears on the stand.
First, at one point, the prosecution is rolling body camera footage showing the officers moving towards Floyd laying on the ground, as they position themselves to do a full-body restraint, and Floyd deliberately kicks out at the officers with both legs. It was this conduct that led to the officers sending Thau to look for ankle hobbles, and why they were so determined to restrain Floyd’s legs from that point forward.
Second, while being questioned by Prosecutor Eldridge, McMillian was asked how Floyd appeared to him while being restrained, with Chauvin’s knee on Floyd’s neck. I expect Eldridge was hoping for a reply along the lines of “he looked like he was being killed.”
Instead, what Eldridge got was McMillian stating that Floyd had foam running out of his mouth. A perhaps stunned Eldridge responded with, “Foam in his mouth?” and McMillian immediately affirmed, “Yes, foam in and out of his mouth.”
Foaming in the lungs, and by extension out the mouth, is, of course, a notable indication of pathological fentanyl overdose. This would obviously reinforce the likely defence narrative that Floyd was killed not by Chauvin’s knee but by the three-fold fatal dose of meth/fentanyl speedball drug cocktail he rapidly ingested to avoid its discovery by the police.
That was about all the substantive value contained in McMillians’ testimony on direct.
When it was time for Nelson to conduct cross, he briefly consulted with Chauvin, then announced he had no questions.
Next witness was Jeff Rugel, Lieutenant, Minneapolis Police Department. He was called for foundational purposes.
After Rugel the jury was dismissed for the day, but there was some additional court business. In particular, the defence wanted to admit into evidence fuller-length versions of the body camera and city surveillance camera footage than the state had offered into evidence.
Further, the defense wanted that video introduced in such a manner that it could be manipulated by the MPDs own software systems, which allowed for a zoom and pan ability not equaled in the versions the state had offered.
Nelson offered his version of the videos to Cahill for review. The state had no objection to the video on foundational grounds.
(Summary acknowledgment Attorney Andrew Branca)
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 03, 2021, 05:33:26 PM
It is very clear that some of the British media in this case such as Sky and the BBC are acting in a manner wholly inconsistent with their primary function which is to report the news. The biased reporting on this trial by these two organisations is particularly appalling.
The trial of former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin in the murder of George Floyd commenced last week. He has been charged with second-degree unintentional murder, third-degree murder, and manslaughter. The murder charges could carry 40 and 25-year sentences, respectively. Mr Chauvin has pleaded not guilty to all three charges.
The trial heard from several prosecution witnesses last week including a man and woman who were in Floyd's car with him, Floyd's girlfriend, bystanders, shop assistants, medics, and two senior police officers.
Yes, I've been watching the trial on American Court TV & the commentary there is also very biased against Derek Chauvin. They appear to cherry pick some of the evidence.
But, the video evidence so far demonstrates in the very least that...
1) The use of the neck restraint was an unnecessary use of force once Floyd was handcuffed behind his back & laying prone.
2) That Chauvin failed to provide aid despite Officer Lane twice telling him Floyd had no pulse & him being aware that Floyd was no longer breathing.
3) That Chauvin ignored pleas from bystanders, one of them a trained firefighter/medic, to render aid to Floyd as he was no longer resisting & was clearly in a serious medical state.
I think them points alone fit the charge of 3rd degree murder, which is defined as “causes the death of another by perpetrating an act eminently dangerous to others and evincing a depraved mind, without regard for human life.”
I don't think that conviction will placate the BLM lynch mob, they will only be satisfied with a public execution imo.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 03, 2021, 05:49:21 PM
A Summary of the trial - Week 1 Day 4
First up was Courteney Ross, who shared his drug addiction (they met as addicts), and who has been variously characterised as Floyd’s girlfriend or fiancé.
Direct questioning was conducted by Prosecutor Matthew Frank, with cross examination by Defence counsel Eric Nelson.
At this point it perhaps goes without saying that Ms. Ross also had a catastrophic emotional breakdown on the witness stand, complete with sobbing and gasping and tears. She partly explained her reaction by noting how devastated Floyd had still been over the loss of his mother, appealing to the video of Floyd calling out “Mama!” as he died.
Generally speaking, Ross testified with the kind of evasiveness we’ve come to expect from state witnesses, including telling part rather than the whole truth in response to defence questioning, claiming she couldn’t recall what she’d previously told investigators and compelling the defence to refresh her recollection with transcripts—and this only goes one way, it seems, the only forgotten prior testimony is that which would be helpful to the defense—and so on.
Ross disclosed on cross-examination that Floyd’s pet name for her was "Mama", and the moniker under which he had her listed in his cell phone. Was she the “Mama” he was calling for while restrained on the street.
Ross also recounting that Floyd had experienced a previous overdose in March 2020 taking pills similar or identical to those he took on 25 May, during which she had to bring him to the hospital because he was experiencing intense stomach pain—much as he was experiencing on 25 May when restrained by police after self-ingesting a bunch of these pills in an effort to avoid their discovery by police.
Further, Ross herself had back in March taken some of these same pills and reported to investigators that she thought they were going to make her die—much like Floyd was saying he felt he was going to die while restrained on 25 May after his self-ingestion of similar pills.
She noted that her “normal” opioids were relaxing and took her pain away, but these strange pills acted as a stimulant, such that she was jittery and couldn’t sleep all night. She had also told investigators that in that March overdose she observed foam around Floyd’s mouth—just as his mouth was foaming on 25 May.
This is important evidence, because of the state’s argument in opening that it couldn’t have been the fentanyl in Floyd’s system that killed him, because fentanyl (an opioid) makes people sleep when they overdose on it, and Floyd was clearly not sleeping.
To the extent the drugs ingested by Floyd also contained methamphetamine, however (and we know that the found pills contained both), then they also contained a stimulant, which could explain Floyd’s energized state in forcibly resisting lawful arrest against multiple officers for some 10 minutes.
The meth would also explain why Floyd’s pupils didn’t demonstrate the pin-prick constrictions of fentanyl overdose, but were instead dilated—a condition the state used to argue, again, that it could not have been fentanyl that killed Floyd–the dilation would be induced by the meth component of the drugs.
All of this, of course, suggests an alternative cause of death other than Chauvin’s knee, and that is the self-induced overdose of Floyd via that pill ingestion on 25 May.
Cross-examination also revealed that Ross had told investigators that she believed Floyd to have been “clean” (off drugs) for a substantial period of time leading up to 25 May, perhaps right up until just two weeks prior to his death.
This “clean” period suggests all kinds of considerations with respect to the question of tolerance, which in turn touches on whether Floyd had such a high tolerance to his drugs of choice that even a three-fold fatal dose might not be able to kill him.
We also learned from Ross that the passenger in Floyd’s car, Maurice Hall, the man who had earlier tried to pass a bad $20 bill to the clerk in Cup Foods and been rebuffed, was apparently Floyd’s drug dealer, or at least one of them.
This provides some insight to why that man’s legal counsel suddenly announced the previous day that if his client was called to testify in Chauvin’s trial he would refuse to provide testimony and would plead the 5th. If I were the drug dealer involved with a fatal overdose of a client, I suppose I’d be pleading the 5th, as well, as I’d be liable to a murder conviction.
Interestingly, the pills that caused Floyd’s hospitalisation because of intense stomach pain, and that acted as a stimulant on Ross, back in March, were essentially identical to the pills consumed by Floyd on 25 May 2020, the day of his death.
Note that if the state wanted Hall to testify, that is if Hall’s testimony was going to be favorable to the state and increase the prospects of convicting Chauvin, the state could simply immunise Hall and compel him to testify. The fact that the state is not doing so strongly suggests that they have reason to believe Hall’s testimony would be favorable to the defence and decrease the prospects of convicting Chauvin.
Re-direct of Ross by Prosecutor Frank came across as particularly weak.
He asked Ross if Floyd had died in his March overdose taking essentially the same pills, she answered: “No. In fact, he had a lot of energy.” Again, driving home the role of the stimulant methamphetamine component of the drug cocktail in all of this.
The second of the state’s witnesses today was Seth Bravinder, the driver of the ambulance that responded to the Floyd scene, and a paramedic who helped provide care to Floyd as well as driving him to Hennepin County Medical Center (HCMC).
Direct questioning was conducted by Minnesota Assistant Attorney General Erin Eldridge, apparently one of the few of Attorney General’s Keith Ellison’s actual staff attorneys whom he trusted to participate in the case (most of the other prosecutors on the case are high-end private attorneys brought in specifically for the purpose). Cross examination was, of course, conducted by Defence Counsel Eric Nelson, the only attorney on the defence “team.”
An early interesting reveal in Bravinder’s direct testimony arose when Eldridge asked him to describe his training. He noted that he’d first been an EMT, and that required relatively little training, a 6 credit college course, but that he was now a paramedic, and that took a year-long course of instruction.
This is notable because while MPD officers will have had some first aid training, they are not trained to even the level of an EMT (the standard for the Minneapolis Fire Department). That means that the first-aid training of MPD is way, way below that of the paramedics who were en route to the Floyd scene with code 3 lights and sirens.
Would it be reasonable for a police officer, trained below EMT standards, to simply wait the mere couple of minutes he expected it to take for the highly trained paramedics to arrive, rather than attempt to provide basic first aid in a busy street and in the presence of an angry and hostile mob threatening imminent physical violence?
Bravinder noted that the time interval between receiving the code 2 (non-emergency medical call) and the code 3 (emergency medical call, lights and sirens) was only about a minute and a half. It wasn’t as if the officers on scene waited 10 minutes before escalating the call from code 2 to code 3. They saw that Floyd had received a bloody nose in resisting arrest, called the code 2, then within 90 seconds escalated that to a code 3 when they realised Floyd was in greater distress than a bloody nose could explain.
Bravinder also provided important testimony that buttressed the defence argument that the angry, hostile, and imminently threatening crowd was an important factor in decision-making at the scene. Bravinder and his paramedic partner Smith both quickly decided to do a “load and scoot” on Floyd, rather than attempt to treat him on site because of the presence of the angry mob.
The state tried to undercut this view of the mob in two rather dishonest respects.
First, they kept asking if anyone in the mob had actually attacked the officers or paramedics. Of course, that’s not the point. The mere presence of a threatening mob is sufficient to influence decision making, without having to experience an actual attack.
Second, Eldridge repeatedly conflated the matter of “moving” Floyd into the ambulance, where the paramedics; equipment was located, and “moving” Floyd three long blocks away from the scene before providing care so that the mob could be escaped.
By conflating these two, she suggested that the reason for the move was to better provide Floyd with care, and by implication not to escape the mob.
Providing better care is certainly the reason to move Floyd into the ambulance. It’s clearly not the motivation for providing him only limited (one paramedic) care until the ambulance has driven three long blocks away.
A key theme hit by Eldridge repeatedly through her direct of Bravinder was the notion that Floyd’s death was the result of a delay in beginning chest compressions, and by implication therefore the death was a result of the police not beginning chest compressions earlier.
After all, however limited their medical training, anybody can do simple chest compressions. This failure constitutes an unlawful killing!
Of course, this begs the question that the officers knew chest compressions were appropriate and necessary, and likely to make a life-saving difference.
The direct questioning of Bravinder by Eldridge further provided support for the defence narrative of the angry mob when body camera footage of the paramedics on the scene was played. The voice of MMA “expert” Williams as well as that of 1-year off-duty firefighter Hansen can be clearly heard calling the officers “b!tch.”
Overall, the direct questioning of Bravinder was more helpful to the defence than it was to the prosecution.
On cross-examination by Nelson, more points were scored for the defence. In particular, Nelson did a good job on cross examination in getting Bravinder to acknowledge the very different roles of the police on the one hand and EMS on the other. For example, it’s the police who have to deal with the danger of the scene—EMS will stage some distance off and wait for a code 4 (all safe) before coming in to provide care.
Bravinder also recounted frequently coming upon scenes in which police were struggling with a suspect.
On another important issue, Nelson asked Bravinder if sometimes people who overdose become violent when they are resuscitated or regain consciousness. Although the state objected, Cahill allowed the question, and Bravinder answered in the affirmative. Indeed, Bravinder testified, he’d personally seen it happen.
Further, Bravinder testified that when they were called out on an overdose call, it was standard practice for them to be accompanied by police—precisely because of the heightened danger of such circumstances.
Bravinder also agreed that he’d told earlier investigators that when he arrived on scene Floyd was on his left side. This is important because the state is in part arguing that Floyd died of positional asphyxia because he was kept prone on his stomach, and should instead have been in the “recovery position.” Well, the recovery position is to be up on one side of the body, and the left side suits this purpose just fine. Thus Bravinder’s description placed Floyd in precisely the recovery position the state argues was appropriate.
Nelson also asked Bravinder if the ambulance carried ketamine, and when the answer was affirmative Nelson asked why. The answer, of course, is that ketamine is a powerful sedative that can be used to calm violently resisting suspects, many of whom are violent because of drug overdose.
This both highlights the risk police officers face in handling overdose calls, but also provides a subjectively reasonable basis for the officers to want to wait on the ketamine paramedics believed to be moments away rather than provide care to the apparently overdosed Floyd themselves.
Up next was Derek Smith, who was Bravinder’s paramedic partner on the ambulance (Bravinder was the driver and paramedic, and Smith came across as the senior of the two.
Under cross examination by Nelson, Smith expressed the belief that, “there was no reason the cops couldn’t have started chest compressions on Floyd sooner.”
First of all, there’s no way to know if providing chest compression earlier would have been of any use to a badly overdosed Floyd with existing serious hypertensive and cardiac disease, and a three-fold fatal overdose of meth/fentanyl drug cocktail in his system.
Absent Narcan, which the officers didn’t have, they would have been doing chest compressions on a patient likely already dead or who was otherwise beyond saving.
Further, Smith’s comment is from the perspective of a paramedic with the narrow mission of saving the life of his patient. He knew nothing about what had gone on before he arrived on scene, nor of the many policies and tactical considerations relevant to the police but not to himself.
After all, Smith had the option to “load and scoot” Floyd and immediately evacuate the presence of the angry, threatening mob, all the while able to rely on being defended by the officers if things went bad. Chauvin and the officers did not have the option to simply run away.
To put it another way, just because Smith would have preferred that the officers had provided chest compressions in the presence of the angry, threatening mob, even if it would have added as little as 1% better chance of survival for Floyd, that opinion is completely detached from the broader context with which the officers were obliged to deal. It’s merely an opinion, not an authoritative conclusion, and a poorly informed opinion, at that.
Otherwise, Smith’s testimony was rather boring. In essence the entirety of his testimony was that Floyd was apparently dead when Smith got on scene, he was dead when the ambulance fled the three blocks, he was dead when the fire department joined him, and he was still dead when the ambulance dropped Floyd off at Hennepin County Medical Center.
As with Bravinder, in direct of Smith, Prosecutor Eldridge pushed hard on the notion that Floyd’s death could be attributed to the transient delay of the officers in providing earlier care to Floyd, but again all this ignores the tactical environment in which the officers were making their decisions.
Smith was subject to only direct examination by Eldridge and cross examination by Nelson.
The next state’s witness was Jeremy Norton, a Captain with the Minneapolis Fire Department.
Norton's testimony wasn't that helpful to the state—except, perhaps in acting as a “white knight” for off-duty firefighter and bystander witness Hansen—and to the contrary chunks of his testimony came across as favoring the defence.
Again, Eldridge led direct here, and it was just boring, boring, boring. If anything, it made the fire department look bad.
First the department received a code 2 for a mouth injury, just like the paramedics, then it was upgraded to a code 3 for lights and sirens, just like the paramedics. When the fire department actually got to Cup Foods, however, the ambulance had already fled the angry mob.
As a result, the fire department personnel basically looked around, saw nothing, entered Cup Foods looking for a patient, again saw nothing, and finally came across a police officer in the back of the store who told them they were supposed to be meeting the ambulance three long blocks away. So they loaded back up in their truck and took off to find the ambulance.
Not exactly a sterling example of professional performance.
Now, perhaps this wasn’t the fault of the fire department—maybe they did everything perfectly. But it certainly was not the fault of the police officers, whose only role was to make the medical calls to dispatch. After that the call is out of the officer’s hands. And the more it looks like fault might lay in hands other than the police, the weaker the prosecution’s narrative of guilt looks.
On cross-examination Nelson again scored important points, this time walking Norton through the timeline of events involving when the police placed their medical calls and when the fire department actually showed up. That time interval was approximately 12 minutes, vastly greater than off-duty firefighter Hansen had claimed was typical, and presumably much longer than the officers on the scene could reasonably have expected.
Again, maybe this 12-minute response time was no fault of the fire department, who knows. But it certainly wasn’t the fault of the officers, and accordingly again diminishes the prosecution’s narrative of guilt.
On re-direct, Eldridge tried to do damage control by conflating the time interval between when the police made the medical call and when the fire department arrived, on the one hand, and when the fire department received that call and arrived, on the other. The latter interval may be important in determining fire department performance, but it’s irrelevant to the reasonable perceptions of events by the officers on scene—all they knew was that they’d made the call for code 3 medical, and the fire department wasn’t there yet, and when fire did show up, it was too late.
Norton was subject to direct by Eldridge, cross examination by Nelson.
(Summary acknowledgment Attorney Andrew Branca)
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 03, 2021, 06:00:26 PM
Yes, I've been watching the trial on American Court TV & the commentary there is also very biased against Derek Chauvin. They appear to cherry pick some of the evidence.
But, the video evidence so far demonstrates in the very least that...
1) The use of the neck restraint was an unnecessary use of force once Floyd was handcuffed behind his back & laying prone.
2) That Chauvin failed to provide aid despite Officer Lane twice telling him Floyd had no pulse & him being aware that Floyd was no longer breathing.
3) That Chauvin ignored pleas from bystanders, one of them a trained firefighter/medic, to render aid to Floyd as he was no longer resisting & was clearly in a serious medical state.
I think them points alone fit the charge of 3rd degree murder, which is defined as “causes the death of another by perpetrating an act eminently dangerous to others and evincing a depraved mind, without regard for human life.”
I don't think that conviction will placate the BLM lynch mob, they will only be satisfied with a public execution imo.
I agree, Chauvin continued the knee restraint far too long. He must have known that George Floyd had gone limp after losing consciousness. Like you I think this will be his undoing.
I understand that to prove a charge of 3rd degree murder you have to prove that the defendant acted with a depraved mind and with malice. Personally I believe it was involuntary manslaughter, the definition below fits this case like a glove.
Involuntary manslaughter carries a sentence of up to 10 years and/or a fine of $20,000 in Minnesota.
A manslaughter charge arises when the defendant had no intention to kill, and didn't plan it beforehand, but their actions were reckless or negligent to the point that they could have avoided the killing by acting appropriately.
I certainly agree with your last comment that no matter what the verdict is, it won't be enough for some, Minneapolis can no doubt look forward to more burning, rioting and pillaging.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Angelo222 on April 03, 2021, 07:33:39 PM
I agree, Chauvin continued the knee restraint far too long. He must have known that George Floyd had gone limp after losing consciousness. Like you I think this will be his undoing.
I understand that to prove a charge of 3rd degree murder you have to prove that the defendant acted with a depraved mind and with malice. Personally I believe it was involuntary manslaughter, the definition below fits this case like a glove.
Involuntary manslaughter carries a sentence of up to 10 years and/or a fine of $20,000 in Minnesota.
A manslaughter charge arises when the defendant had no intention to kill, and didn't plan it beforehand, but their actions were reckless or negligent to the point that they could have avoided the killing by acting appropriately.
I certainly agree with your last comment that no matter what the verdict is, it won't be enough for some, Minneapolis can no doubt look forward to more burning, rioting and pillaging.
I can't see him getting anything other than a few years inside for his stupidity.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 03, 2021, 07:42:40 PM
I can't see him getting anything other than a few years inside for his stupidity.
Unless there's a particularly stubborn & stupid juror or 2 who believe that Floyd was dying of a Fentanyl overdose at the time & Chauvin's knee was mere coincidence. A unanimous verdict is required for conviction.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Eleanor on April 03, 2021, 07:48:55 PM
I can't see him getting anything other than a few years inside for his stupidity.
He attempted to make a plea bargain for 3rd degree murder & was willing to spend 10 years in jail. The request was thrown out by the AG because he believed this would not sate the blood lust of the peaceful protestors.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 03, 2021, 08:30:13 PM
He attempted to make a plea bargain for 3rd degree murder & was willing to spend 10 years in jail. The request was thrown out by the AG because he believed this would not sate the blood lust of the peaceful protestors.
That's correct, more details below.
The fired Minneapolis police officer who held his knee to George Floyd's neck agreed to plead guilty to third-degree murder days after Floyd's death, but then-Attorney General William Barr rejected the deal.
Derek Chauvin and the three other officers involved were fired the day after Floyd's death on May 25 and later arrested. Chauvin faces second-degree murder charges and is scheduled for trial in March. The other three are charged with aiding and abetting and are to be tried together in the summer.
The details of the failed deal were first reported by The New York Times.
A former Justice Department official confirmed the failed deal to NBC News, saying that both politically appointed and career Department of Justice officials had rejected the idea.
"His lawyers were trying to rush us, and we didn't want to be rushed," the official said.
Last autumn, Chauvin’s third-degree murder charge was dismissed by Judge Peter A. Cahill in what at least one former prosecutor termed a “stunning blow” to the prosecution at the time. Chauvin’s second-degree murder charge, third-degree assault charge and second-degree manslaughter charge were left undisturbed.
Law&Crime Network host and former Morris County, New Jersey prosecutor Bob Bianchi stressed that second-degree murder charges are much more difficult to prove and convict on—adding that the prosecution would “have to appeal” the court’s decision to toss the lesser murder charge. Appeal they did.
That appeal was also denied.
The state recently tried to have the third-degree murder charge reinstated for Chauvin—as well as new third-degree charges of aiding and abetting murder added for the other three officers involved in Floyd’s death—based on recent precedent in the Minneapolis Court of Appeals.
That case, State v. Noor, held that “a conviction for third-degree murder under Minnesota Statutes section 609.195(a) [depraved-mind murder] may be sustained even if the death-causing act was directed at a single person.” The decision was explicitly marked “precedential” and would seemingly have been the answer that the prosecution was looking for. Not so, according to Judge Cahill as it does not become final and have precedential effect until the deadline for granting review by the Minnesota Supreme Court has expired.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 03, 2021, 08:48:17 PM
I've been debating with BLM supporters who claim this was straight up first degree murder with intent & one of the problems they've struggled with is the, why?.
I must admit I'm struggling with this too.
Chauvin was fully aware he was surrounded by witnesses filming him during the process as well as he & his fellow officers being equipped with audio & visual body cameras.
What on earth would have possessed him, in full view of everyone, to decide he was going to straight up murder Floyd in cold blood in broad daylight?
He can't seriously have thought he'd ever get away with it, surely?
The argument I've got in response was that he knew prosecutions of police officers were particularly rare , but Christ!, would you really take that risk?
I can only conclude Chauvin woke up that morning, or at some time during the arrest, he suffered a complete mental breakdown & lost the power of rational thought.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 03, 2021, 08:51:25 PM
I've been debating with BLM supporters who claim this was straight up first degree murder with intent & one of the problems they've struggled with is the, why?.
I must admit I'm struggling with this too.
Chauvin was fully aware he was surrounded by witnesses filming him during the process as well as he & his fellow officers being equipped with audio & visual body cameras.
What on earth would have possessed him, in full view of everyone, to decide he was going to straight up murder Floyd in cold blood in broad daylight?
He can't seriously have thought he'd ever get away with it, surely?
The argument I've got in response was that he knew prosecutions of police officers were particularly rare , but Christ!, would you really take that risk?
I can only conclude Chauvin woke up that morning, or at some time during the arrest, he suffered a complete mental breakdown & lost the power of rational thought.
Possibly but unlikely in my opinion. I haven't seen it referenced anywhere but if Chauvin takes the stand he might be asked if he knew Floyd previously in some context. There could be more to this tale than has hitherto been revealed.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 03, 2021, 08:58:40 PM
Possibly but unlikely in my opinion. I haven't seen it referenced anywhere but if Chauvin takes the stand he might be asked if he knew Floyd previously in some context.
This has been claimed, that they worked together in a nightclub & had previously clashed.
But I haven't seen this matter raised by either the prosecution or defence.
Snopes Fact Check say's this is a mixture of truth.
True. Maya Santamaria, who owned the building that housed El Nuevo Rodeo club, said that both George Floyd and Derek Chauvin were employed by the club during a period that overlapped in 2019.
Undetermined It is unknown whether Chauvin and Floyd actually knew each other before the officer pinned Floyd to the ground, putting his knee on Floyd's neck before the latter died.
Santamaria told us via phone that while the employment history of Floyd and Chauvin at the club did overlap some, it’s unlikely that the two men knew each other.
“They were in different departments, and in different parts of the building,” Santamaria told us. “I don’t think they knew each other. I think that’s a stretch.”
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 03, 2021, 09:12:06 PM
And I think Chauvin taking the stand is unlikely unless the defence realise they are absolutely screwed & throw Chauvin in for one last roll of the dice.
The prosecution would tear him to shreds over the use of unnecessary force & failure to render aid.
I don't know how he could talk his way out.
(Editor note: Sensible discussion please)
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 03, 2021, 09:24:46 PM
Seems that Chauvin worked as a security guard outside the El Nuevo Rodeo premises in south Minneapolis for some 17 years while George Floyd had been a more recent addition as a bouncer. They certainly knew each other according to the owner of the club but Chauvin was seen as heavy handed and aggressive towards customers while Floyd tended to defuse conflicts.
No doubt this will all come out in due course.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 03, 2021, 09:57:51 PM
Yes, apologies for the silliness. After several reasoned, rational & sensible comments on the subject I couldn't help but lapse into standard form.
Anyway, the point I was trying to make in the silliness was that it would be impossible for him to defend his position.
If his excuse for not adhering to the correct procedure for restraint was the pressure of the moment, that won't stand up.
The defence has already tried to paint the witnesses as an angry mob, the implication being this may have affected Chauvin's thought or judgement.
The problem with that is the witnesses confronting him included 1 young man, an elderly man, several women & 2 young children. Hardly a threatening situation for a cop with 19 years experience.
Also Officer Keung, a rookie, who twice alerted Chauvin to Floyds lack of pulse was also heard asking him 'should we lay him on his side' which obviously would have been safer, but Chauvin declined.
So with bystanders imploring him to render aid, the firefighter/medic offering to render aid, his colleague alerting him to Floyd's condition & no doubt the feeling of Floyd going limp beneath his knee, he persisted in his restraint.
It's no wonder they're trying to point to the drug overdose theory, it seems the only hope they've got of giving the jury any cause for doubt, but, imo, it certainly doesn't appear to be a reasonable one.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 03, 2021, 10:10:02 PM
Several witnesses made reference to Chauvin's nonchalant demeanour as he knelt on Floyd for over 9 minutes.
Fire fighter witness Genevieve Hansen even gave a statement suggesting Derek Chauvin was so laid back than he had his hand in his pocket. As can be seen from the image below, this was an optical illusion.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 04, 2021, 01:14:56 AM
A Summary of the trial - Week 1 Day 4 contd...
The last witness of the day was David Pleoger. Now retired, on May 25, 2020 Pleoger was the MPD Sergeant responsible for the precinct zone in which the Floyd event took place, and the supervisory sergeant over Chauvin, Thau, King, and Lane.
Pleoger was questioned on direct by Prosecutor Schleicher, and on cross examination by Nelson.
When asked by the prosecution if it wasn’t true that sometimes police officers used more force than the circumstances called for, Pleoger answered in the affirmative.
Conversely, when asked by the defence if it wasn’t true that sometimes police officers were compelled by circumstances to use more force than might otherwise be the case, Ploeger again answered in the affirmative.
Both of these answers are correct—the appropriate amount of force is determined by the totality of the circumstances, and it’s both true that greater force than necessary under the circumstances is excessive and unlawful and that the circumstances may require a greater degree of force than might otherwise be the case.
Specifically, although Pleoger as a sergeant would routinely review, in a comprehensive manner, routine use of force events involving his officers, once an event was escalated to a so-called critical incident—such as the death of a suspect, as in the case of Floyd—the use-of-force investigation was escalated out of his hands to higher authority.
As a result, Pleoger never did anything like a thorough use-of-force investigation in this case. At most, he’d reviewed the body camera footage, and even that only at the late request of the prosecutors.
As a result, the defence argued in a period during which the jury had been removed from the courtroom, precisely to allow this argument out of the jury’s hearing, Pleoger might be able to provide the jury with a use-of-force opinion, but only an uninformed opinion, not an informed opinion, much less an authoritative decision.
After this argument outside the hearing of the jury, the jury was called back in and Cahill allowed Schleicher to ask Pleoger a very narrow use-of-force question. Schleicher got the answer he wanted, but the context was so tightly constrained that it caused little harm to the defence.
Because of the jockeying between the state’s efforts to drag a purportedly authoritative use-of-force call out of Pleoger, and the defence efforts to foil this, poor Ploeger was subject to direct by Schleicher, then cross by Nelson, then re-direct by Schleicher, then re-cross by Nelson, and finally a re-re-direct by Schleicher.
(Summary acknowledgment Attorney Andrew Branca)
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 04, 2021, 02:33:56 AM
A Summary of the trial - Week 1 Day 5
The first witness was MPD Sergeant John Edwards whose only real involvement in this event was to take over at shift change from Sergeant Pleoger. Edwards engaged in some routine activities on site, such as having officers run crime scene tape to secure the relevant areas of the scene, begin to search out witnesses who might be willing to give statements, and so forth.
Within an hour or two afterwards, however, when it became known that Floyd had died and this was now officially a critical incident, Sergeant Edwards and every other member of MPD involved knew that their substantive role in the case was effectively over. At that point they did the minimum required to be prepared to smoothly hand over the case to BCA.
This was certainly true of Sergeant Edwards, as we learned through his testimony as the state stepped him through his activities that evening of 25 May 2020. All of these activities were largely administrative in nature, and none of Edwards’ testimony added much substantive value to understanding this case.
Really all the evidence about the event of which Edwards was aware consisted of body camera footage shown to him by the prosecution. This wasn’t a big deal with respect to Edwards but became a bigger deal when the same approach was taken with the next witness, Lt. Zimmerman.
Indeed, so limited was the utility of Edwards’ testimony that the defence did not even bother subjecting him to cross-examination, so all the testimony we have from Edwards was based on direct questioning by the state Prosecutor Schleicher.
The second and final state’s witness of the day was MPD Homicide Lieutenant Richard Zimmerman. It was noted that he is apparently the most senior of MPD’s homicide detectives.
Direct questioning of Zimmerman was conducted by Prosecutor Frank, taking over from Schleicher, and that raises an interesting and noteworthy point.
Today one of the television commentators chattering away while the court was recessed mentioned that the state had some 15 or so attorneys admitted on the case by Judge Cahill.
There is only one defence attorney, Eric Nelson.
Nelson has himself, a newly barred assistant, and that’s it. The situation is rather like a wrestling match in which one competitor fights alone against 10-15 opponents who can tag each other in and out as they like.
On a more practical level, it means, for example, that each prosecutor need have command of every detail of only the subset of witnesses that they intend to personally question—whereas, in contrast, Eric Nelson must have command of every detail of every single witness.
It also means that if any single prosecutor feels, perhaps, that they might be a bit off that day, they can “tag in” a colleague. Eric Nelson can “tag in” nobody.
Perhaps the best way to describe Lt. Zimmerman is “well-seasoned.” He joined the MPD back in 1985, after a few years as a Sheriff’s deputy, back in the days when cops carried a gun, handcuffs, and that was about it. Often, back then, from my own recollection, not even radios—indeed, often not even every squad car had a radio.
Frank had a very specific role in mind for Zimmerman, and it had little to do with the substantive factors of this case. And there’s good reason it had little to do with the substantive factors of this case—because Zimmerman knows virtually none of the relevant evidence of the case.
Much as with Sergeant Edwards, Zimmerman was almost immediately aware that this was going to be a critical incident and promptly handed over to BCA—indeed, as it was in fact handed over within two or three hours of Zimmerman’s involvement.
Zimmerman’s role, then, was largely as a transient caretaker of the case, to ensure the uniformed officers were doing the things they were supposed to be doing to secure evidence, run crime scene tape, canvass for witnesses, and so forth.
But everybody involved, including Zimmerman, was aware that by the time they went to bed that evening this would be a case entirely in the hands of BCA, with effectively zero involvement by MPD.
So, if Frank would not be able to make use of Zimmerman to testify substantively about the case, for what purpose could he use Zimmerman? As a purported expert on MPD use-of-force policies able to provide an authoritative determination that Chauvin’s use of force upon Floyd was unjustifiable.
Before getting to that, of course, Frank stepped Zimmerman through his administrative role on the case, as a transient caretaker, much as Prosecutor Schleicher had done earlier with Sergeant Edwards.
Then we got to the real point of having Zimmerman testify.
Frank asked Zimmerman if he’d been trained by MPD on use of force, if he was familiar with MPD use of force policies, and (importantly) if he’d viewed the body cam footage of the Floyd event.
The body cam footage is important here, because unless Zimmerman had viewed at least that limited body of evidence he’d have zero basis on which to have a use-of-force opinion.
Accordingly, the prosecution had fed him the limited body of evidence consisting of body camera footage specifically so they could ask for his use of force opinion in court, and have that opinion based on more than zero knowledge of the evidence.
And Zimmerman was happy to comply, providing Frank with every answer the prosecutor could hope for.
The placement of a knee on the neck, Zimmerman said, qualified as deadly force, because “it could kill someone.”
Unmentioned here by either prosecution or defence is that the MPD training policies and manual in effect on 25 May 2020 explicitly allowed for—and, indeed, provided photograph illustrations of—knee on the neck use of force as appropriate non-deadly restraint of a suspect. (The city of Minneapolis did pass a law in July 2020, banning just about anything resembling a “choke hold,” but that was obviously new policy adopted after the Floyd event.)
Asked by Frank if a suspect who was handcuffed could still represent a threat to the officer, Zimmerman answered definitely in the negative.
This is, of course, utter nonsense. The reason Thau was looking for a hobble device in the squad car to further restrain Floyd (ultimately the hobble was never used) was because Floyd had kicked at the officers trying to restrain him on the ground—clearly a handcuffed suspect can still be a physical danger to officers.
Indeed, there have been several instances in which handcuffed suspects have shot and killed officers.
Further, the duty of the officer in restraining a suspect is not merely to protect the officer from the suspect, but also to protect the public from the suspect, and even to protect the suspect from the suspect—this last is a genuine factor when dealing with a violently non-compliant, apparently intoxicated, very large and powerful suspect while on one of the busiest intersections in the city, as here.
Frank also asked Zimmerman about the dangers of the prone position for a handcuffed suspect, driving the prosecution narrative that positional asphyxia had killed Floyd, and Zimmerman was happy to talk about how he’d been trained for decades about the dangers of positional asphyxia and the importance of bringing a handcuffed suspect to a seated or recovery position as soon as possible.
Frank asked Zimmerman about the duty of police to provide care to a suspect in need, even if the officers had already called for an ambulance, and Zimmerman affirmed that the officers had such a duty while waiting for the ambulance to arrive.
About this point the defence objected to the line of questioning—likely on the grounds that Zimmerman was speaking in an entirely hypothetical sense without any grounding or foundation in the actual facts of this actual event. This led to a rather lengthy sidebar during which the court recessed for its morning break.
When the court returned, it was clear that Frank had been instructed by Cahill to tie the questioning to the case. It was at this point that Frank asked Zimmerman about his reviewing of the body camera evidence.
With this foundation established, Frank then asked Zimmerman the very narrow question of whether, based solely on that body camera footage and based on Zimmerman’s training and experience, did Zimmerman believe Chauvin’s use of force was unnecessary?
Zimmerman’s response: Totally unnecessary.
And that pretty much concluded direct.
The defect in this line of questioning, from a substantive perspective, is obvious—the officers on scene in general, and Chauvin in particular, were not making their use-of-force decisions based on body camera footage, they were making their use-of-force decisions based on the totality of the circumstances.
Indeed, the body cameras do not even capture what the officers merely saw, because a turn of the head without a turn of the body means the officer is viewing events not captured by the camera.
The body camera obviously doesn’t at all capture non-visible evidence, such as muscular resistance by a suspect, the perception of traffic moving up and down the street only feet away, the knowledge that EMS is en route on a code 3 with lights and sirens, and more.
It’s as if there were 20 possible sources of information driving the use-of-force decision making of the officers on scene, and Zimmerman was asked to give his use-of-force assessment based only one of those sources.
If that’s all the substantive information Zimmerman has, then he’s simply ill-informed, and if he’s ill-informed then his opinion is equally ill-informed.
To his credit, Nelson did an excellent job clarifying this reality, getting Zimmerman to agree to a long list of factors, other than what might be captured on a body camera, as important in making use-of-force decisions.
Nelson also noted that Zimmerman himself could hardly be characterized as anything like a use-of-force expert, with Zimmerman agreeing that as a long-time homicide detective he would only very rarely be involved in the use of violent force on a suspect, and that indeed his primary exposure to use of force events consisted almost entirely of his mandatory annual training—at which he, Zimmerman, was a student, not a trainer.
There are, of course, limits to what defence counsel can do on cross-examination—specifically, defence counsel is not permitted to argue with a witness (despite what you see on television), nor can defence counsel himself testify (again, despite what you see on television).
These limitations were illustrated when Nelson asked Zimmerman if there was any provision under MPD policy in which a knee on neck would be allowed, other than as a purely opportunistic defence technique, and Zimmerman replied that there was not.
Well, the actual MPD policy and training manual indicates that knee on neck is explicitly permitted (or was, at the time of the Floyd event), and even demonstrated photographically.
Now, Nelson could have pulled out that policy, and shoved it in Zimmerman’s face to impeach him on the stand, but today was not the best day to bring that particular club to bear, and especially not to an older gentleman like Zimmerman.
Nelson undoubtedely thought to save that club for a better time when he could bring it to bear from a position of strength, rather than on cross-examination—and at time much more proximate to jury deliberations.
It’s worth keeping in mind that everything happening in court today will have been three weeks in the past by the time the jury goes into deliberations, and in the intervening three weeks the jury will have seen a mountain of additional evidence—much of it evidence presented by the defence in its case in chief.
Overall, Zimmerman was subject to direct by Frank, cross examination by Nelson, and then a very brief re-direct by Frank.
The court closed for the weekend.
(Summary acknowledgment Attorney Andrew Branca)
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Angelo222 on April 04, 2021, 01:03:55 PM
I have always been interested in and followed this case where possible so it is such a relief to have an unbiased summary written so comprehensively. This saves me hours of having to watch videos thankfully. Cheers 8((()*/
I noted several points which the forum might want to discuss.
1. Officer Chauvin was not among the first two responders to Cup Foods call to report someone passing a forged bill. He and his Chinese partner were called to help when George Floyd became uncooperative and aggressive. Remember, Floyd was a big guy, I'm surprised two officers manage to walk him the 50m or so to the patrol car which was parked in front of the Cup Foods store. None of the officers and certainly not Chauvin were to know that Floyd had swallowed pills to hide them from the police.
2. Testimony showed that there was a delay by the EMS emergency ambulance and that poor communication resulted in several lost minutes as firefighters arrived to find no ambulance and had to go into the store to find out what was happening. I'm sure this question is going to become more and more important as the trial continues. We will never know if Floyd could have been saved had a) the EMS ambulance not had to move because of a noisy threatening crowd and b) had the firefighters arrived sooner to help with resuscitation.
3. We heard from Hansen, the off duty rookie firefighter who was stood outside Cup Foods shouting at the police. She insisted several times that the emergency services response times were wrong. She wouldn't accept that the firefighter medics took so long to turn up when their station was a mere three blocks away. Her view of the scene was slightly impeded, she wrongly claimed that Chauvin was kneeling on Floyd's neck with his hand in his pocket. A trick of the light since Chauvin had black gloves on.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 04, 2021, 02:57:07 PM
Can anyone here give a reasonable defence for an arresting officer to continue kneeling on the neck of another human being minutes after that person has stopped resisting arrest and has in fact stopped responding full stop?
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 04, 2021, 03:47:11 PM
Can anyone here give a reasonable defence for an arresting officer to continue kneeling on the neck of another human being minutes after that person has stopped resisting arrest and has in fact stopped responding full stop?
No.
There isn't a reasonable defence to kneel on his neck once he had been handcuffed behind his back & prone on the ground, let alone when he stopped breathing & had no pulse.
That is why the only defence Chauvin has is the absurd idea that the knee never killed him but the Fentanyl did.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 04, 2021, 05:26:04 PM
There isn't a reasonable defence to kneel on his neck once he had been handcuffed behind his back & prone on the ground, let alone when he stopped breathing & had no pulse.
That is why the only defence Chauvin has is the absurd idea that the knee never killed him but the Fentanyl did.
And yet in an online poll conducted by this forum nearly 40% of respondents had more sympathy for the killer than the man he killed.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Angelo222 on April 04, 2021, 05:55:46 PM
Can anyone here give a reasonable defence for an arresting officer to continue kneeling on the neck of another human being minutes after that person has stopped resisting arrest and has in fact stopped responding full stop?
Good question VS. The answer might come later as the trial progresses. Clearly the defence is going down the substance abuse and hiding illicit drugs route as contributing to the cause of death.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Angelo222 on April 04, 2021, 06:09:31 PM
Good question VS. The answer might come later as the trial progresses. Clearly the defence is going down the substance abuse and hiding illicit drugs route as contributing to the cause of death.
I would agree with them and that is why I'm going with involuntary manslaughter as the probable outcome.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 04, 2021, 06:10:50 PM
It appears people support police officers and not the criminals.
It certainly appears that some people support police officers who kneel on the necks of those that they arrest long after they have ceased resisting and long after they have ceased breathing too.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 04, 2021, 06:27:18 PM
The twitter poll has been an unusual one. It now reflects slightly more sympathy for Chauvin after being skewed in Floyd's favour initially.
It’s why I asked my initial question re: what defence can there be for Chauvin’s actions. Presumably in order to sympathise with him more than his victim one would need to put forward a robust defence of his actions, and I’d be interested to know what justification there can be for kneeling on anyone’s neck long after they have ceased bring any sort of a threat to public safety.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Angelo222 on April 04, 2021, 06:43:19 PM
It’s why I asked my initial question re: what defence can there be for Chauvin’s actions. Presumably in order to sympathise with him more than his victim one would need to put forward a robust defence of his actions, and I’d be interested to know what justification there can be for kneeling on anyone’s neck long after they have ceased bring any sort of a threat to public safety.
Have you ever arrested a really big guy on drugs in the middle of a dangerous thoroughfare with a mob standing on the kerb howling abuse at you?
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 04, 2021, 06:50:48 PM
Have you ever arrested a really big guy on drugs in the middle of a dangerous thoroughfare with a mob standing on the kerb howling abuse at you?
No, have you? Is this a good reason to keep your knee on someone’s neck until they are not breathing anymore, even whenit’s been pointed out to you that the guy has no pulse and hasn’t moved for some time?
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 04, 2021, 06:52:22 PM
Have you ever arrested a really big guy on drugs in the middle of a dangerous thoroughfare with a mob standing on the kerb howling abuse at you?
Would you submit to having someone of Chauvin’s weight put his knee on your neck for 9 minutes 23 seconds while you’re handcuffed and lying on the ground and see what shape you’re in by the end of it?
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 04, 2021, 07:07:42 PM
Have you ever arrested a really big guy on drugs in the middle of a dangerous thoroughfare with a mob standing on the kerb howling abuse at you?
Angelo. C'mon dude, they were hardly a 'mob' there were like 2 men (1 of them in his 60's) & some women & children FFS.
There were 4 armed officers there, officer Thao had them under control. (Not that they were ever really out of control, just desperately trying to stop a guy getting tortured)
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 04, 2021, 07:10:51 PM
Would you submit to having someone of Chauvin’s weight put his knee on your neck for 9 minutes 23 seconds while you’re handcuffed and lying on the ground and see what shape you’re in by the end of it?
One thing I will say is we that can't be sure exactly how much pressure he had on his neck & whether the amount of pressure varied.
The autopsy found no bruising or damage to his neck.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Angelo222 on April 04, 2021, 07:46:11 PM
You know how much I love victim blaming so here is just a little.
Floyd made unnecessary fuss & was awkward with the police because, IMO, he had drugs in his car, had been driving under the influence & if found guilty of trying to pass off a fake $20 (whether it's been proven as a fake yet is in dispute) he would probably do a little jail time what with his previous.
He claimed he was claustrophobic & that's why he couldn't get in the police car, which was total horse shit as he'd just left a car. He made the situation more difficult for himself.
But that still didn't give Chauvin the right to 'allegedly'knee him to death.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 04, 2021, 08:39:16 PM
You know how much I love victim blaming so here is just a little.
Floyd made unnecessary fuss & was awkward with the police because, IMO, he had drugs in his car, had been driving under the influence & if found guilty of trying to pass off a fake $20 (whether it's been proven as a fake yet is in dispute) he would probably do a little jail time what with his previous.
He claimed he was claustrophobic & that's why he couldn't get in the police car, which was total horse shit as he'd just left a car. He made the situation more difficult for himself.
But that still didn't give Chauvin the right to 'allegedly'knee him to death.
I agree.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Angelo222 on April 04, 2021, 08:50:11 PM
You know how much I love victim blaming so here is just a little.
Floyd made unnecessary fuss & was awkward with the police because, IMO, he had drugs in his car, had been driving under the influence & if found guilty of trying to pass off a fake $20 (whether it's been proven as a fake yet is in dispute) he would probably do a little jail time what with his previous.
He claimed he was claustrophobic & that's why he couldn't get in the police car, which was total horse shit as he'd just left a car. He made the situation more difficult for himself.
But that still didn't give Chauvin the right to 'allegedly'knee him to death.
He fell asleep in his car after he came out of the Cup Foods store so he was obviously struggling even then to remain lucid. When the store staff came out to confront him he was barely able to keep awake to interact with them. Even his companions in the car, one of whom was one of his drug suppliers, failed to rouse him to drive off. Had he driven off there might be other people dead today.
So taking that into account, the fact he swallowed more pills when he saw police approaching must have impaired him greatly. No wonder two cops were able to frogmarch him some distance to their patrol car outside Cup Foods where Chauvin joined them and it all kicked off.
I watched the original videos played in court last week and Floyd's voice didn't come across like someone being slowly asphyxiated. He was foaming at the mouth and had pains all over, apparently the same reaction he had had previously to the illicit drugs he had taken and this according to his girlfriend.
I strongly suspect that it was the drugs that killed him, Chauvin wasn't to know the extent of what he had taken.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 04, 2021, 09:03:03 PM
He fell asleep in his car after he came out of the Cup Foods store so he was obviously struggling even then to remain lucid. When the store staff came out to confront him he was barely able to keep awake to interact with them. Even his companions in the car, one of whomwas one of his drug suppliers, failed to rouse him to drive off. Had he driven off there might be other people dead today.
So taking that into account, the fact he swallowed more pills when saw police approaching must have impaired him greatly. No wonder two cops were able to frogmarch him some distance to their patrol car.
Both, allegedly, his girlfriend testified she didn't like his male friend, Morries Hall, who has taken the 5th amendment & refused to testify because he would incriminate himself. He definitely sold Floyd drugs.
She also claimed IIRC she believed he had previously bought Heroin from his other friend Shawanda Hill.
https://thenetline.com/who-is-shawanda-hill/
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 04, 2021, 09:05:35 PM
Three people in their 40's, sat in a car all f..ked up on drugs.
What a lovely image for Black Lives Matter.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 04, 2021, 09:14:56 PM
Reliability of post-Mortem fentanyl concentrations in determining the cause of death.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22890811/
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 04, 2021, 09:19:20 PM
Fatal Fix. How an Opioid overdose shuts down your body.
He fell asleep in his car after he came out of the Cup Foods store so he was obviously struggling even then to remain lucid. When the store staff came out to confront him he was barely able to keep awake to interact with them. Even his companions in the car, one of whom was one of his drug suppliers, failed to rouse him to drive off. Had he driven off there might be other people dead today.
So taking that into account, the fact he swallowed more pills when he saw police approaching must have impaired him greatly. No wonder two cops were able to frogmarch him some distance to their patrol car outside Cup Foods where Chauvin joined them and it all kicked off.
I watched the original videos played in court last week and Floyd's voice didn't come across like someone being slowly asphyxiated. He was foaming at the mouth and had pains all over, apparently the same reaction he had had previously to the illicit drugs he had taken and this according to his girlfriend.
I strongly suspect that it was the drugs that killed him, Chauvin wasn't to know the extent of what he had taken.
So either he was docile because of the drugs and didn’t need to be pinned to the ground for nine minutes or he wasn’t and was violently resisting arrest - he can’t have been both.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Angelo222 on April 04, 2021, 10:25:49 PM
So either he was docile because of the drugs and didn’t need to be pinned to the ground for nine minutes or he wasn’t and was violently resisting arrest - he can’t have been both.
If I remember correctly the drug made you sleepy but also rendered you provocative if woken up.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 04, 2021, 10:47:10 PM
Several witnesses made reference to Chauvin's nonchalant demeanour as he knelt on Floyd for over 9 minutes.
Fire fighter witness Genevieve Hansen even gave a statement suggesting Derek Chauvin was so laid back than he had his hand in his pocket. As can be seen from the image below, this was an optical illusion.
There are so many things about this picture that changed my mind about 'involuntary manslaughter'
IMO- From what I see is:
1 It is very disturbing seeing a photograph of man being killed, The bystanders must have experienced some for of trauma. 2. the police officer looks like a hunter in Africa showing his pride at killing an Elephant or other large 'prey'= he looked pleased with himself. Almost posing!
Ignoring pleas to offer aid is a sign that no one was going to claim his 'kill' a term used in hunting sports for someone who stakes a claim to the triumphant 'winner'
Only y observation.
AT present I am not convinced this particular event was racially motivated. On the basis of no evidence of racial abused hurled at FG as he resisted arrest. Also white criminals have also died as a result of this type of restraint.
People who take certain mixture of drugs can become overtly passive and then violent and aggressive their perception of reality is warped.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 04, 2021, 11:12:12 PM
There are so many things about this picture that changed my mind about 'involuntary manslaughter'
IMO- From what I see is:
1 It is very disturbing seeing a photograph of man being killed, The bystanders must have experienced some for of trauma. 2. the police officer looks like a hunter in Africa showing his pride at killing an Elephant or other large 'prey'= he looked pleased with himself. Almost posing!
Ignoring pleas to offer aid is a sign that no one was going to claim his 'kill' a term used in hunting sports for someone who stakes a claim to the triumphant 'winner'
Only y observation.
AT present I am not convinced this particular event was racially motivated. On the basis of no evidence of racial abused hurled at FG as he resisted arrest. Also white criminals have also died as a result of this type of restraint.
People who take certain mixture of drugs can become overtly passive and then violent and aggressive their perception of reality is warped.
Yes there's no known evidence Chauvin was a member or supporter of any far right Neo Nazi, White Supremacist hate groups, & if he really hated black people so much he was willing to murder one in broad daylight then why didn't he just start shooting all the other black people in the vicinity?
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Angelo222 on April 04, 2021, 11:29:28 PM
There are so many things about this picture that changed my mind about 'involuntary manslaughter'
IMO- From what I see is:
1 It is very disturbing seeing a photograph of man being killed, The bystanders must have experienced some for of trauma. 2. the police officer looks like a hunter in Africa showing his pride at killing an Elephant or other large 'prey'= he looked pleased with himself. Almost posing!
Ignoring pleas to offer aid is a sign that no one was going to claim his 'kill' a term used in hunting sports for someone who stakes a claim to the triumphant 'winner'
Only y observation.
AT present I am not convinced this particular event was racially motivated. On the basis of no evidence of racial abused hurled at FG as he resisted arrest. Also white criminals have also died as a result of this type of restraint.
People who take certain mixture of drugs can become overtly passive and then violent and aggressive their perception of reality is warped.
I tried to tell this to Spam already but he doesn't believe me.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 04, 2021, 11:37:04 PM
I tried to tell this to Spam already but he doesn't believe me.
As virtually the entire incident was filmed there will of course be evidence of Floyd’s violent and aggressive behaviour. Like the part where he apologises when he comes out of the car perhaps, or the part where he begs the cops not to kill him.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on April 04, 2021, 11:54:31 PM
As virtually the entire incident was filmed there will of course be evidence of Floyd’s violent and aggressive behaviour. Like the part where he apologises when he comes out of the car perhaps, or the part where he begs the cops not to kill him.
One decent witness did say he saw FG foaming at the mouth. My opinion, not worth anything I know, It could be 50/50 blame for the struggle getting out of hand. However, FG didn't deserve to die that way, and that responsibility would be on the Police officer.
would FG have been so aggressively resistant had he NOT been intoxicated? or feared being jailed for being in possession of drugs with intent to sell?
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 05, 2021, 01:58:37 PM
As virtually the entire incident was filmed there will of course be evidence of Floyd’s violent and aggressive behaviour. Like the part where he apologises when he comes out of the car perhaps, or the part where he begs the cops not to kill him.
Was that before or after he was seen to flail his feet out at the officers who were helping him out of the patrol car again?
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 05, 2021, 02:01:29 PM
One decent witness did say he saw FG foaming at the mouth. My opinion, not worth anything I know, It could be 50/50 blame for the struggle getting out of hand. However, FG didn't deserve to die that way, and that responsibility would be on the Police officer.
would FG have been so aggressively resistant had he NOT been intoxicated? or feared being jailed for being in possession of drugs with intent to sell?
I watched most of the court tapes last week including the one where he was initially arrested in his own car. The look of abject horror on his face was quite discernible. He knew then that he was going back to jail and he wasn't a happy bunny.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 05, 2021, 02:25:22 PM
Thanks VS, I just spent four hours looking for the video you requested, most folks haven't probably seen it so it is worth posting.
Go to. https://lawofselfdefense.com/chauvin-trial-day-3-wrap-up-floyd-was-high-with-foam-around-his-mouth/
Scroll down to McMillian Direct Questioning
The video is directly underneath. Watch from 20.21
Kicking out. 22.18
Resisting arrest by kicking out yes, very distressing to watch, he clearly had some mental health issues IMO. Obviously the police needed to bring him under control but nothing excuses what happened after he stopped resisting IMO.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 05, 2021, 07:13:00 PM
An interesting fact I came across recently which will show just how skewed the justice system is towards the prosecution. Readers might be shocked to learn that the prosecution in this case have no less than 30 attorneys at their disposal whereas Mr Chauvin has one, and that is Mr Nelson.
The prosecution can alternate prosecutors as often as they like but the unfortunate Mr Nelson is on his own every day for possibly up to four weeks or more. That is the scales of justice in America for you.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Admin on April 06, 2021, 01:32:20 PM
An interesting fact I came across recently which will show just how skewed the justice system is towards the prosecution. Readers might be shocked to learn that the prosecution in this case have no less than 30 attorneys at their disposal whereas Mr Chauvin has one, and that is Mr Nelson.
The prosecution can alternate prosecutors as often as they like but the unfortunate Mr Nelson is on his own every day for possibly up to four weeks or more. That is the scales of justice in America for you.
It just goes to show how determined this state is to set an example with Chauvin.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 06, 2021, 03:10:23 PM
A Summary of the trial - Week 2 Day 1
First to testify was Dr. Bradford Wankhede Langenfeld, who was the emergency room physician who treated Floyd upon arrival at Hennepin County Medical Center. It seems likely that Langenfeld essentially considered Floyd dead on arrival. When someone’s been in cardiac arrest for 30 or so minutes, the odds aren’t good. At no time under Dr. Langenfeld’s care was Floyd anything other than flatlined in terms of cardiac function.
In fact, Floyd had little meaningful cardiac activity when picked up by the paramedics on scene, little cardiac activity en route to HCMC, little cardiac activity upon arrival at HCMC, and little cardiac activity after treatment by Dr. Langenfeld. Ultimately it would be Dr. Langenfeld who would officially pronounce Floyd dead at HCMC, but the likely reality is that Floyd died some considerable time prior to the official “call.”
Prosecutor Blackwell made sure to emphasize the importance of initiating prompt care in cases of cardiac arrest, again hitting on the possible criminal liability claim of failure to provide timely medical care. One money quote from Dr. Langenfeld is that every minute CPR is delayed in a case of cardiac arrest means a 10-15% decrease in survival of the patient. Of course, the fact that Dr. Langenfeld possessed this factoid does not mean that it was possessed by Chauvin or the officers on scene, who are, after all, police, not doctors.
Much as was the case with the bystanders, Dr. Langenfeld found himself working with only partial information about what had occurred generally, and about his patient in particular. For example, Dr. Langenfeld had no information about Floyd’s apparent ingestion of a lethal dose of fentanyl/methamphetamine cocktail upon contact by police, and thus could not consider that likely cause of respiratory depression and cardiac arrest result in his differential analysis of Floyd.
Specifically, in his testimony Dr. Langenfeld told prosecutor Blackwell on direct that he had no report that the patient had overdosed on a specific medication for which there might be a specific antidote. In fact, of course, Floyd had overdosed on the opioid fentanyl, for which there is a specific antidote. That information, however, did not reach Langenfeld.
Why didn’t Langenfeld know that Floyd had likely overdosed on drugs? Well, arguably because the paramedics didn’t tell him. Why didn’t the paramedics tell him? Because they themselves had probably not received that information from the officers on scene. Why didn’t the paramedics get the information from the officers on scene? Likely because the angry and threatening crowd compelled the paramedics to do a “load and scoot” to vacate the area of danger promptly, very much limiting the opportunity to exchange information with the officers.
This poses the question, did the angry crowd actually kill Floyd, by interfering with his effective and efficient medical treatment?
Blackwell spent quite a bit of time in direct of Langenfeld getting the doctor to opine that the most likely cause of Floyd’s cardiac arrest was hypoxia, lack of oxygen in the tissues, induced by asphyxia, the inability of the respiratory system to deliver oxygen to the biological systems of the body.
None of that, of course, actually settles the key issue of what actually caused Floyd’s death. Even if asphyxia caused Floyd’s death, that doesn’t tell us that Chauvin killed Floyd via mechanical asphyxiation via compression of the neck. At least, not when there’s a perfectly viable, and evidence-supported alternative explanation for Floyd’s asphyxia—the three-fold fatal levels of fentanyl in Floyd’s system.
After all, as even Langenfeld himself confirmed today, the means by which fentanyl kills its victims is by suppression of respiration. That’s just another form of asphyxiation. And we have actual toxicology results to support the fentanyl levels. There’s literally zero evidence of how much pressure the 140-pound Chauvin might have been applying, or not, to the neck of the 230-pound Floyd.
A common theme running through Dr. Landenberg’s testimony was this: “Based on the information I had at the time …”. Indeed, that’s how he closed out his direct testimony. That is, of course, just another way of saying “I had only limited information about what was going on with this patient and what had led up to his present circumstances, and my expert opinion must therefore be considered profoundly constrained by that limited information.”
On cross-examination by the one and only defence attorney Nelson, who explicitly asked if a fentanyl, methamphetamine, or a combination of the two could cause the hypoxia observed by Dr. Landenberg. The answer was, of course, “yes.”
Nelson also confirmed that the paramedics had never informed Landenberg about the possibility that Floyd’s condition was the result of a drug overdose, probably for the reasons already discussed.
Touching upon the state’s apparent line of argument that Floyd’s long history of opioid abuse meant he was somehow immune to fatal overdose, Nelson explicitly asked Landenberg if a history of abuse meant fentanyl can’t kill someone. The answer was, of course, “no.”
Nelson also managed to get into testimony the following question, exploring further alternative explanations for Floyd’s cardiac arrest: “Would someone with a >75% occlusion of a coronary artery be at substantial risk of cardiac arrest?”
The state objected to the question, and Judge Cahill called a sidebar (he prudently doesn’t allow arguing over objections in the hearing of the jury). When Nelson returned to question Landenberg he proceeded with a different line of questioning, suggesting that Cahill had sustained the state’s objection on the occluded coronary artery question.
Why might Cahill have agreed to not allow that question? Could it be because Landenberg was present as a personal knowledge witness, and not as an expert witness. That means he can testify about what he knows personally about the events in which he was involved, but he doesn’t have the privilege of an expert witness to opine about hypotheticals—if he does, he’s engaged in speculation, and knowledge witnesses aren’t allowed to speculate.
And that was pretty much it for cross of Langenfeld.
Re-direct by Blackwell was pretty weak, as has been the trend in this trial. He touched back on an earlier, weak, line of argument he’d made previously, that fentanyl makes people sleepy, and Floyd was patently not sleepy while he was violently resisting lawful arrest, and that must mean that Floyd could not have been on high levels of fentanyl.
We have the definitive tox results on fentanyl levels, and they were three-times fatal dose. We also have the chemical analysis results of the pills found both in the Mercedes SUV and the squad car, the latter covered in Floyd’s saliva and DNA, and they were a combination of fentanyl and methamphetamine—and the methamphetamine component is obviously a powerful stimulant that would explain away the lack of sleepiness.
(Summary acknowledgment Attorney Andrew Branca)
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 06, 2021, 03:33:38 PM
A Summary of the trial - Week 2 Day 1 cont'd...
Up next was state's witness, MPD Police Chief Medaria Arradondo.
Direct questioning of Chief Arrandondo was conducted by Prosecutor Schleicher, and he returned to his earlier emphasis on the “soft” values of the Minneapolis Police Department—compassion, dignity, guardianship, respect, be courteous, be polite, and so forth. Little or no emphasis was placed on the “protect” part of the “protect and serve” motto common to most police departments.
Arrandondo even testified that it’s the mission of the MPD “to treat all people with dignity and respect above all else.”
By Schleicher’s telling, and with Arrandondo’s agreement, the job of the police department was mostly touchie-feelie, and any use of force was apparently an implicit indication that the officer involved had failed to do the right touchie-feelie stuff.
Schleicher spent considerable time walking Arrandondo through the MPD’s use-of-force policies, as well, several times having the Chief read aloud specific highlighted portions of that policy manual.
Schleicher also spent a lot of time talking about various MPD de-escalation policies. Noticeable as he worked through the list of explicit de-escalation options was that either the officers on scene with Floyd had already executed those steps, or the steps were likely not practical given the circumstances.
One option for de-escalation was that an officer could call for back-up. Well, Keung and Lane got back-up, in the form of Chauvin and Thau.
Another option was to use verbal commands to de-escalate. Well, Lane did that on his initial approach to Floyd sitting in the passenger seat of the SUV, and to which Floyd was non-compliant—SHOW ME YOUR HANDS! Nope—and then forcibly resistant.
Other options were the use of barriers—you mean like using a squad car as a barrier?—and containing the threat—you mean like physically restraining the threat?
It was also important, according to Arrandondo, for the officers to get as much information as they could before responding to the scene. The notion that the officers were limited to the information offered by dispatch, and dispatch in turn was limited to the information offered by the complainant, didn’t seem to be in anyone’s mind.
Chief Arrandondo actually suggested that officers reaching out to the community itself for help is a viable option. So in this case the officers should have sought assistance from, whom, Maurice Hall the purported drug dealer? MMA Williams, who was threatening the officers with physical violence? The off-duty firefighter gal who was calling the officers “b!tch”?
Schleicher also disingenuously referred to a previous argument he’d raised, which was that all this happened to Floyd simply because Floyd attempted to pass a bad $20 bill, an offence normally addressed by police with a mere summons (ticket) to appear in court. Surely that’s nothing to die over, right?
Unstated, of course, is that what might have started as a mere bad $20 call quickly escalated, and solely as a result of Floyd’s own conduct. When approached by officers in his vehicle, he repeatedly refused to show his hands, compelling them to draw their service pistols. As the apparent operator of a motor vehicle, there were additional safety grounds to remove him from the vehicle and temporarily detain him, which includes handcuffing—which technically is not even an arrest, if the detention is transitory.
Then the apparent drugs were discovered, Floyd began to violently resist the officers’ commands, then violently resisted lawful arrest, and bang, we were off to the races.
The officers didn’t do that. Floyd did that. I’m sure they would have been much happier to have simply written him a summons than to get into a physical fight with a 6’ 6” 230-pound man who was disinterested in being arrested that day.
Schleicher also spent quite a bit of time on the MPD “critical decision-making model.” Schleicher must believe this model generally favours the defence, and he’s decided that rather than attempt to avoid the model he’s going to go hard on offense.
The way he does this is to point out that the “critical decision-making model” obliges the police to continually consider the totality of the circumstances in arriving at their use-of-force (and other) decisions. And that’s true.
Schleicher is using this line of argument to suggest that the officers arresting Floyd failed to consider all the relevant factors in a timely manner, continued to use force when the circumstances no longer warranted the use of force, and therefore acted wrongfully.
Then we got to what I’m sure will be the money headline of the day, and that was when prosecutor Schleicher asked if Chauvin’s specific neck restraint was a trained MPD defensive tactics technique. Arrandondo unequivocally stated that it was not.
The question asked if Chauvin’s specific neck restraint was a trained MPD defensive tactic, and Addarondo answered in the negative. But it turns out that, although he doesn’t offer this context in his answer, Addarondo’s negative response is based on a whole wealth of what he perceives as important circumstances.
Specifically, Addarondo was not testifying that the knee on the neck restraint was contrary to policy, per se—he can’t because neck restraints were explicitly permitted by MPD policy in effect at the time of Floyd’s arrest–but rather that it was contrary to policy for the length of time it was applied.
But that’s now just a judgment call. There’s nothing in the MPD policy about any specific length of duration of the neck restraint. Presumably the neck restraint is permitted as long as circumstances warrant. Which begs the question of what the circumstances warrant, which makes it all a judgment call.
It’s also important to recognize that just because a restraint might not be per policy if used as a defensive fighting technique doesn’t mean it couldn’t be justified for some other purpose—such as the trained full-body restraint of a suspect believed to be a victim of excited delirium.
Another complaint Addarondo had about Chauvin’s particular use of force was that the MPD policy in effect at the time allowed only light or moderate pressure to be applied. Based on Chauvin’s so-called “shimmy” body movements and Floyd’s pained expression, Addarondo inferred that Chauvin was applying greater than moderate pressure.
It should go without saying, of course, that there is no way Addarondo can know, by merely looking at a video, how much pressure Chauvin was actually applying—and remember, guilt must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Further, we know that the medical examiner found zero indication of trauma to Floyd’s neck.
As for Floyd’s pained expression, we have the earlier testimony of his co-addict lady friend that the same pills had previously caused Floyd an overdose involving such tremendous intestinal and body pain that he’d begged her to take him to the hospital—and this was only about a year prior to Floyd’s death, and involving essentially identical pills as those he consumed on May 25, 2020. I’ve little doubt that Floyd was indeed in great pain, but there’s an evidence-based explanation for that pain other than Chauvin’s knee.
Of course, Addarondo never mentioned a word about Floyd’s overdose on the fentanyl/methamphetamine cocktail potentially contributing to his painful demise. After all, even if we presume Chauvin’s knee was out of policy, that doesn’t mean it killed Floyd, given the perfectly legitimate alternative explanations for Floyd’s cause of death.
Schleicher, like Blackwell before him, also touched on the argument that the officers failed to provide Floyd with timely care.
Cross-examination was, of course, conducted by attorney Nelson.
Nelson emphasised how far removed Addarondo was from hands-on policing. Indeed, given the hedging in Addarondo’s responses it seemed likely that he’d only ever physically arrested a very small number of suspects before managing to get himself promoted off the street.
Nelson also got Addarondo to concede that his expertise on MPD use-of-force was at the policy level, and not at the tactical hands-on training level. He could speak to what MPD policy might allow or prohibit, but his knowledge of how the officers were actually trained or what they were obliged to do on the street in carrying out their duties was not a topic on which he could claim great knowledge.
And here we get to the point in cross that illustrates how dangerous it is to rely on the media’s general coverage of only the state’s narrative of guilt. You’ll recall that on direct Addarondo had explicitly stated that Chauvin’s knee technique appeared to him not a trained MPD technique, and Schleicher had Addarondo quote extensively from that policy—but only certain portions of that policy.
On cross-examination, Nelson had Addarondo read aloud the portions of policy that Schleicher had skipped, and it was all the portions that made the policies conditional. For example, that the force used by officers must be objectively reasonable in light of the facts and circumstances known to the officer at the time force is used.
Nelson also had Addarondo acknowledge that the purported objective legal standard of the US Supreme Court decision of Graham v. Connor, generally agreed upon as a core principle of the MPD policy manual, also required that this purportedly objective analysis consider all the subjective knowledge, training, experience, and circumstances known to the officer at the time. Further Graham v. Connor cautioned against judging the actions of the officers with 20:20 hindsight, noting that officers often had to make split-second decisions under dangerous circumstances. Perfection cannot be expected from mere human beings, merely reasonableness.
When Nelson asked Addarondo whether it was true that all MPD policies relevant to use-of-force, to EMS response, to medical treatment, whatever, all of them are by their explicit language situationally dependent, Addarondo was obliged to answer “Yes, I would agree with that.”
Several times during cross of Addarondo Nelson made use of a clever gambit used once or twice on other state’s witnesses, especially those claiming some level of expertise on a relevant issue. When the witness realises that Nelson was leading them to a conclusion with which they didn’t want to agree, they’d start hedging their testimony—well, I’m not sure, it depends, I don’t know if I would agree with that.
In response, Nelson would suggest that perhaps it would be better to defer that specific question to, say, a use-of-force expert. The witness would readily agree, because they saw this as an escape from the question they didn’t want to be compelled to answer.
What this gambit does rhetorically, however, is substantially undercut the witness’ apparent expertise on the subject being asked about. Hey, look, even they are saying they don’t really know that much about this subject, and we should instead listen to a real use-of-force expert (which, unstated, the defence will be glad to present to all you jurors in a few days).
Previously Nelson had gotten away with this little trick without objection by the state. Today, however, when Nelson pulled this trick several times with Addarondo, Schleicher was all over it, objecting each time Nelson made use of it. Despite Schleicher’s best efforts, however, each time an objection was raised Nelson would look over at Judge Cahill with the most innocent “who me?” expression you’re ever likely to see on a lawyer’s face, and Cahill overruled the state’s objection.
Nelson also explored with Addarondo the reality that there was a distinction between use-of-force policy, on the one hand, and permissible use-of-force techniques, on the other. That is, all use of force had to exist within the boundaries of policy, but whereas there might be one “best practice” handcuff technique, for example, that was formally taught by MPD trainers, there might be two or three alternative techniques that while not formally taught also fell within the boundaries of MPD policy. To this proposition Addarondo agreed.
Nelson had, superficially, less success when he attempted to get Addarondo to concede that a police use of force often looked ugly and unpleasant to bystanders, who therefore might be likely to find objectionable even perfectly appropriate uses of force.
The state objected to this line of questioning as speculative, and Cahill upheld the objection, so Addarondo did not have to answer—but, of course, the jury heard the question proposed in the first place, and in many respects the question itself was more important than any answer.
Perhaps the most notable line of questioning of Addarondo by Nelson occurred when Nelson showed the Chief two videos of Chauvin’s knee near Floyd’s neck, but with the videos shot from different angles—one was the bystander video, the other a body worn camera video.
When asked if the bystander video made it appear that Chauvin’s knee was on Floyd’s neck, the Chief answered that it did appear to be located there.
When then asked if the body worn camera video made it appear that Chauvin’s knee was not on Floyd’s neck, but on Floyd’s shoulder blade, the Chief agreed that this also appeared to be the case.
The state would respond on re-direct by having Addarondo claim that he noticed this discrepancy only in the last few seconds before the paramedics swept up Floyd, and that prior to that point it appeared throughout that Chauvin’s knee was on Floyd’s neck—but I can’t help but wonder if this video angle disparity might not encourage some of the jurors to view the videos with more skepticism than might otherwise have been the case.
Importantly, Nelson also got Addarondo to explicitly agree that just because a suspect was handcuffed did not mean they were no longer a threat to officers, others, or themselves. Indeed, Addarondo explicitly agreed that a handcuffed suspect could still be a threat to officers by kicking, biting, spitting, or other means.
There was also a great deal of discussion about neck chokes (which means airway chokes in this context) versus neck restraints (which includes both constrictive neck constraints intended to cause loss of consciousness, permitted only under deadly force circumstances, on the one hand, and neck restraints intended to, well, restrain the suspect without inducing loss of consciousness, permitted when dealing with non-compliant suspects, on the other hand). With respect to the neck constraints, either arm or leg constriction was explicitly permitted by MPD use of force policy at the time (since changed to prohibit).
Frankly, however, I don’t really think it matters. Either Chauvin’s knee killed Floyd, or the drug overdose killed him. There’s no actual evidence that Chauvin’s knee applied sufficient pressure to kill, and there’s plenty of evidence supporting the hypothesis that it was the three-fold fentanyl overdose, the hypertensive and cardiac disease, and the poor judgment of Floyd to fight police that caused his death. Further, if Chauvin’s knee was not inflicting killing force, it was almost certainly permissible as a restraint intended to protect Floyd from himself, rather than as a use-of-force intended to neutralize an active threat against others.
There was a bit of re-direct after cross-examination—this is where Schleicher got Addarondo to state that he’d only seen Chauvin’s knee on Floyd’s shoulder blade in those last few seconds of the video—and then re-cross and a very short re-re-direct, but that’s about it.
(Summary acknowledgment Attorney Andrew Branca)
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 06, 2021, 04:02:49 PM
A Summary of the trial - Week 2 Day 1 cont'd...
Final witness was Katie Blackwell, whose current job is the MPD Inspector for the 5th Precinct. On the 25 May 2020, Inspector Blackwell was the Commander of the MPD Training division, including the academy and all annual and in-service training.
Prosecutor Schleicher conducted the direct questioning of Blackwell.
Much of Inspector Blackwell’s testimony was foundational in nature, documenting that Chauvin had taken various use-of-force, de-escalation, and other relevant trainings in the years immediately prior to 25 May 2020. This was boring, but technically necessary.
At one point Schleicher did get Blackwell to testify that a photograph shown to her of Chauvin kneeling on Floyd didn’t look like anything taught as MPD training. Again, however, one must take care to parse the specific words of the question and answer. Just because something is not taught as a trained technique does not mean it violates MPD policy. Further, just because something violated MPD policy does not mean it killed George Floyd.
Schleicher also spent time with Blackwell exploring the issue of positional asphyxia. The state has to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Were there no fatal levels of drugs in Floyd’s system, positional asphyxia might be a reasonable inference of cause of death based on the facts of this case. In the context of the three-fold fatal levels of fentanyl, however, it's difficult to see how positional asphyxia gets one to guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
And, again, it’s yet another different angle being played by the prosecution on cause of death. Was it asphyxia induced by compression of the neck and body? Was it positional asphyxia? Was it failure to provide timely medical care? Was it a combination of all three? By what mechanism? And all in the context of the fentanyl overdose, for which only Floyd can accept responsibility.
A good indication of the relative unimportance of the Blackwell testimony to the defence is that Nelson spent only about two minutes on cross examination. During that time he seemed to be looking to cast doubt on exactly what training Chauvin actually received, regardless of what the formal documentation stated, but it never seemed to go anywhere, and he dropped that line of questioning, and his cross of Blackwell, promptly.
So ended day 6 of the trial.
(Summary acknowledgment Attorney Andrew Branca)
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 06, 2021, 05:23:23 PM
Is there any chance of receiving a completely impartial account of proceedings?
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Eleanor on April 06, 2021, 07:06:36 PM
Thanks VS, I just spent four hours looking for the video you requested, most folks haven't probably seen it so it is worth posting.
Go to. https://lawofselfdefense.com/chauvin-trial-day-3-wrap-up-floyd-was-high-with-foam-around-his-mouth/
Scroll down to McMillian Direct Questioning
The video is directly underneath. Watch from 20.21
Kicking out. 22.18
I wish I hadn't watched that video.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Eleanor on April 06, 2021, 07:28:52 PM
What I am about to say may sound trite and ill informed, both of which it is. But he didn't half have a lot to say for someone who couldn't breathe.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: IndigoJ on April 06, 2021, 07:32:07 PM
been watching every minute of this , wow the Chief's evidence was pretty damning that will stay with the jury it is an uphill battle for the defence to rebut this
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 06, 2021, 08:14:58 PM
His superiors were always going to chuck him under the bus.
Any sane man can see the knee was completely unnecessary once Floyd was handcuffed prone.
Again, the subsequent failure to render aid is also totally damning to his defence.
He's not getting away with this imo.
Excessive use of force & disregard for human life will secure a minimum of murder 3 imo.
They don't even need to prove intent.
"without intent to effect the death of any person, causing the death of another by perpetrating an act eminently dangerous to others and evincing a depraved mind, without regard for human life"
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 06, 2021, 08:56:33 PM
What did the training experts say?
Minneapolis Police Department (MPD) training coordinator Mr Mercil told the court that officers are taught to use force in proportion to a suspect's level of resistance and it was "very important to be careful with the person".
"We tell officers to stay away from the neck when possible" he said, adding that officers are told to place body weight on a suspect's shoulders when reasonable.
Mr Mercil testified that based on the training that officers receive, Mr Chauvin should only have used that manner of neck restraint if there was "active aggression" involved.
He said that Mr Floyd had no ability to resist or show aggression once he was face down on the ground.
Mr Mercil told the court that Mr Chauvin should have recognised that it was "time to de-escalate the [level of] force" once Mr Floyd fell unconscious, and that Mr Floyd should have been moved into a different position to avoid asphyxiation.
Earlier in the day, Sgt Ker Yang, a crisis intervention training coordinator, confirmed that Mr Chauvin had completed the department's 40-hour practical training course and his "ultimate goal" should have been to assess Mr Floyd's medical condition during his arrest.
Use of force experts opinion: The force was excessive (& the sky is also blue)
Problem being that they have no way of knowing what pressure if any Chauvin applied. If Chauvin had applied pressure the suspect would have reacted. Floyd was almost incapacitated by the illicit drugs he swallowed, they alone had the ability to kill him according to the medical experts.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 06, 2021, 09:15:03 PM
Problem being that they have no way of knowing what pressure of any Chauvin applied.
Agreed, however the act of applying the knee was still knowingly dangerous & unnecessary in itself & as testified by his superior......
"We tell officers to stay away from the neck when possible".
"Mr Floyd had no ability to resist or show aggression once he was face down on the ground."
Sgt Ker Yang: Mr Chauvin had completed the department's 40-hour practical training course and his "ultimate goal" should have been to assess Mr Floyd's medical condition during his arrest.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 07, 2021, 06:25:38 AM
Interesting that Morries Hall, the alleged drug dealer and counterfeiter who was in the Cup Foods store with George Floyd and in the front passenger seat of his SUV when police arrived apparently fled Minnesota after the killing but has since been arrested on a string of felony charges. Seems he even pled guilty to attempted strangulation of his pregnant girlfriend in 2019 and as part of a plea agreement was ordered to stay away from her. He was stopped by police in March and the woman was found in the car.
Morries appeared by Zoom from custody yesterday at the Chauvin trial. His attorney told the judge that Morries intends to take the Fifth Amendment against self incrimination if called to testify. She told the court that Morries is potentially facing third degree murder, counterfeiting and other charges in connection with the death of George Floyd.
Doesn't the s..mbag look pretty in a suit and tie as he sits in the county jail?
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 07, 2021, 06:40:16 AM
A Summary of the trial - Week 2 Day 2
Today was a terrible day for the prosecution. After the judge dismissed Mercil from the witness stand, Prosecutor Schleicher appeared visibly shaken and angry given the mauling his case had just received. At one point Mercil testified the he himself had personally kept a suspect physically restrained until EMS had arrived on scene, behavior which the state has been arguing for over a week was misconduct on the part of Chauvin.
Even worse, not only did the cross-examination of MacKenzie by the defence also go badly for the prosecution, it went so badly that Nelson informed the court that he intended to re-call MacKenzie as a defence witness when he presented his case in chief.
There were two other witnesses today, neither of which went particularly badly for the state, although in the case of one it was only because the prosecution was saved by the bell when the court recessed early in the day—that doesn’t save the prosecution, that witness will be back tomorrow. I anticipate that the defence is going to have a field day with him on cross-examination, as well.
Morries Hall 5th Amendment Argument
Before the jury was brought into the courtroom today, some discussion about the complication of Morries Hall, the reported drug dealer in the Floyd’s Mercedes SUV, announcing he was going to plead the 5th Amendment if called to testify in the Chauvin trial.
Hall has a real problem. If he provided Floyd with the drugs that likely were the actual cause of death, under Minnesota law Hall is looking at 3rd degree murder. Naturally, he doesn’t want to testify in the Chauvin trial only to have that testimony used against him in his own trial.
There’s no doubt that Judge Cahill will respect Hall’s right to assert the 5th. The only question is whether there might be some areas of questioning in which Hall could participate that do not incriminate him.
This seems unlikely, and of course Hall’s own attorney doesn’t want him to be compelled to say a word about anything, but Judge Cahill has asked the defence and state to write down the questions they’d like to ask Hall, and Cahill will decide if any of them will be allowed.
It’s worth noting that Hall “appeared in court” via a Zoom video link from jail where he is currently awaiting trial on other charges.
(Summary acknowledgment Attorney Andrew Branca)
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 07, 2021, 07:09:00 AM
Problem being that they have no way of knowing what pressure if any Chauvin applied. If Chauvin had applied pressure the suspect would have reacted. Floyd was almost incapacitated by the illicit drugs he swallowed, they alone had the ability to kill him according to the medical experts.
The two post mortem reports do not put his death down to a drugs overdose but to his having been knelt on.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 07, 2021, 07:24:13 AM
The two post mortem reports do not put his death down to a drugs overdose but to his having been knelt on.
The medical examiner's report does not mention asphyxiation. According to prosecutors, in charging documents, early results "revealed no physical findings that support a diagnosis of traumatic asphyxia or strangulation."
PS. Neither post mortem report made any reference to having been "knelt on"!
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 07, 2021, 07:27:44 AM
The medical examiner's report does not mention asphyxiation. According to prosecutors, in charging documents, early results "revealed no physical findings that support a diagnosis of traumatic asphyxia or strangulation."
PS. Neither post mortem report made any reference to having been "knelt on"!
OK, what do they both conclude was the cause of death? A fatal drug overdose?
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 07, 2021, 07:36:26 AM
OK, what do they both conclude was the cause of death? A fatal drug overdose?
Time will tell what exactly was the cause of death but CARDIOPULMONARY ARREST is stated on the medical examiner's report.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 07, 2021, 07:50:08 AM
A Summary of the trial - Week 2 Day 2 cont'd...
First state's witness was MPD Sergeant Ker Yang, Crisis Intervention Training Coordinator.
Yang’s testimony, focused on crisis intervention policies of MPD, did little to advance any narrative of guilt for the state, especially after the defence on cross examination of Yang was able to get him to concede that all these policies were contingent on practicability and safety of the scene.
Next up was MPD Lieutenant Johnny Mercil, Use-of-Force Trainer.
Mercil testified at the start that he was currently on medical leave.
In any case, he was active as a trainer during the period preceding the Floyd events during which Chauvin would have received his department use-of-force training and policy instruction, which is what makes Mercil’s testimony relevant.
Mercil is also a genuine fan of Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu (B[Name removed]), saying (as many practitioners do, in my experience) that he had “fallen in love with the sport.” This was elicited on direct, led by Prosecutor Schleicher, no doubt to buttress Mercil’s credibility, as was the direct testimony of Mercil about his expertise in hand-to-hand force techniques as both a trainer and a street cop, and his mastery of MPD use-of-force policies.
Schleicher made use of the MPD use of force continuum. If at this level of the continuum, officer can do this, but not that, correct. Mercil answered in the affirmative. But if at that level of the continuum, officer can do that, but not this. Again, yes.
Schleicher would also pose simplified and hypothetical scenarios only minimally representative of what occurred with Floyd and ask if the use of, say, a neck restraint in that hypothetical would be reasonable. Of course, the answer from Mercil, as intended that narrow and specific question, would be, no, unreasonable.
Missing from all of this direct, of course, was any context around the complex dynamics and circumstances that often surround a police use of force event. That Schleicher wants to avoid any such discussion is understandable, because doing so provides an appearance for at least reasonableness, if not outright justification, for Chauvin’s use-of-force decisions and conduct with respect to Floyd.
Another common routine from Schleicher when doing direct on state’s witnesses who have any purported use-of-force expertise is to show them the photo of Chauvin apparently (but perhaps not actually) kneeling on Floyd’s neck and asking, “Is this an MPD trained neck restraint?” Invariably the answer is in the negative.
Once again, Schleicher touched on positional asphyxia, and once again note that this doesn’t really help the state prove Chauvin’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt in the context of Floyd’s ingestion of a three-fold fatal dose of fentanyl.
Defence attorney Nelson began by asking questions related to Mercil’s time as a street cop, with a particular emphasis on the tendency of suspects being subject to arrest to come up with all kinds of nonsense about why they shouldn’t be arrested that day.
Dangerous job, being a police officer? Yes. Are people generally unhappy about being arrested? Very rarely are they happy, Mercil answered. Do suspects frequently engage in a wide variety of behaviors to avoid arrest, including fighting, arguing, making excuses? Yes, they do, answered Mercil.
Indeed, when asked if he himself had ever disbelieved a suspect’s claim of a medical emergency as an apparent effort to avoid arrest, Mercil answered that he personally had done so.
All of this, of course, undercuts the part of the prosecution narrative that is relying on Floyd’s purported pleas and excuses about claustrophobia and anxiety and crying out for mama. Perhaps all of that is real—but a reasonable officer must also consider that maybe much of it is simply an effort to avoid arrest.
Nelson also once again put the use of pressure and body weight techniques in a favorable light. The state wants to present Chauvin’s knee in a negative light, as deadly mechanical asphyxiation, or as a “blood choke” as attested to by MMA Williams. In fact, however, the use of pressure and body weight to restrain a suspect was adopted by the MPD because it was a lesser intensity of force than the prior practice of using strikes—either barehanded, or with batons, or even with weighted gloves—to compel compliance. Mercil concurred.
The take home message for the jury is that Chauvin’s knee, far from being a public execution in a public street, was a lesser force than would otherwise have been required.
Whereas Schleicher wants to pretend that all of Chauvin’s use of force and other decisions should have been based solely on the needs and desires of Floyd, Nelson once again had the state’s witness concede that under the MPD critical decision-making model the officer must consider a wide breadth of factors beyond just the suspect, including the officer himself, his partners, any bystanders—especially angry or threatening bystanders.
Schleicher had described use of force in a very static and binary way—once a suspect stops resisting, the officer should immediately stop his use of force, period. But Nelson got Mercil to agree that if that suspect had been forcibly resisting the officer only moments before, that would be a factor weighing in favor of continuing to apply force even after apparent resistance had ceased.
Additional factors that a reasonable officer would take into account in deciding how much force to apply and for how long included a disparity in size between the officer and the suspect—and as we know, the 6’ 6” 230-pound Floyd was substantially larger than the 5’ 9” 140-pound Chauvin—as well as the circumstance in which a suspect not only fought police, but fought multiple officers—exactly as Floyd did in this instance.
When asked if additional use-of-force factors included if the suspect was believed to be on drugs, and whether being on drugs could give a suspect exceptionally great strength, Mercil agreed to both statements.
When asked explicitly if any of the video of the event showed Chauvin placing Floyd in a “choke hold” (in this context meaning a respiratory choke but the term has been used with careless disregard for accuracy) Mercil was obliged to answer that it did not.
When asked if a carotid choke, or what MPD would refer to as an “unconscious neck restraint” required both of the carotid arteries to be compressed, Mercil answered that it did. So much for MMA expert Williams’ testimony to the contrary.
Further, when asked how quickly unconsciousness occurred when a carotid choke was placed, Mercil answered “less than 10 seconds.” Clearly, then Floyd was not being subject to a carotid choke for the large majority of the 9 minutes or so Chauvin had his knee in place, and likely never during that period.
When asked if Mercil trained officers that a suspect who had become unconscious could regain consciousness, get back into the fight, and perhaps even be more aggressive than previously, Mercil responded that he did.
This, of course, is a rationale for Chauvin maintain his knee across Floyd’s back even after Floyd lost consciousness.
As noted above, Nelson also explored with Mercil whether there were circumstances in which it would be appropriate for an officer to maintain a neck restraint for a substantial period of time, and Mercil conceded that there were.
Sometimes to maintain the neck restraint for however long it took EMS to arrive, asked Nelson? Mercil answered that he, personally, had maintained restraint on suspects for the duration required for EMS to arrive.
To ensure the point: The state’s own use-of-force expert testified on cross that he personally had engaged in use-of-force conduct that the state had been using to demonise Chauvin as an unlawful killer.
Nelson also again re-emphasized the reality that the officer involved in a use-of-force event must consider not just the suspect, but also the presence of an angry and growing mob observing what might well look like an ugly use of police force, and Mercil agreed that was the case.
On the issue of providing timely medical care, an issue the state pushes with particular energy, Nelson had Mercil agree that while MPD policy is to provide care as soon as possible, that must take into consideration the safety of the scene, and that the MPD policy actually requires that it first be safe for the officer to provide care before the officer has the duty to provide that care.
Indeed, factors such as whether a suspect had just been fighting with the officers was huge in determining whether an officer could reasonably provide care—especially if that “care” would be chest compressions requiring the suspect to have their handcuffs removed. Mercil answered in the affirmative.
Later, on re-direct, Schleiter asked Mercil if bystanders merely taking videos would constitute a reason to not provide care. The answer, of course, was no.
But that merely provided Nelson with the lay-up opportunity on re-cross to ask whether a mob shouting insults and outright threats would constitute such a reason—and that was conduct of the mob in this event—and the answer to that, of course, was yes.
Similarly, Nelson hit back on the state’s emphasis on the whole “recovery position” narrative in the context of hypothetical positional asphyxia. Might there be circumstances that would prevent putting a suspect in a recovery position? Mercil answered that there were.
It was at this point that Nelson showed Mercil a series of photographs captured from the body worn camera of Officer Lane, and showing Chauvin’s knee on Floyd from the angle down Floyd’s proned body.
Photo 1: Where’s Chauvin’s leg in this image? On Floyd’s neck? Or on his shoulder blades and back. Mercil: Shoulder blades and back.
And in photo 2? Same. Photo 3? Same. Photo 4? Same.
This, of course, fundamentally undercuts the prosecution’s narrative of guilt that it was Chauvin’s knee on Floyd’s neck that killed Floyd.
Are there circumstances like those already discussed where would be appropriate to maintain presence of leg across shoulder blades and back in order to ensure control of the suspect? Yes, there are, Mercil answered. For as long as 10 minutes? It’s possible.
In other words, the use of the restraint can be justified not only to compel compliance of the suspect in the first place, but to ensure that the suspect maintains compliance moving forward—especially given the experience and concern that unconscious suspects can revive and be even more violent than they were prior, even if that restraint is being held in place for as long as 10 minutes. And that’s not just for the safety of the officer, but also for the officer’s partners, for bystanders, and even for the suspect himself.
It was after Nelson was done with cross examination that Schleicher attempted to salvage something for the prosecution by showing a still photo of the bystanders, pointing to some holding phones, and asking if people taking videos was a good enough reason to maintain a restraint. Mercil answered that video taking by bystanders was not a sufficient reason.
That’s when on re-cross Nelson pulled up the exact same photo that Schleicher had just used, and pointed out that in the picture MMA Williams was clearly being physically restrained from advancing on the officers by the arm of another bystander pulling him back.
Would the threat of imminent physical violence from bystanders be a sufficient reason to maintain restraint on a suspect? If the crowd is shouting that they’re going to slap the “F” out of you, that you’re a “p-word,” that you’re a bum, would that be sufficient to cause the officers to be alarmed about the prospect of imminent physical violence from the bystanders?
Yes, Mercil answered, it would.
(Summary acknowledgment Attorney Andrew Branca)
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 07, 2021, 08:10:12 AM
You don’t have to say anything more but you might like to read this
Editor’s Note (3/29/21): The murder trial of Derek Chauvin, the former Minneapolis police officer charged in the death of George Floyd, began with the defense arguing that Floyd died of underlying medical conditions and drug use. This contradicts two autopsy reports—one by the Hennepin County Medical Examiner’s Office and the other by private doctors commissioned by Floyd's family—that ruled the cause of death was homicide. This story from June 2020, written by 12 physicians, explains how inaccurately portraying the medical findings from Floyd’s autopsy emboldens white supremacy under the cloak of authoritative scientific rhetoric.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 07, 2021, 08:36:28 AM
A Summary of the trial - Week 2 Day 2 cont'd...
Next witness was MPD Officer Nicole MacKenzie, Medical Support Coordinator
Direct examination was by Schleicher, he had MacKenzie testify about how officers had a duty of care to suspects, that Chauvin had CPR and other training that would qualify him to provide emergency care, and that such care must be provided by the officer even if an ambulance has already been called. This was all particularly the case if the suspect was unresponsive, if the suspect was in handcuffs, if the suspect was in the prone position, and so forth.
Isn’t it true, Nelson asked MacKenzie, that you train officers to consider not just the suspect, but the totality of the scene? Yes, she replied.
Isn’t it true that police officers also have a competing duty of safety to themselves, their partners, to bystanders, that paramedics, for example, don’t have? To the point that if the scene is unsafe, if the officers haven’t already announced a code 4 “all safe,” that EMTs will stage a distance away until they are told safety has been achieved. Yes, MacKenzie replied.
And isn’t it true that the safety concern might come not from the suspect himself, but from angry bystanders? Indeed.
We keep seeing Nelson circle back to this reality, and it’s a potent view of the events around Floyd’s death. It raises the legitimate question of whether it was, in fact, the angry bystanders who in effect “killed” Floyd by interfering with the officers’ ability to provide Floyd with the attention and care which he’d otherwise have received.
Indeed, their angry presence compelled the paramedics to do a “load and scoot” of Floyd, delaying his effective treatment, and resulting in further delays when the fire department could initially not find the re-located ambulance.
Along these lines, Nelson also touched on a new issue, that of agonal breathing. This is a kind of “last gasp” desperate type of breathing a body near death engages in, and is generally considered an ineffective form of respiration and a sign of really desperate physiological condition.
Isn’t it true, Nelson asked, that agonal breathing could be misinterpreted by officers as just breathing? Yes, answered MacKenzie. Would this be a more likely misinterpretation if the scene was noisy, disruptive, had the presence of a loud angry mob? It would, answered MacKenzie.
Nelson noted that one of the CPR training slides previously shown by Schleicher on direct questioning of MacKenzie had indicated that one of the reasons an officer could justifiably cease performing CPR was if the circumstances were not safe enough to allow continued CPR. Would this also mean that unsafe circumstances could justify not starting CPR in the first place, even where CPR would otherwise be warranted. Yes, answered MacKenzie.
A highlight of the cross of MacKenzie occurred when Nelson pulled up another slide from the training materials. This one showed a picture of a type seen many times, intended to illustrate in dramatic form just how lethal fentanyl is.
The picture showed a vial of heroine, with a small bit of powder in it—that small amount of heroine represented a fatal dose. Beside it was a second vial, with a much smaller amount of a powder—that represented a fatal dose of fentanyl. Finally there was a third vial, with a truly miniscule amount of powder—that represented a fatal dose of a particular common variant of fentanyl.
One can only imagine the effect this had on a jury that is naïve to the lethality of fentanyl, especially given that death by fentanyl overdose is the obvious explanation for Floyd’s death as an alternative to Chauvin’s death knee.
The prosecution raised an objection, and there was a lengthy sidebar. When Nelson returned to cross, he immediately moved on to another topic, so perhaps Cahill upheld the state’s objection to the vials image.
Nelson began to explore the question of excited delirium with MacKenzie. This was a topic that MacKenzie trained MPD officers on, so she had expertise, and Chauvin would have received this training, so the knowledge is relevant to his decision-making with respect to Floyd.
You’ll recall that we can hear the officers discussing concerns about excited delirium on their BWC videos.
The importance of excited delirium for the defence is that it explains both a lot of Floyd’s erratic behavior, raises genuine concerns of super-human strength on the part of the already very large Floyd, provides a justification for the sustained restraint of Floyd’s entire body from foot to head as that’s part of the excited delirium protocol for police, and more.
Naturally, the prosecution objected, and there was another sidebar. When Nelson returned he again promptly moved on—but, we’ll learn, not because he was giving up on excited delirium—and not without having yet another line of questioning for MacKenzie that would prove severely damaging to the state.
Here Nelson began to ask again about the reasons that arriving paramedics might do a “load and scoot.” Why that approach, if the patient needs care?
One reason, MacKenzie answered, was that the patient might need immediate care that could only be provided at the hospital, such as emergency surgery.
Understood, replied Nelson, but might there be another reason?
Yes, answered MacKenzie. Unfortunately, and this might be hard to believe, she said, but there have been instances in which paramedics were attacked by an angry crowd. If that’s a concern, the paramedics might do a load and scoot purely for reasons of their safety.
Exactly as happened in the case of the paramedics arriving at the Floyd scene.
Is one of the reasons the ambulance might do a load and scoot is not just the safety of the paramedics, but that the presence of an imminently threatening crowd would make it difficult or impossible for the paramedics to focus on providing proper care to their patient?
Yes, answered MacKenzie.
On re-direct Schleicher asked MacKenzie, that officers shouldn’t expect to only have a duty to provide care under perfect circumstances? MacKenzie agreed.
Schleicher then asked MacKenzie for her definition of a hostile crowd.
Her answer: A growing contingent of people, yelling, being verbally abusive to those providing scene security, acting in manner that could interfere with care.
Exactly as the mob was conducting itself at the Floyd scene.
It was at this point, when both sides had completed today’s questioning of MacKenzie, that it was revealed that the state had objected to Nelson’s asking MacKenzie about excited delirium. Rather than fight that objection, Nelson took a different approach entirely.
He informed the court that he intended to recall MacKenzie as a defence witness for his own case in chief.
Not only was MacKenzie’s testimony, as a state’s witness, incredibly damaging to the state itself when Nelson was limited to the role of cross-examination, and limited by the state’s own scope on direct, Nelson was going to bring MacKenzie back as a defence witness, where he would be in control of the scope of direct, and the state would find itself limited on cross examination.
And that was it for state’s witness MacKenzie—until we next see her as defence witness MacKenzie.
(Summary acknowledgment Attorney Andrew Branca)
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 07, 2021, 08:38:33 AM
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 07, 2021, 08:51:36 AM
A Summary of the trial - Week 2 Day 2 cont'd...
Final witness was Sergeant Jody Stiger, of the Los Angeles Police Department, who has been retained by the state prosecutors as an expert witness on use-of-force tactics and policy. He stated that he was on vacation.
Prosecutor Schleicher as per usual explored the various experiences of the witness with LAPD including his knowledge of use of force in police arrests. He also served in the department's Safer Cities initiative. Stated that he was a tactics instructor for six years and had travelled to other police departments and agencies within the US to compare use of force tactics.
Asked about his presence as an expert witness in the death of George Floyd, stated that he had viewed all the videos and training materials provided by the prosecution. Schleicher asked if he had reached an opinion and what factors he had taken into account. Stiger opined that the force was excessive. Asked if the force used against Floyd was appropriate to the offence of passing of a counterfeit $20, states that it was a minor offence and that the force used was excessive.
Asked if a large person would constitute a risk, answered no. Asked if Floyd was offering resistance, answered yes that officers were justified. But once he was prone on the ground the officers should have eased up. Agreed that Floyd offered resistance both inside and outside of the vehicle. Added that officers should have de-escalated the situation once Floyd was on the ground.
Asked about the hobble device used to shackle the legs of suspects to prevent them kicking officers, Stiger agreed and smirked when adding that it was also used to stop suspects from kicking out the windows of police vehicles. Agreed that officers felt that Floyd had started to comply which negated the necessity to use the hobble.
Court ended for the day.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 07, 2021, 09:32:06 AM
Is Scientific American an arm of BLM? Perhaps you could point out specifically which parts of the article are false or propaganda, starting with this paragraph:
Editor’s Note (3/29/21): The murder trial of Derek Chauvin, the former Minneapolis police officer charged in the death of George Floyd, began with the defense arguing that Floyd died of underlying medical conditions and drug use. This contradicts two autopsy reports—one by the Hennepin County Medical Examiner’s Office and the other by private doctors commissioned by Floyd's family—that ruled the cause of death was homicide.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 07, 2021, 09:42:49 AM
Is Scientific American an arm of BLM? Perhaps you could point out specifically which parts of the article are false or propaganda, starting with this paragraph:
Editor’s Note (3/29/21): The murder trial of Derek Chauvin, the former Minneapolis police officer charged in the death of George Floyd, began with the defense arguing that Floyd died of underlying medical conditions and drug use. This contradicts two autopsy reports—one by the Hennepin County Medical Examiner’s Office and the other by private doctors commissioned by Floyd's family—that ruled the cause of death was homicide.
The entire article and the other blogs which accompany it are clearly BLM related.
PS. If you don't like the summaries don't read them!
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 07, 2021, 10:00:17 AM
Well stop disrupting the forum then and let those who wish to read it do so without having to navigate silly comments interspersed between posts.
I didn't disregard the postmortem results, I choose not to read biased racist opinion about them.
How rude. There is nothing silly about pointing out to that the post mortem results clearly stated George Floyd's death was homicide and not as a result of self-inflicted drugs overdose as you and your far right blog would prefer to have us believe. The fact that you consider my remarks "silly" and "negative" speak volumes. i suggest if you don't want any comments on this thread that you lock it to all but yourself and Angelo.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 07, 2021, 03:53:51 PM
How rude. There is nothing silly about pointing out to that the post mortem results clearly stated George Floyd's death was homicide and not as a result of self-inflicted drugs overdose as you and your far right blog would prefer to have us believe. The fact that you consider my remarks "silly" and "negative" speak volumes. i suggest if you don't want any comments on this thread that you lock it to all but yourself and Angelo.
As you well know, this forum is based on facts and not sentiment. The post mortem reports make no reference to 'knee on neck' as that is beyond the doctor's remit. Doctors have to deal with what is in front of them and leave the semantics at the front door.
We have already heard evidence that the non prescription drugs ingested by Floyd were capable of killing him given the right circumstances. No doubt as the trial progresses the defence will provide their own medical experts who will speak to this. I for one look forward to that testimony.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: barrier on April 07, 2021, 03:59:48 PM
As you well know, this forum is based on facts and not sentiment. The post mortem reports make no reference to 'knee on neck' as that is beyond the doctor's remit. Doctors have to deal with what is in front of them and leave the semantics at the front door.
We have already heard evidence that the non prescription drugs ingested by Floyd were capable of killing him given the right circumstances. No doubt as the trial progresses the defence will provide their own medical experts who will speak to this. I for one look forward to that testimony.
Is homicide a cause of death? homicide caused by say, asphyxiation would be, but that would be up to a jury to decide if it were the case.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 07, 2021, 04:00:45 PM
As you well know, this forum is based on facts and not sentiment. The post mortem reports make no reference to 'knee on neck' as that is beyond the doctor's remit. Doctors have to deal with what is in front of them and leave the semantics at the front door.
We have already heard evidence that the non prescription drugs ingested by Floyd were capable of killing him given the right circumstances. No doubt as the trial progresses the defence will provide their own medical experts who will speak to this. I for one look forward to that testimony.
There was no sentiment in any of my posts. Two post mortems concluded George Floyd's death was a homicide. That means he didn't kill himself, someone else killed him. Having viewed the footage it's pretty clear to me (and I suspect most people without an agenda either way) who that someone else was and how the homicide was perpetrated. So whilst I concede the post mortem does not say "knee on neck" that is the logical conclusion of both reports.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 07, 2021, 04:08:28 PM
For anyone interested in where the BLM rioting first showed it's ugly head..
Read about the shootings of...
Trayvon Martin(killed in self defence by a civilian he was beating)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trayvon_Martin
Michael Brown in Ferguson Missouri. (Gunned down by an officer he'd attacked & had attempted to take his fire arm.)
Tamir Rice, The tragic shooting of a 12 year old boy by an officer in self defence. (Tamir was playing with a toy fire arm, the officer did not know it was a toy)
I've read the official DOJ evidence & reports on all these killings & they were all legally justified self defence, but BLM are still demanding 'justice' for them.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 07, 2021, 04:46:16 PM
Is homicide a cause of death? homicide caused by say, asphyxiation would be, but that would be up to a jury to decide if it were the case.
The cause of death is the specific injury or disease that leads to death. The manner of death is the determination of how the injury or disease leads to death. There are five manners of death (natural, accident, suicide, homicide, and undetermined).
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 07, 2021, 04:47:44 PM
There was no sentiment in any of my posts. Two post mortems concluded George Floyd's death was a homicide. That means he didn't kill himself, someone else killed him. Having viewed the footage it's pretty clear to me (and I suspect most people without an agenda either way) who that someone else was and how the homicide was perpetrated. So whilst I concede the post mortem does not say "knee on neck" that is the logical conclusion of both reports.
Homicide is not a cause of death as explained in my last post.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 07, 2021, 04:48:50 PM
Tamir Rice, The tragic shooting of a 12 year old boy by an officer in self defence. (Tamir was playing with a toy fire arm, the officer did not know it was a toy)
I've read the official DOJ evidence & reports on all these killings & they were all legally justified self defence, but BLM are still demanding 'justice' for them.
They would do. Any excuse to further their racist cause.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: barrier on April 07, 2021, 04:56:43 PM
The cause of death is the specific injury or disease that leads to death. The manner of death is the determination of how the injury or disease leads to death. There are five manners of death (natural, accident, suicide, homicide, and undetermined).
Thanks, much as I thought.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 07, 2021, 05:32:17 PM
Homicide is not a cause of death as explained in my last post.
I didn’t say homicide was the cause of death I said two reports concluded Floyd’s death was a homicide.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 07, 2021, 05:35:43 PM
A Summary of the trial - Week 2 Day 3
Session starts with Prosecutor Steve Schleicher continuing direct examination of Sergeant Jody Stiger of the Los Angeles Police Department, who is an expert witness on the use-of-force tactics and policy. Eric Nelson defending as per usual.
Schleicher commences questioning in relation to a composite of photos taken as Floyd was placed in the prone position after being removed from the vehicle. Stiger indentified that Chauvin had his left knee on Floyds neck and his right knee on his back throughout the restraint period. He also identified the pain compliance procedure effected by Chauvin on Floyd's fingers. Stiger added that the pain compliance procedure was continued throughout the restraint according to the camera footage provided to him.
Stiger stated that the severity of the crime didn't change. That the suspect did not pose an immediate threat to the five officers or that Floyd was not actively resisting while in the prone position. Asked about the MPD Defense & Control Response Training Guide with respect to active agression which allows specific actions by officers in response to agression by suspect. Stiger opined that no force should have been used when Floyd was in prone position. That force exerted by Chauvin on Floyd can be defined as deadly force.
Asked if he had ever had to arrest someone in front of a hostile crowd, state's affirmative. Asked about the crowd which was presentthe night Floyd was arrested states they were not a threat as they were concerned for Mr Floyd. Asked if Chauvin had sufficient crowd distraction training, replies in the affirmative. When asked by Schleicher how long the restraint had continued after Floyd stopped responding verbally, replied about 6 minutes. End of direct.
Defence attorney Nelson now cross examined Stiger asking if he ever testified previously as an expert in police use of force to which he replied only in LA. Asked if entire training was wholly in accordance with LAPD policy, replied in affirmative. Admitted that techniques can vary between police departments. Admits never had any training by MPD. Admits that has not seen any training videos made by MPD. Asked about MPD training materials he had received in order to provide a substantive report.
Asked about the numerous use of force cases he had dealt with and the Graham v Connor precedent. Nelson introduced MPD Code of Practice on use of force. Nelson reads from COP, that decision on force lies with the officer at the scene and not the reviewer with hindsight. Nelson introduced the concept of the totality of the circumstances.
Asks Stiger about his claim that Chauvin applied an excessive use of force. Nelson repeats the various factors which an officer has to take into account. Stiger agreed that a non risky situation can suddenly become a risky situation. Stiger agreed that inherent risk with every call. Agreed that all of the facts should be considered before attending a call.
Stiger asked if Chauvin and other officers acted reasonably given the details from dispatch. Notably that Chauvin had been dispatched twice due to the escalation at the scene. Nelson states that dispatched heard a commotion over the radio so summed addition officers to the scene. That there was a heighten concern. That when Chauvin arrived he knew that there had been an issue with the call involving a large man under the influence. That Floyd was actively resisting the officers. Stiger agreed that Chauvin could have stunned Floyd but did not do so. Stiger agreed that Floyd was actively resisting when taken to the squad car. Agreed that Floyd said that he couldn't breathe when being put in the squad car.
Nelson asks Stiger if he has ever had a suspect feign a condition to which he replied in the affirmative. Stiger accepted that when the futility of the efforts to put Floyd in the back seat of the squad car became clear they put him on the ground in the prone position. Stiger agreed that officers asked Floyd what drugs he had taken. Agreed that foaming at the mouth was indicative of drug ingestion. Agreed that putting Floyd in the prone position was reasonable. That such a person can still cause mischief. That a person who continues to kick may require more forceful action. That the scene of an arrest can be chaotic. That sometimes things can be missed.
Nelson plays a video to the court where it is alleged Floyd says, "I ate too many drugs!" Stiger couldn't make it out.
Stiger agreed that shortly after Floyd was put in the prone position that they called for EMS in a non emergency situation. That they considered use of the Hobble device but ultimately decided not to use it which was a de-escalation.
Agreed that officers reassessed the priority of the EMS call. That this coincided with a crowd gathering. Agreed that the use of force sometimes looks bad to the onlooker. Agreed that compliant suspects sometimes become non compliant.
Shows Stiger the MPD training materials from March 2020 which Chauvin received training on. Nelson references fact that crowds are dynamic and can change suddenly. That crowds are distracting. That name-calling can be seen as a specific threat. That officers have to decide on what to do next in context of that perceived threat.
Nelson asks Stiger about the comments coming from the crowd including, "If you touch me I'm going to slap the f..k out of you" which he accepted was a threat. Stiger agrees concept of control the head control the body as being standard protocol training. Asks Stiger if he is aware of MPD training that cuffs should be removed with caution, he replied in the negative.
Nelson references the knee to the neck and shoulder protocols in Ground Control techniques. Stiger agreed that he was aware that MDP had authorised use of neck restraints. Agreed that Chauvins knee was more to the base of the neck than on the neck.
Schleicher on redirect asks Stiger if positional asphyxia occurs more when there is pressure on the neck or the body. Stiger states any additional pressure on the body. Asks Stiger to confirm if both defendant's knees were on Floyd during entirety of the restraint to which he concurred.
Shows Stiger bodycam footage from officer Lane showing Floyd being put into the back seat of the squad car in some distress. Stiger confirms that in his opinion force applied by the defendant was excessive and not reasonable. Asked Stiger about defendant asking suspect to relax. States not necessarily a de-escalation. Confirms obligation of care in custody.
Schleicher points out that officers effecting neck and shoulder restraints in trading video were doing so on an unhandcuffed individual.
Nelson in re cross examination reminds Stiger that he was not there on the day, that he would not know about the stiffness of his body to which he agreed. Asked about the number of peer reviewers in training protocols.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 07, 2021, 05:38:12 PM
I believe the difficulty arose as the initial report made no reference to homicide but the press release did.
Decedent experienced a cardiopulmonary arrest while being restrained by law enforcement officer(s) Other significant conditions: Arteriosclerotic and hypertensive heart disease; fentanyl intoxication; recent methamphetamine use.
I can’t find any cause of death given in that report, what’s missing? Oh right, it’s in the title CARDIOPULMONARY ARREST COMPLICATING LAW ENFORCEMENT CASE TITLE: DECEASED: DATE AND HOUR OF DEATH: 5-25-20; 9:25 p.m. DATE AND HOUR OF AUTOPSY: 5-26-20; 9:25 a.m. PATHOLOGIST: Andrew M. Baker, M.D. FINAL DIAGNOSES: SUBDUAL, RESTRAINT, AND NECK COMPRESSION
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 07, 2021, 05:50:03 PM
I can’t find any cause of death given in that report, what’s missing?
See above...I have attached both official files.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: carlymichelle on April 07, 2021, 08:30:15 PM
im not in anyway defending what the police officers did but is it posssible george would have died of the OD anyway even if police had not been there??
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 07, 2021, 09:28:51 PM
A Summary of the trial - Week 2 Day 3 cont'd...
Next up was Senior Special Agent James Reyerson, of the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension. Direct examination is by Assistant Minnesota Attorney General Matthew Frank.
Frank stated he conducts criminal investigations into the use of force. That spent 6 months training with NYPD and four years thereafter on the streets. Had transferred to the DEA to investigate narcotics activity in NYC and later investigated drug cartel activity in Arizona. Moved back to home in Minnesota.
Was hired as a fraud agent by Dept of Commerce in Minnesota. In 2018 moved to Bureau of Criminal Apprehension.
Is case agent for the current investigation and incident that occurred on 25 May 2020. Is now employed by force investigation unit. Is responsible for all aspects of the investigation.
States that he was called out by supervisor at 9.45pm and reported to the City Hall to interview officers involved. Only knew that a critical incident had occurred. Was briefed at City Hall and initiated critical incident protocols before transiting to the scene.
Has seized two $20 bills in a manila envelope and a glass pipe from boot of the squad car. Arranged for two squad cars to be lifted and taken to the BCA headquarters to a secure area for processing. BCA crimescene team processed vehicles on 27 May. Secured video footage from Cup Foods and Dragon Wok. States that Cup Foods store volunteered video but Dragon Wok refused and so had to serve them with a search warrant to secure video harddrive.
Frank shows video taken from the Dragon Wok. Depicts Floyd and Morries arriving in Mercedes SUV, former driving. Both exit vehicle, Floyd seen unsteady on his feet and being led by Morries across the street to Cup Foods store. Morries goes inside leaving Floyd outside initially. Delay while mixup with videos is sorted out, Frank embarrassed.
Reyerson asked if blood samples were taken, replies in the affirmative. Also received autopsy and toxicology report also received showing preliminary findings that Floyd had been under the influence of some substance. Mercedes SUV secured before being searched and processed. Squad car 320 reprocessed where a pill was found in the back seat. Also obtained medical records and County Medical Center for George Floyd.
Watched composite video compiled from Facebook footage and police bodycam. Reyerson states video shows both Chauvin knees on Floyd's back up until moment paramedic arrived.
Nelson in cross examination has Reyerson confirm that some 50 BCA agents and some 25 FBI agents were involved in the case. That 200 witnesses were interviewed, many of whom were not witness to the event. That female owner of the SUV driven by Floyd was also interviewed. That almost 450 BCA reports have been generated.
Asks Reyerson to confirm that there was no question of the defence having put a pill in the 320 squad car. Reyerson confirms in the affirmative. (Obviously BCA missed the pill the first time the car was processed)
Nelson has Reyerson confirm that certain matters in case were not consistent with normal practise.
Nelson shows a video showing Chauvin getting up from Floyd. References the video where Floyd says, "I ate too many drugs" and Reyerson agrees. Refers to the liquid on the street immediately beside Floyd which was in fact water from the squad car air-conditioning unit.
Frank in re direct refers to words spoken by Floyd which Reyerson hadn't previously viewed. Confirmed that defence did not put pill in squad car.
Nelson on re re direct asked Reyerson to confirm he did not know if squad car was running on gas on electric while it was parked, confirms in affirmative.
Delay while parties sort out mixed-up video.
Frank continues redirect with agent Reyerson. Asked Reyerson if he had since viewed the video, affirms. Plays video yet again and confirms Floyd actually said, "I ain't do no drugs".
Nelson again on re re direct asks Reyerson about the Dragon Wok video. Published and views video. Reyerson confirms Morries Hall takes something out of his backpack and throws it along the street. States consistent with someone attempting to conceal something.
Next witness was McKenzie Anderson, Bureau of Criminal Apprension, a forensic scientist. Worked for a private laboratory before moving to the BCA. Does sample collection and body fluid identification. Works in the biology DNA section. Joined crimescene team in 2014 becoming a team leader two years later.
Explained that the laboratory is divided into multiple sections which deal with specific areas of specialisation. Affirms on call a week at a time. Been to 30 crime scenes in last 12 months. Laboratory is independently assessed and accredited.
Confirms being called to crimescene on 25 May 2020. Confirms responded with a technician and a photographer. Arrived on scene at 1.15am on 26 May for about 2 hours. Confirms learned that employee of Cup Foods had reported an attempt to pass a counterfeit bill, that suspect had been arrested, there was a struggle and moved to the grind. Became unresponsive and moved to hospital.
Arrived at scene to find the Mercedes SUV and a squad car 320 parked behind it. Was made aware that there was video of the incident. Court views photos taken by BCA photographer.
Vehicles put on a transport and taken to BCA premises at St Paul for processing. Confirms checked for blood after being briefed that there had been a struggle in the squad car.
Frank shows several photos of Mercedes SUV in BCA garage. Anderson confirms money bills found in the SUV between centre console and passenger seat. Confirms requested by AG office to do a second search of the vehicle on 9 December 2020 to collect additional items from centre console. Confirms identification of additional items in SUV including a Suboxone packet, an unopened Suboxone packet and two pills in the front centre console.
Anderson confirms processing of squad car 320 on 27 May 2020. Frank shows photos of the squad car in the BCA garage. Items were recovered and documented including a black strap, a pair of trainers. Admits that she left a pill on the backseat floor of the squad car. Confirms requested to process squad car again and collect pill for identification. Also found portion of further pills and powder on back seat of the squad car. Analysis testing of the pill revealed that it was positive for saliva. DNA testing confirmed a match with George Floyd.
Confirmed that 8 blood stains found in the squad car were DNA tested. All samples matched George Floyd.
Defence attorney chose not to cross examine.
Next witness was Breahna Giles, forensic scientist in the drug chemistry section of the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprension.
Direct examination by Matthew Frank.
Confirms analysis for controlled substances. Confirmed analysed a glass pipe. Performed a presumptive test and a confirmatory test. Analysed residue revealed THC or marijuana. Confirms additional testing of two white round tablets marked RP and 2 over 10 on alternate sides. Did not recognise markings. Analysis of tablets revealed they were methamphetamine and fentanyl. A further pink tablet tested positive for methamphetamine. Two further small pieces of tablet also tested positive for methamphetamine.
Nelson in cross examination sought clarification of the pill sizes and test results. Sought confirmation that other unidentified substances were found which were probably fentanyl.
Final witness was Susan Neith, forensic chemist at NMS Labs in Pennsylvania.
Direct examination by Erin Eldridge.
Confirms pharmaceutical experience. Analysis substances for presence of controlled substance or other pharmaceutical drugs. Performed approximately 6000 tests, approximately 4000 of which were quantitative analysis.
Confirms that she received three pills for testing and did quantitative analysis on them all. Confirms that they were not complete tablets, round, nothing out of the ordinary. Gave monogramming details of tablets. Photographed tablets before quantitative testing. Confirms testing report showing presence of methamphetamine and fentanyl.
No cross examination.
Court ends.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 07, 2021, 09:29:54 PM
im not in anyway defending what the police officers did but is it posssible george would have died of the OD anyway even if police had not been there??
It was always possible Carly but remember he only swallowed the extra pills to hide them from the police. The felon drug dealer Morries Hall who was first seen in the Cup Foods store pacing up and down before passing something to an agitated Floyd was also in the car with him when the initial police arrived. Morries chucked his stash away but the police saw him doing it.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Angelo222 on April 08, 2021, 01:39:28 PM
It was always possible Carly but remember he only swallowed the extra pills to hide them from the police. The felon drug dealer Morries Hall who was first seen in the Cup Foods store pacing up and down before passing something to an agitated Floyd was also in the car with him when the initial police arrived. Morries chucked his stash away but the police saw him doing it.
For sure I have a teensy weensey bit of empathy for George Floyd but the reality is that he was a nasty piece of work with a long criminal record for numerous drug offences and at least one armed robbery. He claimed to have moved to Minneapolis for a new start but his methamphetamine and fentanyl abuse followed him.
I do feel sorry for Derek Chauvin because he didn't get up that morning unlike Floyd and think oh my...will I continue my criminal activities today...will I pass some counterfeit currency to the mugs at Cup Foods and buy some opioids from Morries Hall with the proceeds.
Chauvin was careless imo, no more and no less. He didn't deserve the BLM faux outrage heaped upon him, he didn't deserve to lose his job, his home and his way of life. One stupid mistake in the heat of the moment and he could be looking at ten years in federal prison. Pathetic!!!
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 08, 2021, 03:43:05 PM
A Summary of the trial - Week 2 Day 4
First state's witness today is Irish American Dr Martin Tobin from Freshford in Ireland, a physician in pulmonary and critical care medicine at the Hines VA Hospital and Loyola University Medical School in Chicago.
Direct questioning by Jerry Blackwell.
Asks Dr Tobin to confirm what his specialisms are. Affirms that he specialises in pulmonology and criticare care medicine. Clarifies that pulmonology is all to do with the lungs, chest wall etc. Clarifies been a physician for 45 years.
Affirms that currently works in ICU in Chicago. Been at Hines VA in Chicago for 32 years. Previously a registered doctor in Ireland and in England. Affirms that is engaged in medical research since 1981 which relates to patients with breathing difficulties. Authored a large text book on mechanical ventilation called Principles and Practice of Mechanical Ventilation which The Lancet refers to as the Bible of mechanical ventilation. Has authored several other books and lectures regularly. Has published a lot of work on basic science in The Journal of Applied Psysiology.
Affirms that has been working in respiratory psysiology since 1981. Had spent 5 years before that investigating lung disease. Replies no when asked if he knows others in his field who has been studying respiratory psysiology for 46 years.
Asked if he has served as an expert witness previously, replies yes and all to do with medical malpractice. Asked if he has ever testified in a criminal case previously, replies no. Has testified in court previously about 50 times. Affirms that he is not being paid for testifying in this case. That State of Minnesota contactef him.
Affirms that he has formed an opinion in the cause of George Floyd's death. States that Floyd died from a low level of oxygen and this caused damage to his brain which also caused a PEA arrhythmia which in turn caused his heart to stop. States has also been caused asphyxia or low level of oxygen. Asked if he had formed an opinion as to what caused the low level of oxygen in Floyd, Dr Tobin states that it was shallow breathing, small breaths that weren't able to carry the oxygen through his body.
Blackwell introduces a video which shows how oxygen travels around the body.
Asked what occurred in this case. States that his prone position in handcuffs with a knee on his neck and back. Explains what dead space is in context of breathing.
Admits assisting in creating an illustration to show the officers positions while restraining George Floyd. States that Chauvin's knee was on Floyd's neck for 90% of the time. Explains how breathing works in some depth to the jury. Compared the expanding of the lungs to the movement of a bucket handle. At the same time the chest is expanding from side to side like a pump handle. Blackwell introduces an exhibit showing the movements involved in breathing. Defence attorney Nelson objects to exhibit and judge rules sustained.
Asked if Floyd's breathing was impacted by the handcuffs, Dr Tobin states that the police were forcing his left wrist high up so that his breathing was impeded. Basically on the left side it was like he had had a lung removed so there was virtually no opportunity for air to enter into the left side of his chest leaving him totally dependent on the right side. Blackwell introduces a video showing the situation.
Witness explains that being pinned down on the street has a major role in Floyd not being able to breathe. Illustration shows Floyd pushing against the street with his fingers and later pushing against a tyre with his knuckles. Explains Floyd is using his fingers and knuckles in an attempt to crank up his air intake.
Asked about the knee on the neck, Dr Tobin states that it would exclude air getting into the passageway. Dr Tobin then opens his shirt neck and demonstrates compression on his own neck. He explains that the upper throat or hypopharynx area is particularly vulnerable, has no cartilage around it and extremely small to breathe through.
Blackwell introduces exibit showing hypopharynx which Dr Tobin uses to explain breathing. Explains that hypopharynx is also controlled by the size of the lungs. As the lungs expand so too does the hypopharynx. States that had Chauvin placedvhisvknee on the hypopharynx then that area would have been occluded but he moved his knee slightly over time so reaction was delayed. Defence makes further objection as jury had been invited to put hands on their own necks as Dr Tobin does a demonstration. Judge tells jurors they can do so if they wish.
Dr Tobin states that there is variation over time as to where Floyd's head was and as to where Chauvin had his knee. Asked about calculating the force exerted, witness responds in the affirmative. As the space narrows it becomes increasingly difficult to breathe. Further time out.
Blackwell introduces a chart showing effect of narrowing of passageway. Witness explains mathematical relationship between pressure loss, flow and narrowing of the airway. Explains the with narrowing the effort to breath becomes great and eventually unsustainable. Explains that Chauvin's knee caused a narrowing of the hypopharynx. Shows photo showing Chauvin's left boot off the ground meaning that half his entire weight (91.5 lbs) was on Floyd's neck.
Asked to characterise Floyd's oxygen levels for the first 5 minutes and three seconds that Chauvin was on top of him, the witness responds that we know that his oxygen levels were high enough to keep his brain alive because he continued to speak. Further time out and mid morning break.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 08, 2021, 05:30:28 PM
For sure I have a teensy weensey bit of empathy for George Floyd but the reality is that he was a nasty piece of work with a long criminal record for numerous drug offences and at least one armed robbery. He claimed to have moved to Minneapolis for a new start but his methamphetamine and fentanyl abuse followed him.
I do feel sorry for Derek Chauvin because he didn't get up that morning unlike Floyd and think oh my...will I continue my criminal activities today...will I pass some counterfeit currency to the mugs at Cup Foods and buy some opioids from Morries Hall with the proceeds.
Chauvin was careless imo, no more and no less. He didn't deserve the BLM faux outrage heaped upon him, he didn't deserve to lose his job, his home and his way of life. One stupid mistake in the heat of the moment and he could be looking at ten years in federal prison. Pathetic!!!
There’s plenty of people in prison for their “careless mistakes”, why should Chauvin be any different from them?
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 08, 2021, 06:01:29 PM
A Summary of the trial - Week 2 Day 4 cont'd...
On resumption Blackwell introduces the subject of oxygen levels in adults. He introduces exhibits showing lung volumes in the body while participating in various movements. Blackwell returns to the compression of the hypopharynx by Chauvin's knee and asks witness to explain how this would affect lung volume. Witness responds that the reduction in lung volume would have the effect of constricting the hypopharynx. Explains that anyone placed in the prone position results in a reduced lung volume estimated at about 24%. That lung reserves are also reduced. Adds that a 24% reduction in lung capacity also reduces oxygen reserves in the lung. Blackwell asks why someone with covid or pneumonia is placed in the prone position, witness responds that with some patients they do improve but that doesn't apply to people with normal lungs. Asked about people sleeping in the prone position, witness states that normal lungs have sufficient reserves to overcome any reduction in lung capacity.
Asked about the officers knee being on back or side, witness affirms that they will all reduce reserves. That Floyd's reserves reduced with the officers knees on his back. Calculates the reduction of being about 43% in oxygen reserves, of which 24% is simply being in the prone position. Blackwell introduces other illustration exhibits showing the effect of the lung volume on the hypopharynx opening in the sitting, prone and with a knee on the back.
Asked if there was a point in time when Floyd had so little oxygen that he lost consciousness, witness responds that it was at 24.53 recognised by Floyd's facial features. Asked what Floyd's oxygen level would have been at that time, witness states that it would have been 36, the level of oxygen in human blood. The normal level for Floyd would have been 89. That once consciousness was lost, that oxygen level would drop to zero after a further 25 seconds. Adds that Chauvin's knee remained on Floyd's neck for a further 3 minutes.
Asks witness if he is aware of studies which claim that putting someone in the prone position with a weight on their back is not dangerous. Confirms in affirmative and adds that they are highly misleading. Says that the studies, possibly 10, involve putting people on a mat, not on a hard surface. Clarifies that studies are not measuring lung capacity. Claims that the Chan Diego Studies bare out by a factor of 10. Asked if any studies have taken place involving a knee on the neck, affirms there haven't and adds that he suspects such a study would have some difficulty getting past the ethics panel.
Asks witness if he was aware of Floyd's pre-existing health conditions, states he is having read about them in the hospital records and in the autopsy reports. Asked if a healthy person would have died if subjected to the same conditions as Floyd. Affirms that a healthy person would also have died. Asked if he knew that Floyd had a tumour known as a paraganglioma, affirms he does. Explains that a paraganglioma is a tumour that is found in the pelvis. Asked if the presence of a paraganglioma was significant to Floyd's death, affirms it wasn't. Adds that there are only six reported cases worldwide of anyone dying from paraganglioma and those were sudden deaths, added that Floyd's was not a sudden death.
Witness agrees that the statement, 'if you can speak you can breathe' is true but gives one an enormous false sense of security. Adds that it does not guarantee you will still be breathing 5 seconds later. Explains that you only speak when exhaling. Adds you cannot speak if the brain is not alert. Asked if the timing of Floyd's speech was important, affirms and adds that it tells us that there could not have been total occlusion of the neck for the 4 minutes and 51 seconds. Asked if the brain is sensitive to oxygen deprivation, affirms and adds that the brain is the most sensitive organ to needing oxygen. Adds that the brain is only 2% of the body weight but uses 20% of the oxygen. Also adds that you lose consciousness in 8 seconds if starved of oxygen.
Asked if Floyd's last words "I can't breathe" were significant, affirms that at that point he had oxygen in his brain but had a major loss of oxygen a short time later...a very dangerous mantra! Confirms that he could identify from the various videos when Floyd was no longer alert.
Witness is shown a short video clip showing Floyd's right leg lift up. Witness states that this was a seisure brought about by lack of oxygen to the brain. Adds that the brain was reacting to a fatally low level of oxygen, an involuntary reaction.
Witness shown graphics showing effect of airway narrowing on patient effort to breathe. Empathises that at the point you can't speak you are in deep trouble. Witness asked if he had taken his clinical experience and applied it to Floyd's breathing, affirms that he did. Asked if there was video evidence from which he could take measurements, affirms there was. Video was played showing Floyd's breathing. Witness confirmed that this was how he established breathing rate. Explains that with fentanyl Floyd's respiratory rate should have been down to about 10 but Floyd's was normal at 22 breaths per minute just before he lost consciousness.
Asked about the high level of CO² found in Floyd's blood in the hospital. States that it was significant. States that Floyd's CO² level in the emergency room was 89. States that the normal level is 35-45 mm of mercury. Adds that Floyd made his own spontaneous effort to breathe until 20.25:16. That he remained a further 3 minutes on the street before the ambulance arrived and they eventually successfully put in an airway, a gap of some 9 mins and 50 secs. Explains that the high CO² level found in Floyd's blood in the emergency room was predictable given the delay in inserting an airway. Asked why this was significant, the witness stated that it was the second reason why fentanyl did not cause the depression on Floyd's respiration.
Witness asked about other factors. States that someone with heart disease who have shortness of breath will have respiratory rates of over 30, even over 40. Instead of this we found that Floyd's respiratory rate was normal at 22. Adds that the second thing that is important with someone with a 22 respiratory rate is that if there is a narrowing of the airway, a restriction on the hypopharynx, them the psysiology response is a normal respiratory rate.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: barrier on April 08, 2021, 07:07:02 PM
@John, Stirling work keeping us informed of thee proceeding's. 8((()*/
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 08, 2021, 09:02:51 PM
A Summary of the trial - Week 2 Day 4 cont'd...
Blackwell asks the witness if he observed in the videos evidence of low oxygen in the last minutes of George Floyd's life. Witness affirms and states that the changes in the facial appearance becomes crucially important. Asked if he sees this in other patients, states that he has, that he works in an ICU unit where 40% of the patients die.
Blackwell brings back a video clip showing Chauvin kneeling on Floyd. Witness states, one minute he is alive, next minute he is unconscious. Shows another video clip at 20.22:56 showing Floyd moving his hip in an attempt to get air.
Reaffirms that the knee remained on the next for another 3 mins and 20 seconds after he takes his last breath.
End of direct examination. Break for lunch returning at 1.30pm
Cross examination by defence attorney Eric Nelson.
Nelson states witness was asked by the State of Minnesota to assist them in the review of the medical issues in this case, witness affirms. That witness agreed to do the work at no cost, witness affirms. That witness not normally involved in criminal cases of this nature, witness affirms. That this is the first time that the witness has been involved in a criminal case, witness affirms. That that was the reason witness decided not to charge a fee, witness affirms. Witness states that he normally charges per hour at a rate of $500 an hour for reviewing material. That witness had waived his hourly rate for this case, witness affirms. That witness felt it was an important case, witness affirms.
Nelson asks witness if he has reviewed all the materials in the case and that he is not a pathologist, witness affirms. Reminds witness that MPD officers medical training comes nowhere near to his own expertise, witness agrees.
Nelson makes reference to the numerous meetings that witness has had with the prosecution and the time he has had to prepare material adding that he himself only received the material last night!
Nelson talking about dynamic events and how things change on a second by second basis. States that the witness has taken this case and literally wound it down to one nanosecond, witness disagrees saying that there is a whole chronology from the moment Floyd had a knee placed on him prone on the street to the arrival at the hospital.
Nelson points out that there was nobody measuring the units of force being applied, witness states that they were all calculable. Points out that the pathologist looks at how other factors may contribute to a death, affirms.
Nelson points out that the time spent by witness looking at the incident is a thousand times taken for the original incident.
Witness states that the low level of oxygen caused damage to the brain and the irregular heart rhythm PEA.
Nelson states that there was no bruising to the neck, witness agrees.
Nelson speaks about the "If you can speak...you can breathe'" comment and pointed this out, would witness have a problem with that. Witness replies that situation can change from second to second.
Nelson claims that witness calculations are generally theoretical, witness disagrees and adds that they are based on direct measurements and extensive research. Nelson asks if he is making certain assumptions in the application of the science but witness again disagrees. Nelson says he is assuming the weight of the defendant and his equipment, witness accepts. Nelson also states that witness has made assumptions about the weight distribution between Chauvin's legs, witness agrees. Nelson points out that that weight is redistributed as events flow, witness agrees.
Witness agreed with Nelson that calculations assumed a healthy 46 year old in his models and can vary considerably. That the psysiology make-up of the individual is relevant.
Witness denies that Floyd's heart disease was relevant. Absence of chest pains evidences this according to witness and demonstrating a very rapid respiratory rate. Points out that they didn't see either.
Nelson struggling with his own voice today (will he last another 3 weeks?) and failing to pronounce certain basic medical terms. A moment of tension relief however as Nelson blames the Irish witness' accent for his own failure to pronounce some words. Witness responds with a, "I can't compensate for it" retort.
Nelson also mentions the fact that Floyd had previously been diagnosed with Covid-19 and it's effects, some discussion ensued including reference to placing patient in the prone position. Witness affirms but adds it is people with Covid and will vary from person to person.
Nelson referenced the autopsy report as to the substances found in Floyd's system. Asked about illicit ingestion of fentanyl witness agrees that it can cause respiratory depression, witness affirms. Asked if the methamphetamine can increase the heart rate, witness affirms. Adds that it is a prescribable agent.
Nelson reminds witness that fentanyl tablets were found in the squad car. Nelson asks witness if fentanyl and methamphetamine tablets had been ingested by Floyd, would the reaction have been seen within 5 minutes? Witness affirms. Explains 20:18 ingested meaning peak reaction by 20.23. Witness confused but then agrees.
Nelson makes reference to seisure previously attested to by witness at 20:24. Last breath estimated by witness at 20.25.16. At 20:35.06 first air pumped in. Paramedics arrived at 20:27.45. That is was nearly 9 minutes before first air pumped into Floyd, witness agrees.
End of cross examination.
Blackwell on re direct. Asks witness if he saw Mr Chauvin get off the back of Floyd, witness replies no. Asks witness where Mr Chauvin's knee was during all that time, witness responds that it was on Floyd's neck.
Asks witness if low oxygen shows up on autopsy, witness states it isn't.
Asks if Floyd's pre-existing health conditions had any relevance to Floyd's death, affirms it wasn't. Adds that the cause of death was the low level of oxygen which caused brain damage and the heart to stop.
Blackwell references substances in Floyd's system, nicotine. Asks did he die from nicotine, witness laughs and states no. Blackwell references fentanyl and methamphetamine. Asks any evidence that Floyd died from meth, witness states no. Blackwell mentions ingesting fentanyl within five minutes of death. Witness agrees that you would see a depression in the respiratory system if someone was suffering from a fentanyl overdose and a reduction in the ability to breathe but there was no evidence of this with Floyd. Asked if there was any evidence that fentanyl had impacted Floyd's breathing in any way, witness replies no.
End of re-direct.
Defence re-cross examination.
Clarified couple of points including fenta being a cause of death.
Re re direct by Blackwell.
Asks witness to confirm that people who die from fentanyl overdose go into a coma, witness affirms smiling.
End of re re direct. Judge calls a 5 min break so all can get their voices back.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: carlymichelle on April 08, 2021, 09:55:41 PM
im watching the court case it sounds like georges fentyl and meth levels were low i could be misunderstanding but thats what im gathering
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 08, 2021, 11:07:26 PM
im watching the court case it sounds like georges fentyl and meth levels were low i could be misunderstanding but thats what im gathering
Watching Nelson attempt to cross examine Dr Tobin was cringeworthy. I think Nelson is going to have trouble with his voice poor b....r.
Tobin has certainly damaged the fentanyl and methamphetamine cause of death argument.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 08, 2021, 11:20:50 PM
A Summary of the trial - Week 2 Day 4 cont'd...
Next state's witness is Dr Daniel Isenschmid, forensic toxicologist of NMS Labs, Horsham, Pennsylvania.
Direct examination by Erin Eldridge.
Dr Daniel Isenschmid testified that he tested blood drawn from Floyd at the hospital and urine from his autopsy, which found fentanyl and methamphetamine in his system.
Dr Isenschmid said fentanyl and norfentanyl, which is a byproduct of its breakdown, were both found in his body, as well as a 'very low' amount of methamphetamine.
He told the court that even though there was a high level of fentanyl in Floyd's bloodstream – 11ng ml where a 3ng ml could be lethal – individual tolerance had to be taken into account.
The toxicology expert suggested Floyd's tolerance had been high as a regular user.
He also pointed to the presence of norfentanyl – a metabolic of fentanyl.
Dr Isenschmid said that he wouldn't expect to see this in a case where death had occurred as a result of fentanyl overdose because the body wouldn't have had a chance to metabolize the drug.
He described the level of meth in Floyd's bloodstream – 19ng ml - as no more than he would expect to find in the blood of a patient who had consumed a single legally prescribed dose and his amphetamine was below reportable levels.
His testimony essentially rejected the defence's theory that Floyd's drug use and underlying health problems were what killed him.
Defense attorney Eric Nelson has argued that Chauvin did what he was trained to do and that Floyd's death was caused by illegal drugs and underlying medical problems that included high blood pressure and heart disease.
Putting Floyd's blood toxicology into context, Dr Isenschmid told the court that of 2345 DUI blood samples analyzed by his lab, 376 – all of whom survived - had levels of fentanyl upwards of 16ng ml in their blood stream with the highest coming in at a staggering 50ng ml.
In contrast, Floyd's blood fentanyl level was below the average and the median in the DUI cases they had analyzed.
Similarly, Floyd's levels of meth put him in the bottom 15.2 percent of 3271 DUI blood samples analyzed by the lab, with 215 drivers recording levels of methamphetamine greater than 1000ng ml.
In a brief cross-examination, Nelson tried to strip Isenschmid's testimony of significance and keep open the door to his contention that fentanyl is what caused Floyd's death.
Nelson suggested there was no way to know how much fentanyl Floyd had ingested, and Isenschmid agreed. Nelson also suggested that it's impossible to know the concentration of fentanyl in illegal street drugs.
'Every single pill you take, it becomes a unique experience for the person, right?' Isenschmid agreed.
Nelson pointed out that there was no field of reference in the 19,185 post mortem cases from which Isenschmid drew median and average fentanyl levels and sought to draw comparisons to Floyd as the doctor could not give cause of death on any of them.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 09, 2021, 01:30:38 AM
A Summary of the trial - Week 2 Day 4 cont'd...
Last witness was Dr Bill Smock, forensic medicine specialist.
Direct by Jerry Blackwell.
Smock told the trial that when George Floyd cried out 'I can't breathe' he was exhibiting the desperation of 'air hunger'.
Building on the testimony from other prosecution witnesses earlier, Dr Smock was asked to give his medical opinion on Floyd's cause of death.
Smock knocked down any other suggesting, saying Floyd died from positional asphyxia, which he said was 'a fancy way of saying he died because he had no oxygen left in his body'.
'When the body is deprived of oxygen, in this case from pressure on this chest and back, he gradually succumbed to lower and lower levels of oxygen until he succumbed and he died,' he said.
Dr Smock said that he had considered and dismissed other causes including the defence's causes of choice – fentanyl overdose and excited delirium.
One by one, he explained the symptoms of excited delirium – including excessive sweating, being unaffected by pain and super-human strength – and dismissed them pointing out that Floyd was cold to the touch, complaining of pain from the moment he was on the ground and unable to throw the police officers from his back.
Asked by how many of the 10 recognized symptoms he observed, Dr Smock answered: 'Zip.'
He discarded fentanyl overdose as a possible cause of death because he said, Floyd was not falling into a coma, snoring, or slowing down in breathing.
He was, instead, fighting for his life and demonstrating 'air hunger' as he struggled to breathe. He pointed to Floyd's weakening voice as evidence that the life was draining from him and recognised Floyd's dying moments in his altering facial expressions and anoxic seizure – when his legs kicked out straight behind him.
Dr Smock explained that since Floyd was a chronic drug users the levels of narcotics and their metabolites found in his blood stream really meant very little.
He said: 'You don't rely on the level, you look at the patient.'
Defence attorney Nelson pointed to the fact that there was no bruising on Floyd's neck and throat post mortem as proof that Chauvin's knee did not dig into him until the life was squeezed out of him.
But Dr Smock, who is also a specialist in strangulation, said: 'You can be fatally strangled and died of asphyxia and have no bruising.'
Blackwell also asked Dr Smock about CPR and when, in his opinion, it should have been started.
'As soon as Mr Floyd was unconscious. He should have been rolled over and we have documentation on the video that the officer says, 'I can't find a pulse',' he said.
'It should have been started way before. He should have been rolled over, check his respiration but clearly when they can't find a pulse CPR should have been started.'
In cross examination Nelson tried to undercut the validity of Dr Smock's opinion from the outset by reminding the jury that he was neither a pathologist or board certified in forensic pathology.
He asked him what evidence for positional asphyxia had been found at autopsy, Dr Smock replied, 'The evidence was not at autopsy it was on the video tape.'
Addressing the fact that Dr Smock had dismissed the levels of methamphetamine in Floyd's system as meaninglessly low, Nelson put it to him that, 'There is no safe level of methamphetamine is there?' Dr Smock agreed.
He pointed out that Floyd had said 'I can't breathe' multiple times before anyone was on his back and before he was prone on the ground.
And he reminded the jury of all of Floyd's underlying health issues – among them a 90% blockage of an artery in his heart – painting the picture of a man under attack from his own cardiac disease and the drugs that he had ingested.
As far as the levels of those drugs found in Floyd's system Nelson suggested to Dr Smock that tolerance to controlled substances was not fixed but varied according to usage.
He said, 'If someone's not using a substance for two to three months they're going to lose that tolerance…[and if they start using again] it's not going to immediately jump back up.'
Last week the court heard from Floyd's girlfriend Courtney Ross who spoke openly about the opioid addiction with which both she and Floyd had struggled. She said how both of them had tried to stop using and that only in recent months did she notice changes in his behavior that made her think he was using again.
But when Blackwell rose to question Dr Smock again on redirect, he took him through his opinions once again and once again Dr Smock stated that Floyd's death wasn't a sudden one but due to 'a gradual decrease in levels of oxygen…because of the pressure being applied to his back and his neck.'
Court ends for the day.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 09, 2021, 07:16:24 AM
Much better reportage John, have you changed sources or has your right wing blogger stopped spinning the day’s proceedings?
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: carlymichelle on April 09, 2021, 08:44:50 AM
I started out feeling desperately sorry for Floyd. Now I am not so sure.
IMO no one deserves to die in that manner, no matter what their life choices, crimes or misdemeanours. Once it became clear he posed no threat to himself, law officers or the public and certainly when it became obvious he was unconscious, the knee should have come off his body and rescusitation should have commenced immediately. This did not happen and was a disastrous decision by Chauvin who will I'm sure pay for it with a long spell in prison.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: barrier on April 09, 2021, 09:31:09 AM
IMO no one deserves to die in that manner, no matter what their life choices, crimes or misdemeanours. Once it became clear he posed no threat to himself, law officers or the public and certainly when it became obvious he was unconscious, the knee should have come off his body and rescusitation should have commenced immediately. This did not happen and was a disastrous decision by Chauvin who will I'm sure pay for it with a long spell in prison.
From John's opening summary of the trial, do you think that a jury will be convinced beyond reasonable doubt this will be the case.
The prosecution opening speech made the case that unreasonable force was used to subdue George Floyd resulting in his death by asphyxiation. They alleged that former police officer Derek Chauvin murdered George Floyd by keeping his knee on Floyd's neck for some nine minutes. They allege that the officers actions were not in keeping with Minneapolis Police Department training or protocol, that they were excessive and did not represent reasonable force.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Eleanor on April 09, 2021, 09:40:32 AM
IMO no one deserves to die in that manner, no matter what their life choices, crimes or misdemeanours. Once it became clear he posed no threat to himself, law officers or the public and certainly when it became obvious he was unconscious, the knee should have come off his body and rescusitation should have commenced immediately. This did not happen and was a disastrous decision by Chauvin who will I'm sure pay for it with a long spell in prison.
I agree. But it's whether or not Floyd was murdered that is in question.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 09, 2021, 09:46:49 AM
From John's opening summary of the trial, do you think that a jury will be convinced beyond reasonable doubt this will be the case.
The prosecution opening speech made the case that unreasonable force was used to subdue George Floyd resulting in his death by asphyxiation. They alleged that former police officer Derek Chauvin murdered George Floyd by keeping his knee on Floyd's neck for some nine minutes. They allege that the officers actions were not in keeping with Minneapolis Police Department training or protocol, that they were excessive and did not represent reasonable force.
I think so, yes.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 09, 2021, 04:42:26 PM
I agree. But it's whether or not Floyd was murdered that is in question.
I still think that involuntary manslaughter will carry the day. Remember, it only takes one juror to scuttle it and going by this morning's behind the scenes shenanigans I think the jury could be in revolt. We should find out more later.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 09, 2021, 04:45:19 PM
I still think that involuntary manslaughter will carry the day. Remember, it only takes one juror to scuttle it and going by this morning's behind the scenes shenanigans I think the jury could be in revolt. We should find out more later.
What’s been occurring?
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 09, 2021, 04:45:57 PM
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 09, 2021, 04:47:08 PM
A Summary of the trial - Week 2 Day 5
First in the witness box today is Dr Lindsey Thomas, a forensic pathologist.
Direct examination by Jerry Blackwell.
Asked whether she had testified previously, Dr Thomas replied that she had done so over a hundred times mostly as a medical examiner. Also as an expert witness in wrongful death or malpractice cases. Added that she has testified in numerous States. Asked if she is being paid to testify in this case replies no. Adds that she didn't ask to be paid, that the State asked her to testify. Also adds that she felt this case was important and that she wanted to do something to explain what had happened. She states that she was asked to review materials and come to an independent conclusion as to the manner of death of Floyd. States that she has reviewed his report in this case. Adds that the volume of material in this case, especially videos, is unprecedented.
States that she reviewed the autopsies, reports, medical records, videos, photos and text books. Adds that she did not do the autopsy as it was done by Dr Andrew Baker of the Hennepin County Medical Examiner's office. Asked if she knows Dr Baker, admits doing so and had overseen parts of his training as a pathology resident. Adds that she had worked with him at Hennepin County and considers him a friend.
Shown the Death Certificate in respect of Floyd, states, that she agrees with the cause of death. States that the primary cause of death was asphyxia or low oxygen. States that the death was caused by both the heart and lungs stopping due to compression. States that Floyd was restrained by handcuffing in the prone position with officer's knees on his neck and back. Clarifies that in her opinion the activities of the law enforcement officers resulted in Floyd's death.
Clarifie's term 'mechanism of death' as being what was going on in the body at the time of death. States that the primary mechanism was asphyxia or low oxygen. That Floyd was in such a position that he could not get sufficient air in to sustain breathing. Explains how hypopharynx collapses when body is compressed. Gives the example of snoring which varies depending on the position one sleeps.
States that Floyd had no sign of lung disease which could have affected his breathing. Adds that pathologist looks at the coronary arteries and the heart muscle.
Agreed that the bodycam and fixed position cameras were extremely useful in determining what occurred. Observed this was not a sudden death. It was not a cardiac arrhythmia. Was not a fentanyl overdose. Goes on to explain the bellows function in that Floyd's ability to breath was severely impacted. Explains what a seisure is and how it is brought about.
Asked about other contributing conditions on the death certificate, responds that is used for public health data purposes as well as being informative for family members. It lists disease processes or drugs that are present at the time of death but that we don't believe contributed directly to the cause of death. That someone looking it years from now can see the whole picture. Witness had looked at other contributing diseases but had agreed that the death did not fit with the various heart diseases shown on the death certificate. Gave example of death by fentanyl which did not fit with Floyds. Also that death by methamphetamine was not a contributing factor. Thus ruled out a drug overdose as cause of death. States that she has filed out thousands of death certificates.
Blackwell points out that the death certificate does not refer to low oxygen or asphyxia. Witness replies that she tends not to use the word asphyxia much so tends to use other descriptions. Similarly low oxygen is not stated as there are no physical findings that show low oxygen.
At this point Blackwell asks permission to distribute a series of autopsy photos to the court. Judge rules these are NOT to be removed from the courtroom or published to media due to their sensitive nature. One picture showed Floyd's face with scratching caused with contact with the road. Another showed a shoulder with scrapes on it consistent with him having moved his shoulder against the road surface in an attempt to get up. A picture of Floyd's left hand had red marks consistent with wearing handcuffs, similarly the left hand. Also skin missing from between the fingers of his right hand where it had come into contact with the rim of the squad car wheel.
Asked if this evidence was conclusive, witness says no. That it was only with assistance of the video evidence that this could be established. Asked if there was any evidence that Floyd would have died anyway that night, witness affirms no.
Blackwell asks about the Press Release put out by the coroner's office. Specifically the words 'homicide' and how the injury occurred. Asked whether she agreed with this, witness concurs.
Asks witness about manner of death, witness states they are, Natural, Accident, Suicide, Homicide and Undetermined. Blackwell asks witness if she agrees with pathologist Dr Baker's finding of homicide in the Floyd case, witness affirms.
Court takes morning break and time out to deal with side issues.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 09, 2021, 04:50:29 PM
I still think that involuntary manslaughter will carry the day. Remember, it only takes one juror to scuttle it and going by this morning's behind the scenes shenanigans I think the jury could be in revolt. We should find out more later.
That sounds about right to me. I certainly don't think that Chauvin meant to kill Floyd.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 09, 2021, 05:53:30 PM
On the potential juror misconduct the other day...
A juror received a text message from her mother-in-law yesterday stating, "looks like a bad day for the defence". The juror did not reply. Judge ruled no misconduct.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 09, 2021, 06:53:05 PM
A Summary of the trial - Week 2 Day 5 cont'd...
Blackwell returns to the question of manner of death again. Asks if homicide rules out death by accidental drug overdose, witness agrees. Asked about the definition of homicide, witness states it is an act caused by others. Adds that a determination of homicide does not infer a criminal act as it is a neutral term. Clarifies that homicide is an intentional or volitional act and not an intent to kill. Asked if whether this definition is what is evident in the death certificate, witness affirms.
Blackwell then introduces the issue of prone restraints. Asked about studies which claim that putting someone in the prone position with a weight on their back is not dangerous. Witness states that such studies are theoretical and not real life. That such studies are conducted with volunteers who are healthy and not subject to stress. That they involve no resemblance to the Floyd case. Asked if the forces which Floyd was subjected to would kill a normal healthy person witness states that she would not like to be subjected to such force.
End of direct.
Cross examination by Eric Nelson.
Nelson's asks if witness has been provided with Dr Baker's opinions in this case, states no. Asked if doctor's sometimes disagree, witness affirms. Witness agrees that Floyd's heart was slightly enlarged. Discussion about enlarged hearts ensued.
Witness agreed that Floyd had high blood pressure, a condition which can be associated with an enlarged heart. Some technical discussion of heart function generally ensued.
Nelson refers to Floyd's heart and asks witness if they took the police actions out of the equation what would be the cause of death, witness affirms heart disease.
Asked whether abrasions to Floyd's hands, face and shoulder were all received while he was restrained in the prone position, witness states she cannot be certain.
In respect of asphyxia, Nelson asks witness if there are multiple things that can cause it, witness agrees. Asked if controlled substances can cause low oxygen, witness states that some can affect the ability to breathe.
Asked witness about the Chan studies on prone positions and about a Canadian study which looked at over 3000 real life prone position arrests which resulted in no deaths. Witness responds, "ISN'T THAT AMAZING!" when you consider that virtually every forensic pathologist in the US has probably had an officer involved death like this, how did they... it utterly baffles me which is why I kept saying Canada because I think I don't know what is different..." (Inaudible...Judge has words with witness)
Nelson asks witness about hypoxia and the brain. Asks witness if it is true that in death by asphyxia, she has to exclude all natural and non natural cause. Asks if the prone position in itself is dangerous, witness states it isn't as long as there aren't external factors. Asks if not dangerous on a concrete surface, witness agrees. Asks witness if she had taken Chauvin's weight into analysis, she says no. Witness confirms no bruising on Floyd's shoulders and to the back of neck. No bleeding into the muscles in his back, witness affirms. Again affirms no bruising to Floyd's neck or back.
Witness offers, "everyone bruises differently!"
Asked if pathologist found hypoxic changes in Floyd's brain, witness says he died too quickly to determine. Asked if Floyd appeared confused, witness couldn't say. Asked if at some point he went limp, would witness call that as the progression of hypoxia, witness agrees that it was not a sudden hypoxia event. Witness agrees that where there is a 90% stenosis of the right coronary artery that's going to be limiting oxygen to the heart. And that Floyd had an enlarged heart. Needs more blood. And that adrenaline speeds up the heart. Agreed that methamphetamine speeds up the heart. Asks if methamphetamine and adrenaline cause the heart to work harder. And increases the heart's oxygen needs.
Asks witness at what point the stenosis in the coronary arteries become critical and cause the heart to stop, responds 70%-75% and above.
In respect of drug use, Nelson asks if witness would describe them as a binge use, witness couldn't say. Witness agrees that fentanyl is a respiratory depressant. Adds no way of knowing when fentanyl ingested. Agrees that fentanyl decreases oxygen intake and increases CO². Agrees that no safe level for methamphetamine.
Nelson references drugs found in squadcar and attributable to Floyd by DNA testing. Witness agrees that amount of drugs in Floyd's system could be considered an overdose. That other individuals who had died with a much lower level of drugs than was found in Floyd's system were considered death by overdose, witness agreed that it could be higher or lower as depends on the individual.
Cross examination ends.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 09, 2021, 08:33:01 PM
A Summary of the trial - Week 2 Day 5 cont'd...
Jerry Blackwell re direct.
Witness asked if she would consider hypothetical factors as a pathologist, responds no.
Asks witness if she knows how much fentanyl was found in Floyd's bloodstream, responds a very small amount. Asked what affect such would have had on Floyd's heart, states no that there is too many variables. Witness states that if there were no signs of a fentanyl overdose it makes no sense to conclude that there was an overdose from fentanyl.
Asked what the symptoms of a fentanyl overdose are, states that people just fall asleep, slump over, very peacefully stop breathing. Asked if Floyd was asleep or on a coma, responds no. Asked if during the 9 mins and 29 seconds that he was on the ground did he exibit any signs of fentanyl intoxication, responds no.
Asked about death by heart attack, explains that someone just drops over. Asked if there were any indication s that Floyd suffered from a heart attack, answers no. Asked if there was any damage to the heart, responds no.
Blackwell refers to the 'supposed' Canadian study, witness says she didn't know how to respond to that as it didn't equate to her experience of forensic pathology in the US.
Blackwell reminded witness that she was asked about sitting on a bench with a baseball under her butt, you never done that? Witness laughs and responds no.
Asked if she observed any evidence of a anoxic seisure in Floyd's brain, witness says there was no enough time to see such in autopsy.
End of re direct.
Re cross examination by Nelson.
Asks witness if the heart stops will the body continue to breathe or respire? Witness responds yes I suppose it could in certain circumstances. Asked if methamphetamine can constrict tha arteries, witness says it can do that. Asked about the low level of methamphetamine in the body. Defense objection. Witness offers no opinion.
End of re cross examination.
End of morning session.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 09, 2021, 09:54:21 PM
A Summary of the trial - Week 2 Day 5 cont'd...
Final witness this week is Dr Andrew Baker, the forensic pathologist who undertook the autopsy of George Floyd.
Direct examination by Jerry Blackwell.
Witness states that he has been the Chief Medical Examiner for Hennepin County since 2004. Previously was a Major in the Air Force and served as a forensic pathologist for the Department of Defense.
Asked about the circumstances of Floyd's death, states that he had become unconscious while in police custody and had been transferred to Hennepin Hospital where he had been pronounced dead. Asked if he had seen any videos before he commenced work, responds that he had not but was aware that at least one had gone viral on the internet but chose not to watch it. Stated that he had seen various videos thereafter on different days. Proceeded to explain the methodology of undertaking an autopsy. Added that additional investigations were made on Floyd's back to check for bruising that were not normally undertaken.
Blackwell introduces photographs from the autopsy shown earlier today in examination of Dr Lindsey Thomas. Witness confirms that photos were taken by himself.
Asked if he had seen any injuries to Floyd's back, responds I did not. No bruises, scrapes etc, responds correct. Asked about injuries to Floyd's face, states he had several injuries to his face.
Injuries identified on Floyd's left eyebrow and left cheek. Baker states injuries consistent with Floyd's face being on the asphalt road.
Further injuries indentified on Floyd's face, left shoulder, confirms consistent with lying prone on asphalt. Further injuries indentified on Floyd's hands consistent with having handcuffs on.
Witness states that he did not photograph Floyd's heart or other irganscas they didn't appear damaged. That the heart was removed from the lungs and weighed. Coronary arteries were carefully dissected and then checked for normal openings and for blockages. Heart is then dissected checking for previous damage. Found no visible or microscopic damage to Floyd's heart. Found lesion damage in Floyd's coronary arteries known as hardening of the coronary arteries. Lesions were stable and not fractured. Saw no damage to the heart muscle. Similarly found no damage to the brain.
That Floyd's lungs had edema fluid in them. States that given he was subject to CPR that there was multiple reasons for the pulmonary edema. Saw no evidence of a pulmonary embolism.
Witness confirms that all toxicology samples are sent to NMS Labs.
Asked about Floyd's stomach contents, states a brown fluid and bread. Found no tablets in the stomach. Confirmed that Floyd had sickle cell trait but was irrelevant to his death.
Dr Baker asked about the final Press Release seen earlier and the Death Certificate relaxing to George Floyd.
Blackwell goes over the same questions as put to previous witness wrt the Death Certificate getting the same answers but admits that Floyd had very serious underlying heart disease, an enlarged heart that needs more oxygen. That in the context of a physical altercation the heart needs to work harder so the restraint by the officers created a situation whereby Floyd's heart couldn't compensate.
Again witness mentions the other significant conditions. States that fentanyl did not cause the subdual or neck restraint. The heart condition did not cause the subdual or neck restraint.
Direct examination ends. Side bar called with 10 minute break.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 10, 2021, 12:18:03 AM
A Summary of the trial - Week 2 Day 5 cont'd...
Cross examination by Eric Nelson.
Asked about the word complicated, witness explains it as an untoward event. Asked if he took into consideration the restraint and the heart disease, witness agrees. Asked if the heart disease, the drugs in Floyd's system and the history of hypertension played a role in his death, witness agrees in his opinion that it had.
Witness states that he records the unexpected in an autopsy. Asked about the media coverage, states that he has not seen the videos before undertaking the autopsy. Agrees that the BCA had called him and explained what had happened including that pressure had been applied to Floyd's neck. That because of this the witness had undertaken further procedures on Floyd.
Witness confirms that Floyd's heart was enlarged. Agreed that enlarged heart requires more oxygen. That Floyd was know to be hypertensive ie had high blood pressure. Confirms narrowing of the coronary arteries up to 90% in one of them. Asked about hypoxia of the heart, witness states that there are several mechanisms.
Asked about effects of methamphetamine on the heart, states that it is not good in someone with heart disease or bad coronary arteries. Witness clarifies that he did eventually view the video footage.
Asked if the prone position is not inherently dangerous, agrees. Asked how many autopsies he had undertaken, answers about 2,900 to 3000.
Witness agrees that on viewing the video, that it was his opinion that the knee could not be on either carotid artery. That if excessive pressure had been applied that there would be bruising, witness replies not necessarily. Confirms no bruising in Floyd's back. Confirms that he has certified death in a patient with a lower level of fentanyl in their bloodstream than Floyd. Agrees that combinations of drugs and interactions of drugs are relevant.
Witness asked if he had meeting with Hennepin County attorneys on 26 May 2020 and told them that the autopsy revealed no physical evidence that Mr Floyd died of asphyxiation, agreed that he conveyed such to them. And had told them that you had avoided watching the videos, witness states yes, until after the autopsy. Witness asked if he on same day did he offer to Hennepin County attorneys office his opinion as to what factors contributed to the death. Responds cannot recall but would have offered the facts about the heart condition. Also admits relaying the toxicology findings to the attorneys office. Asked if he recalls describing the level of fentanyl as a fatal level, confirms that describing it in other circumstances that it would be a fatal level.
Witness asked if he recalls telling Hennepin County attorneys that if he had come across Mr Floyd in other circumstances that he would have determined the cause of death as fentanyl overdose? Witness responses that yes, had there been no trauma.
Witness asked about being interviewed by the FBI on or about the 8 July 2020, agrees. Asked about the opinions he provided to those people. States that he told the Hennepin County attorneys and the FBI that it was the constraint on Mr Floyd that tipped him over the edge considering his heart disease and fentanyl ingestion. Added that was also claried by letter.
Asked witness to confirm that he had already testified twice in respect of the proceeding related to Floyd, witness agrees. And that first occasion was on 20 August 2020, agrees.
Asked if the application of the knee would cut off Floyd's airway, confirms it would not. Asked if he remembers discussing how the coronary arteries worked, responds he doesn't. Witness then shown transcript of previous proceedings.
Admits testifying before the Federal Grand Jury. Admits to deferring to other specialists.
Cross examination ends.
Re direct by Blackwell.
Asks witness what today remains his opinion as to what the death was for Mr Floyd, responds that it is unchanged and is cardiopulmonary arrest complicating law enforcement subdual, restraint, and neck compression. Adds that was my top line then and will remain my top line now. Adds that other contributing conditions are not direct cause of Floyd's death. And adds that he would still classify manner of death today as a homicide.
Re direct ends. Sidebar and 15 minute break.
Court ends.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 10, 2021, 01:10:50 PM
Having heard the varous prosecution witnesses and experts testify including the chief forensic pathologist of Hennepin County yesterday it is abundantly clear that George Floyd had underlying medical issues which contributed to his death. The highlighted summaries above are direct testimony from the pathologist who carried out the autopsy.
Outwardly George Floyd looked a picture of health albeit that he appeared somewhat intoxicated to the various witnesses. It seems that the exertions of his arrest and what followed created a situation whereby his heart could not cope with the stress. What resulted was a fatal heart attack and death.
The officers who arrested Floyd that day were not to know this, he appeared to be in reasonable physical health. It is clear too that his arrest and the placing of him in the prone position hastened his demise. The jury have to decide if the officers acted reasonably or if they failed to give the suspect in their custody the care and attention he deserved. A difficult one?
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 10, 2021, 02:24:39 PM
Having heard the varous prosecution witnesses and experts testify including the chief forensic pathologist of Hennepin County yesterday it is abundantly clear that George Floyd had underlying medical issues which contributed to his death. The highlighted summaries above are direct testimony from the pathologist who carried out the autopsy.
Outwardly George Floyd looked a picture of health albeit that he appeared somewhat intoxicated to the various witnesses. It seems that the exertions of his arrest and what followed created a situation whereby his heart could not cope with the stress. What resulted was a fatal heart attack and death.
The officers who arrested Floyd that day were not to know this, he appeared to be in reasonable physical health. It is clear too that his arrest and the placing of him in the prone position hastened his demise. The jury have to decide if the officers acted reasonably or if they failed to give the suspect in their custody the care and attention he deserved. A difficult one?
Not really. The moment he stopped resisting and became unconscious is the moment they should have got off him and started trying to save his life as per their training. IMO.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Eleanor on April 10, 2021, 02:30:02 PM
Having heard the varous prosecution witnesses and experts testify including the chief forensic pathologist of Hennepin County yesterday it is abundantly clear that George Floyd had underlying medical issues which contributed to his death. The highlighted summaries above are direct testimony from the pathologist who carried out the autopsy.
Outwardly George Floyd looked a picture of health albeit that he appeared somewhat intoxicated to the various witnesses. It seems that the exertions of his arrest and what followed created a situation whereby his heart could not cope with the stress. What resulted was a fatal heart attack and death.
The officers who arrested Floyd that day were not to know this, he appeared to be in reasonable physical health. It is clear too that his arrest and the placing of him in the prone position hastened his demise. The jury have to decide if the officers acted reasonably or if they failed to give the suspect in their custody the care and attention he deserved. A difficult one?
Absolutely. Thank you for that.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 10, 2021, 02:43:08 PM
Not really. The moment he stopped resisting and became unconscious is the moment they should have got off him and started trying to save his life as per their training. IMO.
That's the crux of it. The defence will argue though that the officers were distracted by the forming crowd.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 10, 2021, 03:17:51 PM
That's the crux of it. The defence will argue though that the officers were distracted by the forming crowd.
that’s a pretty poor defence imo. What was this crowd doing exactly? At least one person in the crowd was trying to warn the police that Floyd was in serious jeopardy.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 10, 2021, 03:47:41 PM
that’s a pretty poor defence imo. What was this crowd doing exactly? At least one person in the crowd was trying to warn the police that Floyd was in serious jeopardy.
That's why I believe involuntary manslaughter will be the jury's judgement if they agree at all.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 12, 2021, 03:37:18 PM
As we start the 11th full day of the Derek Chauvin trial, the state is rapidly approaching the end of its presentation for its case in chief. We are therefore nearing what could be the last significant testimony for the prosecution.
The court heard on Friday that George Floyd died not of any single cause but of multiple forces acting together. His profound heart disease, his dangerous hypertension, his deadly-levels of fentanyl complicated by methamphetamine and ultimately his decision to forcibly resist the efforts of four police officers attempting to make a lawful arrest. But also, of course, that force used by police, including the subdual restraint.
There’s a second condition that must also be met in order for that conduct that may have made a significant contribution to Floyd’s death to be a crime and that is the conduct itself must in some manner be legally wrongful. If the conduct was lawful, it cannot be the basis for criminal liability.
The State need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Chauvin’s actual conduct was a significant contributory cause of Floyd’s death AND that Chauvin’s conduct was not reasonable under the totality of the circumstances, given the facts known to Chauvin at the time and in the context of his training and experience.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 12, 2021, 05:52:47 PM
A Summary of the trial - Week 3 Day 1 pre-testimony debate
Before the start of proceedings today in Minneapolis, Defence Counsel Eric Nelson raised a number of issues.
Firstly, he raised an objection to prosecution witness Prof. Seth Soughton giving evidence today on the basis that such would cover extensive ground already covered by other use of force experts. Ultimately the judge decided to permit him to testify albeit in very narrow terms.
The second issue related to drug dealer Morries Hall who was with George Floyd the day he died and who fled the State thereafter. Morries gave a statement in Texas where he had been arrested on the 2 June 2020 in relation to what occurred with George Floyd including having a $20 in his (Hall's) possession. Video shown to the court previously showed Hall in the cup Foods store acting suspiciously before passing something to a nervous Floyd. Hall denies giving tablets to Floyd.
Hall has basically incriminated himself and has now sought to take the 5th Amendment. Argument ensued as to what Hall can or cannot now testify about. Suggested that testimony be restricted to what occurred in the Mercedes SUV between Hall and Floyd. Judge deferred a decision until after lunch.
Finally, Nelson raised the issue of jurors security given overnight killing of another black man by police in Minneapolis. Specifically that the jurors could be exposed to external pressures given the event. Requested jurors to be instructed to avoid ALL media. State opposed the motion saying it is a different case, basically that shit happens and that they can't change the process because of outside influences. That such an order would be unworkable. Judge denies motion as is a totally different case. Adds he will only go to sequestration if a juror is interfered with. [Note: Sequestration of a jury means they are put up in a hotel together away from outside influences]
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 12, 2021, 06:44:13 PM
As we start the 11th full day of the Derek Chauvin trial, the state is rapidly approaching the end of its presentation for its case in chief. We are therefore nearing what could be the last significant testimony for the prosecution.
The court heard on Friday that George Floyd died not of any single cause but of multiple forces acting together. His profound heart disease, his dangerous hypertension, his deadly-levels of fentanyl complicated by methamphetamine and ultimately his decision to forcibly resist the efforts of four police officers attempting to make a lawful arrest. But also, of course, that force used by police, including the subdual restraint.
There’s a second condition that must also be met in order for that conduct that may have made a significant contribution to Floyd’s death to be a crime and that is the conduct itself must in some manner be legally wrongful. If the conduct was lawful, it cannot be the basis for criminal liability.
The State need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Chauvin’s actual conduct was a significant contributory cause of Floyd’s death AND that Chauvin’s conduct was not reasonable under the totality of the circumstances, given the facts known to Chauvin at the time and in the context of his training and experience.
do you have a cite for “profound heart disease”? The medical expert on the stand today says Floyd had a strong heart and did not die of a heart attack.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 12, 2021, 07:04:57 PM
do you have a cite for “profound heart disease”? The medical expert on the stand today says Floyd had a strong heart and did not die of a heart attack.
Very serious then. I don't recall anyone saying he had a strong heart because that wasn't the case. He had an enlarged heart, his coronary arteries were severely compromised due to a build up of fatty substances. I believe his right coronary artery had a 90% blockage.
Very serious then. I don't recall anyone saying he had a strong heart because that wasn't the case. He had an enlarged heart, his coronary arteries were severely compromised due to a build up of fatty substances. I believe his right coronary artery had a 90% blockage.
: Doctor testifies Floyd did not die of heart attack or overdose Cardiologist Jonathan Rich earlier told the court that in his professional opinion, George Floyd did not die of a heart attack or drug overdose.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 12, 2021, 08:13:11 PM
A Summary of the trial - Week 2 Day 5
First in the witness stand today was Dr Jonathan Rich, a cardiologist at the Northwestern Memorial Hospital in Chicago, Illinois and an associate professor of medicine at Northwestern University.
Direct examination by Jerry Blackwell.
Witness stated that he was giving evidence as an expert cardiologist, to provide opinion as to how George Floyd died. Asked if he had ever testified in a court previously, admitted it was his first time. Adds that his job at Northwestern is mostly clinical work involving patient care and teaching resident doctors. Also involved in clinical research.
Witness states that he is the lead cardiologist who oversees patients in the ICU. Involved in determining cause of death of patients. Also participates in a committee that looks at deaths and near deaths in order to improve future prospects of patients. Has knowledge of patients who die from low oxygen levels. Involved in heart transplant post death investigations.
Works with cardiac pathologists regularly reviewing autopsies. Puts much store on clinical backgrounds when undertaking autopsy reviews. Has published more than 200 combined abstracts, original manuscripts, reviews and book chapters on wide ranging topis related to cardiology.
States that he was contacted by the State of Minnesota to give his opinion as to the way Floyd died. States that he has not received any compensation for his input as he felt that his input would be meaningful. Adds that he receives $1200 each day he is away from home as a result of testifying in this case.
Witness has reviewed all the medical records, autopsy reports, videos etc. Has formed the opinion that Floyd died from a cardiopulmonary arrest caused by low oxygen level which were caused by the prone restraint and positional asphyxiation that he was subjected to. Considered whether a primary heart event or ingestion of drugs had contributed to Floyd's death.asphyxia
Concluded that Floyd had not died from a primary heart event or a drugs overdose. (Note: this conflicts with the evidence given on Friday by the doctor who actually carried out the post mortem on George Floyd).
Agrees that Floyd suffered from hypertension, anxiety and struggled with substance abuse. States that Floyd had no diagnosis of heart disease while alive. Found no abnormalities wrt Floyd's heart after reviewing records. States that high blood pressure is not a heart condition. States that Floyd had "an exceptionally strong heart". (Note: this again was based on historical records).
Witness gave evidence in respect of the video footage he viewed. States that Floyd didn't appear to have any medical problem when he exited the SUV. Saw no evidence of a cardiac issue as police attempted to put Floyd in the squad car. Saw no sign of heart arrhythmia. Observed that Floyd was restrained in a life threatening measure in the prone position. That Floyd went into a cardiopulmonary arrest. Witness adds that he checked to see if Floyd went into a primary cardio event or if he deterioration was slower. He opined it was the latter.
Witness agrees that Floyd had coronary artery disease. States that none of the arteries were totally occluded as one would find in a heart attack. Added that the heart muscle showed no signs of damage. States there was no evidence of a previous heart attack. Asked about the arteries, agreed that there were partial blockages, that left coronary artery showed no platelets. Agreed that there was a plaque buildup in the heart arteries. Agreed that Floyd's heart was mildly enlarged and thickened, it was an expected finding in someone with high blood pressure. Agreed that the primary cause if death was not his heart.
As to the toxicology report, agreed that there were signs of fentanyl and methamphetamine. Added that he found that fentanyl played no role in Floyd's death. Opined that Floyd had a higher degree of tolerance due to his opiate abuse. Adds that he saw no signs of an opiate overdose. Floyd was awake, alert, talking.
Also states that the methamphetamine level in Floyd's system was low and did not trigger the cardiopulmonary arrest. Says that Floyd's death was "absolutely preventable".
Says that being in the prone position contributed to Floyd's death. Opined that meaningful survival was low by the time the paramedics had arrived. Asked if Floyd would have lived had it not been for Chauvin holding him on the ground for over 9 minutes, witness says he would have lived. Asked if a normal healthy person would have survived the restraint, defence objected and was sustained.
Direct ends.
Mid morning break followed.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 12, 2021, 08:15:46 PM
: Doctor testifies Floyd did not die of heart attack or overdose Cardiologist Jonathan Rich earlier told the court that in his professional opinion, George Floyd did not die of a heart attack or drug overdose.
Seems we have two doctors giving contradictory opinion. Dr Baker, who carried out the autopsy, was adamant that Floyds enlarged heart and clogged arteries CONTRIBUTED to his death, he didn't say it cause it. Dr Rich is basing his opinion on historic clinical records which are minimal and certainly don't reveal the state of his heart at death.
I think these doctors are putting a play on words, should be interesting going forward.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Eleanor on April 12, 2021, 08:42:14 PM
I thought it was common knowledge that Expert Witnesses rarely agree. In fact I sometimes wonder why they bother.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 12, 2021, 09:13:39 PM
In opposing counsel yes but these guys are both prosecution witnesses.
Yes, I know. That makes it all even more pointless.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: number1barber on April 12, 2021, 09:30:29 PM
I watched the body cam footage i saw him complain he couldnt breathe almost the second they tried to put him in their car. I watched him resist and kick at the officers as they put him on the floor. I have choked people and put people in sleepers the funny thing about both is its impossible to say you cant breathe whilst being choked because you cant breathe and a sleeper takes seconds. i have no issue with the knee on the neck as stupid as it was right up until george passes out. If as a police officer you continue to kneel on someones neck after the person passes out you deserve some time for totally failing in your role.
It reminds me of an awful case where a girl kept trying to kill herself in prison so the guv told the screws not to interfere as she is just seeking attention. So she hung herself and they filmed it on there phones until she had passed out and gone blue and was very much dead. Nothing happened to the screws they just said they were following orders
The point is regardless of the type of role at some point you engage your humanity and stop what your doing and help the person or else you rightly goto jail. I think this point would have been when george passed out not waiting until a while after you are told by a emt there is no pulse
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 12, 2021, 10:00:00 PM
A Summary of the trial - Week 2 Day 5 cont'd...
Cross examination by Defence attorney Eric Nelson.
Witness confirms he is not a pathologist, that most of his patients are still alive. Asked if he agrees that people die if their arteries have a 90% blockage, witness says "no sir...well everyone dies eventually but not from the 90% blockage".
Witness agrees that heart attack and heart failure are completely different terms. Agrees that people with a 90% blockage may have a cardiac event and might die. Agrees that people might not experience pain as a result of an arrhythmia. Also agrees absolutely that Floyd had coronary heart disease. Explains that plaque rupturing would have a more dramatic effect because Floyd had narrowed coronary arteries.
Asked about methamphetamine in relation to George Floyd, agreed that there was a record of abuse. States that use of methamphetamine over a long period of time can contribute to coronary heart disease, can constrict blood vessels and can have a host of effects on other parts of the body including the heart. That methamphetamine can make the heart work faster. That adrenaline can make the heart work faster. Agreed that Floyd had a record of high blood pressure. That Floyd had been prescribed high blood pressure medication.
When asked if Floyd's records were limited, agreed that one's he reviewed only went back to 2018. Witness agreed that he was not qualified to speak about effects of using fentanyl with methamphetamine. Agrees that on more than one occasion that Floyd had complained about shortage of breath before being put in the prone position. Witness opined that Floyd would not have died had he not been subject to the positional restraint on the street in the prone position. Asked if Floyd had got into the squad car he would be alive, witness "am...I think my answer remains the same." Witness adds that he saw no reason why Floyd couldn't have gone home or wherever he was going that night if he had complied with police instead of fighting with them.
Asked about the prone position, agrees that it can be dangerous but not for the average person. Says that patients in the ICU are only put in the prone position as a last resort. Asked if someone can respire after the heart stops, responds that a patient can take one or two breaths for up to several seconds.
End of cross examination.
Re direct by Blackwell.
Witness explains the term blockage. Explains that usually uses the term narrows and would use the term in relation to Mr Floyd as narrowings. Explains the term incidentals.
Witness states that high blood pressure can cause death because of their impact on the heart. States no absolutely no damage to Floyd's heart muscle.
End of re direct.
Re cross examination by Nelson.
Nelson asks witness if all medical and drugs circumstances were taken into account without the struggle and restraint could death have occurred, witness responds that he found no evidence to suggest this.
Re cross examination ends.
Break for lunch.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: carlymichelle on April 12, 2021, 10:00:57 PM
im not defending the police officers but george was fighting the police and wouldnt get in the car etc and was saying he was claustiphobic even though he had just been in his friends car again im not defending what the police did but they had to try and subue george to a degree did they go around it the right way?? no in my opinion
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 12, 2021, 10:06:14 PM
im not defending the police officers but george was fighting the police and wouldnt get in the car etc and was saying he was claustiphobic even though he had just been in his friends car again im not defending what the police did but they had to try and subue george to a degree did they go around it the right way?? no in my opinion
The defence attorney has just implied that part of the reason Floyd was acting up was to distract the officers, thus giving his 2 drug dealer friends time to dump their stash.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Eleanor on April 12, 2021, 10:06:43 PM
I'm still wondering how he could repeatedly say he couldn't breathe if he couldn't breathe.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 12, 2021, 10:10:52 PM
As a former pot smoker I can testify that this doesn't necessarily apply to all people & all drugs.
When I smoked pot I generally needed a nice lie down & plenty of munchies.
Munchies eh! I like them too &^^&*
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 12, 2021, 11:57:49 PM
A Summary of the trial - Week 2 Day 5 cont'd...
Ref motion to allow or deny Morries Hall's statement taken in Texas. Judge rules it is not admissable.
Further recess.
Next witness was Philonise Floyd, brother of George Floyd from Houston, Texas.
Direct by State's attorney Steve Schleicher.
States that George was born on 14 October 1973 in North Carolina but left at a young age. States that the family later moved to Houston. Says older brother George helped them all when he was younger. Had excelled in sports when at school, especially football. State shows photos of George Floyd as a baby with their mother and later in the football team. Also a picture with his daughter now aged 7.
Witness states that the last time he saw George was at their mothers funeral in 2018. Was informed of George's death on 26 May 2020.
Direct ends. No Defence examination.
Next witness was Professor Seth Stoughton, an associate professor with the University of South Carolina School of Law and an Associate Professor (Affiliate) in the university’s Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice.
Direct by State's attorney Steve Schleicher.
Was a police officer with the Tallahassee Police in the State of Florida for 5 years. Thereafter took a job as an investigator with the Department of Education. Was able to finish his original degree and attended law school at the University of Virginia. On academic pursuits chose to draw on experience with Tallahassee Police. Written law review articles on a number of topics. Authored chapters of books on critical issues in policing and police violence. Co-authored and published a book recently called Evaluating Police Use of Force.
More recently has been a law professor in South Carolina for 7 years. Studies the regulation of policing. Regular speaker on the use of force by police. Had previously been retained about 60 times as an expert witness. Testified by deposition on over 12 occasions in civil cases and testified in court on use of force on three occasions.
Sidebar called.
Witness asked about his retention in this case. States that his fee is $295 per hour with am 8 hour daily minimum and that to date has received compensation of approximately $24,000 to $25,000 for about 130 to 140 hours. States that he gives his opinion irrelevant of who is paying him. That State of Minnesota contacted him. Has come to an opinion about the case after reviewing some 41,000 pages of documentation and videos.
Often called upon to review video from body worn cameras and interpreting the results. The availability of numerous cameras in this case has allowed witness to get a better perspective of the events.
Provided a report of the case of about 300 pages. Reached opinion after evaluating several factors and generally accepted police standards in the use of force. Reference to the Graham v Connor case in determining the factors which must be considered. Ability Opportunity and Intention have to be considered as part of the risk assessment. Size of the individual or recent drug ingestion do not necessarily justify the use of force. Just as there is a spectrum of resistance there is a spectrum of consequences. Analysing use of force it very important to focus on the foreseeable rather than the actual. Proportionality is a balance of harm's. An officer cannot use more force than the event justifies.
Referencing the restraint of George Floyd in the prone restraint position, states that use of force must be reasonable throughout the entire period of the restraint. Viewing the video showing officers attempting to put Floyd in the back seat of the squad car, a reasonable officer would have offered some alternatives when Floyd said he was claustrophobic. States that a reasonable officer would not have seen this as active agression on behalf of Floyd.
Viewing bodycam footage of officers attempt to take Floyd out if the car again, witness states that Floyd had said than you after having been taken out of the squad car. States that it was not reasonable for the officers to place Floyd in the prone position. Other alternatives were available to the officers and should have been considered. That the prone position is merely transitory and should only be used for handcuffing. Witness did not see Floyd as a threat. There was no attempt to escape. There were ample resources on the scene. Two officers could have stood with him while the other two investigated the counterfeit note allegation.
Some discussion ensued in respect of the Hobble leg restraint. Added that suspect should be moved to the recovery position as soon as practicable and not left in the prone position.
Viewed video where one officer suggested turning Floyd onto his side into the recovery position but Chauvin said not to. Added that it appeared that at least one officer was attempting to act reasonably.
Viewed officer Thao's bodycam footage as restraint continued evidencing positional asphyxia. That a reasonable officer on the scene would have reacted to Floyd's distress. That when Floyd passed out, officers failed to respond appropriately.
Viewed bodycam video showing Floyd unresponsive. Officer checks for a pulse but finds none, defendant doesn't respond.
Bystander video shows defendant take his knee off Good and he is moved onto a stretcher.
Court takes afternoon break.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 13, 2021, 02:16:27 AM
A Summary of the trial - Week 2 Day 5 cont'd...
Direct examination continues.
It was the witnesses opinion that the bystanders did not constitute a threat during the entire of the restraint. That is only after the restraint period that the bystanders became more vocal. That the comments by officer Thao to the bystanders relating to drugs was inappropriate and not a comment one would use to de-escalate a situation.
That officers have a duty to respond to the situation as it appeared. Factors such as what a suspect is saying, how they are saying it. Noticeable was Floyd's discomfort, his reported inability to breathe and his non vocalising.
The witness was asked whether the degree of force used on George Floyd constituted deadly force, witness agrees.
The witness was asked whether the degree of force used on George Floyd was reasonable force, witness responses that both the knee across Mr Floyd's neck and the prone restraint were unreasonable, excessive and contrary to generally accepted good police practises.
The witness was asked whether the degree of force used on George Floyd was reasonable as viewed by a police officer on the scene, witness responds that no reasonable officer would have believed that that was an appropriate, acceptable or reasonable use of force.
The witness was asked if the defendant appropriately rendered medical aid to George Floyd on 25 May 2020, witness responds that the failure to render aid to Mr Floyd both by taking him out of the prone position and by rendering aid as his increasing medical distress became obvious was unreasonable and contrary to generally accepted police practises.
Direct ends.
Cross examination by Eric Nelson.
Nelson asked the witness if he analysed the case from an academic standpoint. Witness responded that it was reviewed under the professional standards for policing. Adds that the Graham v Connor is the standard.
Nelson asks if officer is entitled to rely upon their training. Witness responds that training should be based on best police practises. Witness adds that officers rely on their training. I'm not assessing an officer on whether they satisfy their training standards, I'm looking at whether they satisfy generally accepted police practises. For my purposes, it is irrelevant whether an officer was doing what he was trained to do because I'm looking at the professional norms which we expect.
Nelson explores the situation as experienced by the defendant when he arrived on the scene. That dispatch had considered that a second patrol car was needed. That reasonable police officers sometimes set out with one set of circumstances but end up with another. Witness responses convoluted and not helpful to Nelson.
Nelson offers the scenario whereby a suspect detained in a car creates a situation whereby his associates in another vehicle have the opportunity to flee or to hide drugs. Witness responds that he supposed it is possible but adds that in this case it was reasonable to expect that the defendant knew that there were passengers. Nelson then points out that the witness has spent 130-140 hours reviewing videos so should know where the different officers were located and when. That officer Chauvin was not to know that there were other persons in the suspect's vehicle. Witness says that an officer arriving in such circumstances would not necessarily know the entire situation.
Nelson points out that some suspects say they will cooperate but their actions are not cooperative, what is an officer to do in that situation, witness responds that he thinks it depends on the situation...no I don't think an officer has to assume that a person will at some future point comply.
Nelson suggests that an officer is entitled to use such force as it required to overcome a suspects resistance, witness responds that an officer can use force which is proportionate and reasonable to address an individuals non compliance or resistance assuming they have the legal authority to do so.
Nelson asks if it is the officer or the suspect who decides if a suspect should go into the squad car, witness responds that the officer decides assuming there is legal authority and the like. Nelson then asks assuming there is legal authority the suspect doesn't get to dictate whether he goes into the squad car or sits on the ground. Witness responds to some extent yes...there is a hmmn hmm yes.
Nelson refers to the video clips already viewed. Asks if a reasonable officer would know that the other officers were only on field day two. Witness responds it depends what a reasonable officer knows at that point.
Nelson makes the point that the officers of the second patrol arriving on the scene were not to know if the suspect's vehicle had been searched.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 13, 2021, 04:30:55 AM
A Summary of the trial - Week 2 Day 5 cont'd...
Witness affirms that putting Floyd in the prone position was unreasonable. Nelson points out that that was contrary to force training. Witness affirms that the prone position should only be used as a transitory position only.
Nelson refers to an opinion piece by the witness to the Washington Post four days after the Floyd incident in which it opined an excessive use of force. Witness responds that he formed the opinion that putting your knee across someone's neck except in absolutely unbelievably rare circumstances is generally an inappropriate use of force.
Asked if he could determine what force the defendant vhad applied to Floyd's neck, witness responds that he could not with any specificity. That the pressured varied occasionally.
Asked if reasonable police officers expect an EMS response within a reasonable time, witness responds yes...when you call EMS you expect them to respond.
That a reasonable officer needs to take notice of bystanders, witness agrees if threatening. That a reasonable police officer would know that they are being recorded, witness agrees that is fair description.
Nelson suggests that a reasonable use of force might not look pretty to a bystander, witness agrees that an officer can act reasonably in terms of generally accepted police practises and it can look bad but I do not think that is the case here.
Nelson makes reference to use of force continuum and passive resistance. Specifically where Floyd appears to kick out at officers after an officer attempted to control his legs.
Nelson states that reasonable officers could be distracted by bystanders, by what was occurring at the suspect's car, on the other side of the street, by radio traffic etc, witness concurs.
Nelson states that in reviewing the events, witness was not experiencing what the officers felt at that point, witness responds that individually he was not experiencing it no...that he was applying the reasonable officer on the scene framework.
Nelson states that witness does not have the sensory responses to what the officers were doing, witness states that tactile feedback does not show up on video...right.
That in doing his use of force review the witness was not doing it in a dangerous environment, witness responds that without making any jokes about his kids that no, he wasn't doing it in a dangerous situation.
Nelson states that witness has the luxury of slow motion, enhancement, looking at it from different perspectives, agreed? Witness responds that for the portion of the review where he was identifying what the underlying facts were, yes, I can slow video down, I can freeze frame, as I am taking those facts, I agree that a reasonable officer on the scene does not have those capabilities.
Witness states that officers can do various things to mitigate risk if a compliant suspect later becomes non compliant. Accepts officers can use some force to deal with passive resistance. That officers can maintain control when a suspect IDs placed in the recovery position.
End of cross examination.
Re direct examination.
Witness agrees need to constantly review their awareness of what is in front of them. That a reasonable officer should have taken note when a fellow officer pointed out that the suspect had no pulse. That someone struggling to breathe in a positional asphyxia situation is fighting to get air, not fighting officers.
End of direct examination.
[Judge advises jury that the defence case to start tomorrow with the last day of evidence to be Friday. Closing arguments to start on Monday which gives both sides extra time to prepare. Jury should expect sequestration from Monday so they should pack an overnight bag]
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Angelo222 on April 13, 2021, 10:30:22 AM
I thought the trial was to last four weeks but if closing speeches are to happen on Monday then we could very well have a verdict next week.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Eleanor on April 13, 2021, 11:09:27 AM
I thought the trial was to last four weeks but if closing speeches are to happen on Monday then we could very well have a verdict next week.
What price on The Defence? It is all looking very iffy to me. The Prosecution I mean.
I am trying to be objective about this. I don't like Chauvin, bearing in mind that I don't know him personally, but I am having with trouble finding him culpable.
I don't know very much about Racism in America, but that was one very large black man with a criminal record who was also a drug abuser. So what to say for a Policeman who was trying to deal with this person at that moment?
It will all come down to Semantics in the end. And whether or not Chauvin intended to kill Floyd. Which I very much doubt. And with a bit of Political Correctness thrown in, of course.
To convict any person based entirely on Political Correctness would be a disgrace.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Angelo222 on April 13, 2021, 12:34:18 PM
What price on The Defence? It is all looking very iffy to me. The Prosecution I mean.
I am trying to be objective about this. I don't like Chauvin, bearing in mind that I don't know him personally, but I am having with trouble finding him culpable.
I don't know very much about Racism in America, but that was one very large black man with a criminal record who was also a drug abuser. So what to say for a Policeman who was trying to deal with this person at that moment?
It will all come down to Semantics in the end. And whether or not Chauvin intended to kill Floyd. Which I very much doubt. And with a bit of Political Correctness thrown in, of course.
To convict any person based entirely on Political Correctness would be a disgrace.
Let's be honest, Chauvin will be the sacrificial lamb slaughtered to appease those within the black community who are only out for blood, nothing else will do, an eye for an eye and all that. Watching the squirming mayor of Brooklyn Center in Minneapolis yesterday must have been humiliating and now he has total control over the police too. If America though it had problems before, it is nothing to what is yet to come imo. Black criminals appear to be winning this war, they are becoming like the untouchables.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Eleanor on April 13, 2021, 01:16:39 PM
Let's be honest, Chauvin will be the sacrificial lamb slaughtered to appease those within the black community who are only out for blood, nothing else will do, an eye for an eye and all that. Watching the squirming mayor of Brooklyn Center in Minneapolis yesterday must have been humiliating and now he has total control over the police too. If America though it had problems before, it is nothing to what is yet to come imo. Black criminals appear to be winning this war, they are becoming like the untouchables.
I wouldn't be too sure about that. There are some Americans who can listen and understand.
There is almost nothing but violence these days, so now would be a good time to beware of what you wish for.
The Prosecution isn't looking good, with too many contradictions, so which Expert Witness are we supposed to believe? While one lone man is set to defend his client against an army. Shades of David and Goliath. And we all know who won that one.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Angelo222 on April 13, 2021, 01:24:05 PM
I wouldn't be too sure about that. There are some Americans who can listen and understand.
There is almost nothing but violence these days, so now would be a good time to beware of what you wish for.
The Prosecution isn't looking good, with too many contradictions, so which Expert Witness are we supposed to believe? While one lone man is set to defend his client against an army. Shades of David and Goliath. And we all know who won that one.
I accept that Eleanor but in my view Chauvin did wrong. He must realise this too otherwise he wouldn't have asked for a plea deal. I'm curious as to what the other three officers will get because of Chauvin's intransigence. At least one of them saw the danger after failing to find a pulse and suggested Floyd be turned on his side. Alas all too late unfortunately.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Eleanor on April 13, 2021, 01:38:29 PM
This isn't about Chauvin, in my opinion. It's about the gift of the gab. Let's see what The Defence has to say.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 13, 2021, 02:02:29 PM
I really hope he gets acquitted, because that would give protesters the moral right to destroy homes & businesses & then rebuild their new police free utopia.
I'm sure it will be a great success, I mean, If you don't have laws then there's no such thing as crime is there.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Angelo222 on April 13, 2021, 02:39:04 PM
I really hope he gets acquitted, because that would give protesters the moral right to destroy homes & businesses & then rebuild their new police free utopia.
I'm sure it will be a great success, I mean, If you don't have laws then there's no such thing as crime is there.
I suspect that there will be riots and looting regardless, it's a way of life for some.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 13, 2021, 02:49:18 PM
I really hope he gets acquitted, because that would give protesters the moral right to destroy homes & businesses & then rebuild their new police free utopia.
I'm sure it will be a great success, I mean, If you don't have laws then there's no such thing as crime is there.
Let's not regress
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 13, 2021, 03:03:03 PM
Today will see an important change in this trial as the state rests its case in chief intended to meet the state’s burden to prove defendant Chauvin guilty as charged beyond a reasonable doubt, and the defence start its case in chief intended to raise a reasonable doubt in the jury's mind.
I am hearing that the defence case is expected to be much briefer, three days max, in contrast with that of the state, which is now entering its twelfth day. Judge Cahill has indicated that he’s likely to allow closing arguments to take place on Monday, with jury instruction and deliberations to follow immediately afterwards, at which point the jury will be sequestered (sent to a hotel together).
It is noteworthy that the parties are free to suggest more substantive changes to the jury instructions, argue for their suggested changes before the judge. The reason for allowing such changes is to customise the regular instructions to best fit the unique factual and legal characteristics of this trial. Both parties have already done so in motions filed previously.
A reminder of the criminal charges Derek Chauvin is facing:
1. Murder in the second degree.
2. Assault in the third degree.
3. Manslaughter in the second degree.
4. Murder in the third degree.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 13, 2021, 03:29:09 PM
A Summary of the trial - Week 3 Day 2 pre testimony debate
Some discussion ensued this morning before proceedings start as to the admissibility of video footage from Park Officer Peter Chang's bodyworn camera. It was Chang who dealt with the two passengers in the SUV while the restraint was going on. It seems that some footage revealed information on a squad car screen about George Floyd. Prosecution want that information obscured or redacted before being published into the public domain.
Judge Peter Cahill agreed that part of the video should be redacted.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 13, 2021, 03:37:46 PM
A Summary of the trial - Week 3 Day 2
Judge Cahill invites prosecutor Matthew Frank to introduce his next witness, Frank states that the State of Minnesota rests its case.
Judge Cahill then invites defence attorney Eric Nelson to proceed with his first defence witness.
First up is Scott Creighton, a retired police officer with the Minneapolis Police Department.
Judge Cahill explains that the video is of an incident involving George Floyd on 6 May 2019. That it is being shown solely for the limited purpose to show the effect that opioids may or may not have had on the physical well-being of George Floyd. He states that it is not to be used as evidence of the character of George Floyd.
Witness says that on 6 May 2019 while on traffic duty he approached a red Ford Explorer on the passenger side. Passenger appeared unresponsive and non compliant. Witness had to remove the individual from the vehicle and handcuff him.
Court shown video footage of the event
Witness identifies the passenger as George Floyd.
Direct ends.
Cross examination by Erin Eldridge.
Asks witness if he had his gun drawn, replies yes. Agreed that Floyd was awake but incoherent a lot of the time but didn't fall down.
End of cross examination.
Re direct by Nelson.
Witness agrees that driver was requested to spit it out (reference to drugs).
Re direct ends.
Re re cross examination.
Eldridge asks if Floyd didn't drop dead while he was interacting with him, witness shakes head and bemusedly answers no.
Re re cross examination ends. Witness excused.
Next up is Michelle Moseng, retired paramedic.
Judge Cahill again explains that the video is again an incident involving George Floyd on 6 May 2019. That it is being shown solely for the limited purpose to show the effect that opioids may or may not have had on the physical well-being of George Floyd. He states that it is not to be used as evidence of the character of George Floyd.
Worked as a paramedic with Hennepin County for most of her career. Agrees that records were maintained of each interaction. Asked about an incident involving George Floyd at MPD, affirms. That Floyd required assessment, was confused, that he had consumed multiple opioid drugs every 20 minutes. That he had ingested pills just before his arrest (ref to red Ford Explorer incident). That she had taken his blood pressure and recommended he be transferred to the hospital.
Direct ends.
Cross examination by Eldridge.
Witness says Floyd initially denied having hypertension. That he had taken painkiller opoids. That Floyd stated that hexwas an addict. That Floyd was resistant and confused. That it took some time to convince him to go to the hospital. That he was alert and eventually obeyed commands. That respiration was normal throughout assessment. There was no respiratory distress, that all vital signs were normal. Didn't have any cardiac issues.
Eldridge adds that he went to the hospital band released two hours later.
End of cross examination. Witness excused
Yet another side bar and a 10 minute recess
In absence of jury, Judge Cahill brought in the next witness who was the backseat passenger in the SUV with George Floyd on the day he died. Asked, she is willing to answer questions. Also willing to answer if she was under the influence of drugs that day. Jury brought back in.
Witness is Shawanda Hill. Agrees that she was at the Cup Foods store and met George Floyd. Observed that Floyd was talking normally and offered her a lift. Went to the car with him, talking, and got a phonecall from daughter while Floyd fell asleep. At some point boys from shop approached the car but they couldn't wake Floyd up. Had told witness in the store that he was tired. That store clerks left car after she stated she would sent him back in. Tried several times to wake Floyd. At some point officers came to the car and woke up Floyd.
Direct ends.
Cross examination by Matthew Frank.
Asks if Floyd was alert, friendly, talkative. Witness agrees. That Floyd gave a little dance as they left store. That she woke Floyd up as police walked to the car. Adds that Floyd was confused when police knocked on SUV window. (Witness very agitated). Agrees that two officers came to the SUV, one at each side. Didn't complain of shortness of breath or of chest pains. That Floyd was very startled when officer pulled a gun on him.
Cross examination ends.
Re direct by Nelson.
Witness agrees that Floyd was normal prior to getting into the SUV. That he fell asleep and that she had to make several efforts to wake him.
Re direct ends.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Eleanor on April 13, 2021, 03:50:20 PM
A Summary of the trial - Week 3 Day 2 pre testimony debate
Some discussion ensued this morning before proceedings start as to the admissibility of video footage from Park Officer Peter Chang's bodyworn camera. It was Chang who dealt with the two passengers in the SUV while the restraint was going on. It seems that some footage revealed information on a squad car screen about George Floyd. Prosecution want that information obscured or redacted before being published into the public domain.
Judge Peter Cahill agreed that part of the video should be redacted.
How fair is that?
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 13, 2021, 05:19:52 PM
As a QC once told me Eleanor, trials aren't intended to be fair.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 13, 2021, 05:27:44 PM
A Summary of the trial - Week 3 Day 2 cont'd...
Next up is Peter Chang, a Minneapolis Parks Police officer with 4 years service.
Direct by Eric Nelson.
Witness admits that on 25 May 2020 he did respond to a call for assistance at approx 8pm to the Cup Foods store. Witness states that he was stationed at the park close by and heard a call for assistance to that location. As he was close he self-assigned to assist. Confirms that is normal practise for Park Police to assist MPD. That his jurisdiction is normally with the parks. That his training us same as MPD.
States that he arrived at the scene and found officers with the suspects. Did not know the other officers. That he was asked by one of the officers to identify Floyd on the police system so returned to his squad car. Identified Floyd on the system and observed officers walk Floyd in direction of Cup Foods.
Adds that he observed two officers place Floyd against their squad car outside Cup Foods and when he (Chang) approached them he was told to go watch Floyd's sub with other occupants. So crossed street to the SUV and told passengers to step away from the car. That observed second squad car arrive but did not know Chauvin. Had met officer Thao on a couple of occasions. Adds that there was a loud crowd forming. Was concerned that the SUV had not been searched. Wore a bodyworn camera. Adds that crowd were very aggressive towards other officers. Was concerned for their safety.
Some video footage followed from officer Chang's bodyworn camera albeit with incorrect time stamp, showing Chang respond to call for assistance and arriving at the scene.
Further video footage from officer Chang shown showing officer approach Floyd and two police officers before going across street to SUV passengers. Sees both passengers Hill and Morries stand on the footpath alongside the SUV. Chang waits near them as second squad car arrives. A concerned Hill heard saying that Floyd won't get into the squad car, "what is he doing" they're still fighting. Note that Morries gives a false name of Ricardo when asked. Hill appears to stagger. ENS ambulance eventually arrives, shouting heard from the bystanders across the street. Hill heard shouting, "Why is he going to hospital?" Chang continues to keep Hill and Morries on pavement albeit separated by this stage as Hill had wandered up to the road junction to get a better view of Floyd. Fire truck with paramedics then arrives but ambulance has already left. Some confusion as Fire Dept don't know where patient is. Chang asks officer Thao if Floyd ok, Thao says on way to hospital.
Questioned, Chang states he moved about quite a bit because he needed to observe other officers too. Agrees it is a busy intersection. Had no further involvement in case and went back to the park.
Direct ends.
Cross examination by Matthew Frank.
Chang explain asking another officer "still red" which was his way of asking if his bodycam was still on. Confirmed again that went through police academy with MPD recruits. That before training each recruit knows which department of police they will be working for. States doesn't have much interaction with MPD. That has same radio traffic as the city police.
That on arrival saw Floyd sitting on the sidewalk. Never heard a cide 3 call over the radio. Chang heard officer King ask Floyd for his name etc which he wrote down and passed to him.
Cross examination ends. 10 minute break and Counsel to chambers.
Defence recalls Officer Nicole MacKenzie. Originally a prosecution witness. States she is a medical support coordinator for MPD.
Jury shown excited delirium training material. Mackenzie states that it is a correct training document. Explains that excited delirium combination of psychosis, incoherent speech, superhuman strength etc. States that officers are taught to look for certain signs like excessive temperature, incoherent, resistant, acts as in just snapped, mental health issues. States that officer should get more resources started, stage EMS, restrain subject if excited delirium identified. States that veteran officers may not have seen this training.
Direct ends.
Cross examination by Matthew Frank.
Witness agrees that one thing that officers are taught to do is to put the subject in the recovery position. That officers are trained in CPR and that they have an obligation to use CPR if subject becomes unresponsive. And that applies to all officers as it is policy. And that includes officer Chauvin. States that it is not MPD's place to diagnose excited delirium, just refer subject to medical team in hospital.
Cross examination ends. Witness again excused. Break for lunch.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 13, 2021, 06:51:58 PM
A Summary of the trial - Week 3 Day 2 cont'd...
Next up is Barry Brodd, of BVB & Associates, a Consulting and Expert Witness Services Company which looks at police practises and the use of force.
Direct examination by Defence Counsel Eric Nelson.
Was previously a police officer for 29 years. Has in that time worked in various States for numerous police departments. Was 22 years with the Santa Rosa PD. Taught as a defensive tactics at the Santa Rosa Public Training Center for 35 years. Taught weapons law, interview and interrogation techniques, collision scene preservation, verbal judo, communication skills. Explains that verbal judo creates better verbal skills to overcome non compliance. Also taught crowd control. Taught while a police officer and thereafter continued for another 9 years. Actively involved in over 149 cases. Has testified in courts throughout the US. Has testified 10 times in Illinois, California, Hawaii. Was previously hired by Minneapolis City Attorneys Office.
Admits spent 60 hours on this case and receives compensation at $350 per hour for courtroom appearances and $275 for casework. Has received $11,400 in this case so far. States that his testimony is unbiased. That he initially reached out to the States Attorney Office since he had some exposure to the George Floyd incident but they did not retain him so he approached the Defence and was retained by them. Scope was to analysise the actions of Derek Chauvin. Has reviewed mostly videos, bodycam footage and material relative to the case.
Has formed the opinion in this case that Derek Chauvin was generally justified and acted with objective reasonableness following MPD policy and current standards in law enforcement in his interactions with Mr Floyd.
Confirms he is aware of the Graham v Connor factors in relation to Use if Force techniques. Asked to briefly provide his definition. Answers that the standard of G v C in his experience is that force must be appropriate. That it's how the subject to who you as a law enforcement officer are interacting responds to you. Imminent threat factor is a reasonable fear so you adjust your tactics accordingly. The officer can escalate if a suspect breaks away during an arrest.
Witness states that the officer needs to apply objective reasonableness. That it's easy to sit in an office in hindsight. Somewhat different to being in a live street scene.
Review looks at whether the officer has the legal right to arrest. Detention requires reasonable suspicion, an arrest requires probable cause. Reasonable suspicion refers to an infraction or a misdemeanor or a felony by the person you are going to detain. Probable cause is based on just that. That putting someone in handcuffs could be a detention rather than an arrest.
Witness explains that no resistance would be compliant. Passive resistance is where a suspect won't comply with instructions and active resistance is where force us used in a struggle. Active agression is where a suspect resists arrest and swings at the officer. Asked if use of force policies vary from State to State, responds that there are slight differences.
Asked if this was a use of deadly force case, witness says no. Give the example of a suspect who is tazered but subsequently falls, hits his head and dies. That is not the uses of deadly force but an unfortunate accidental death.
Asked about control techniques. Replies are an officer putting hands on a suspect and carrying out certain manoeuvres. Refers to what is known as one-upmanship. The officer is allowed to use a greater level of force in making an arrest. Adds that people subject to drugs are a special area as they are not subject to normal behaviours. The training requires that subjects under the influence of drugs should remain in handcuffs until they get to a medical facility.
In respect of situational awareness, states officers need to be aware of all movements in the vicinity and try to predict the potential for further violence. That dispatched only have so much information.
Witness has reviewed officer Chauvin's usage of force. States that Floyd level of resistance necessitated the use of force applied by Chauvin and the other officers. Asked about bodycam footage, states that anyone viewing such footage is not aware of things going on out of sight of the camera or periferal vision.
Agrees that manhandling Floyd out of the squad car was a justifiable use of force. That moving Floyd to the ground continued the use of force. That Floyd continued to struggle against the officers and kicked out at officer Lane. States that any resistor should go to the ground in the prone position. That the use of the Hobble restraint would have been appropriate had the officers decided to do so. Adds that the officers decision to not use the Hobble was a choice to deescalate the situation.
That the officers were correct to restrain Floyd given all the circumstances as they knew the Fire dept seconds or a minute and a half away and they had the equipment to carry out any medical intervention if required. Asked about keeping a drug impaired suspect in the prone position, states safer for the suspect and the officers to keep him in that position. States that someone who is shouting can obviously breathe regardless of what they are shouting. Asked if is reasonable to prolong the prone control, states that maintaining it is not a use of force but a restraint. Adds that a target person for positional asphyxia would be someone who was obese. Agrees that the MPD trains officers to put suspects in the recovery position. Explained that not putting a suspect in the recovery position in this case was space restrictions, there was traffic still driving down the street, there were crowd issues which distracted the officers and Floyd was still resisting at that point.
Asked what defines a crowd, states that the crowd in this case started to grow in size, became more vocal. That officers are trained to deal with the greater risk. Could see that officer Chauvin's focus started to move from Floyd to the crowd and at one stage was so threatened that he withdrew his pepperspray cannister and gave verbal commands to the crowd to stay back so in that he was dealing with the bigger threat.
Asked to wrap up, witness Barry Brodd stated that officer Chauvin was following his training, following current practices in policing and was objectively reasonable.
End of direct examination.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: carlymichelle on April 13, 2021, 08:03:07 PM
im watching and i think this guy has made alot of sense
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: carlymichelle on April 13, 2021, 08:13:48 PM
i think the police are dammed if they do and dammed if they dont personally and thats worldwide
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 13, 2021, 08:16:38 PM
i think the police are dammed if they do and dammed if they dont personally and thats worldwide
They are the medias favourite enemy, along with the white devil man.
The democrats & media are openly against the police & supporting a violent, anti police mob who declare 'no justice, no peace'. And they want justice their way.
Police officers are resigning at quite a high rate & it isn't in the least bit surprising as they are being treated like shit & being constantly demonized by the radical left.
Across America, cops are quitting. Here’s why that’s bad for public safety.
I can assure they do. Some folk are just crazy out there, most people never see it off course.
Was this good reason for Chauvin to be afraid of Floyd? Or at least very wary?
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 13, 2021, 09:46:14 PM
A Summary of the trial - Week 3 Day 2 cont'd...
Witness Barry Brodd.
Cross examination by Steve Schleicher. Sidebar called plus 5min break.
Schleicher asks witness to confirm that it is opinion that Floyd being handcuffed in the prone position on the ground was not a use of force to which the witness concurs. Asks witness if it is his opinion that this is the case because putting a suspect in such a position would not inflict pain, witness agrees.
Asked if it did inflict pain, witness asked if that would change his opinion. Witness states only if officers were manipulating the body or the hands in a way that would create pain, agrees that would be a use of force. Asked if Floyd actually experienced pain, would that be a use of force, witness states that if pain were inflicted through the prone control then he agrees that that would be a use of force. Schleicher makes reference to prone restraint on a hard surface and states that the defendant was on top of him. Witness says that he wouldn't say on top of him. Schleicher shows the photo of Chauvin with his knee in Floyd's neck, again witness disagrees that Chauvin was on top of him. Schleicher makes reference to Chauvin's other knee and states that it is on Floyd's back, witness disagrees and adds that it was on his arm. Asked again about use of force, witness agrees that both Chauvin's knees on Floyd could be seen as a use of force if Floyd experienced pain.
Asked about positional asphyxia, witness states that only an obsese person should have any problem with prone restraint. Witness states that he has been aware of positional asphyxia for 30 years. That law enforcement is aware of it.
Asked about putting a suspect in the recovery position, witness states that it only takes seconds to accomplish.
Asked if he knows how the MPD defines use of force, states he has some knowledge. Witness asked if force should be appropriate, witness agrees. Asked if he agrees that the original call made to Cup Goods overva $20 bill was on the less serious side, witness concurs.
Asked to explain what is a threat. Witness says it could be the position of the hands, position of the body. Agreed that there is a difference between a threat and a risk. Discussion ensued as to risk factors.
Agrees that someone passed out because of drugs does not constitute a threat. That it is the behaviour of the subject that can pose a threat. Agrees that a threat by a third party or crowd is not a reason to justify the use of force against someone who is not directing such activity.
Witness agrees that officers should at all times be aware of the suspect in their charge. In their custody is in their care. Agrees that the use of force must be reasonable at all times. Has received a copy of MPD use of force training manual but agrees that the phrase one-upmanship does not appear.
Witness agrees that information being received from other officers should be considered as part of the overall circumstances. Agreed that Floyd was handcuffed in the prone position for 9 minutes and 29 seconds.
Witness claims that Floyd actively resisted officers for some minutes after being put in the prone position.
Schleicher shows video showing start of the restraint period after Floyd was taken back out of the squad car. Showing defendants left knee on Floyd's neck and right one on Floyd's left shoulder blade/upper back, witness concurs.
Showed the still with defendants left foot off the ground and pressure in Floyd's neck, witness states that Chauvin was responding to Floyd's movements. Adds that Chauvin had to put his hand on the squad car to regain his balance.
Asked about Floyd saying that he can't breath six times, a reasonable police officer would take note, witness responds that Floyd was still struggling with the officers just as he had done since being placed in the squad car.
5 minute break.
Witness agrees that the defendant responded with a "Ah ha" when Floyd was complaining that everything hurt.
Shown another video with four bystanders stood in the pavement, witness agrees that they were not doing anything or saying anything but that defendant at that point could have been considering his options. Shown another video, officer Lane is heard to asked if they should roll Floyd onto his side, the defendant states not yet.
Schleicher suggests that defendant is still applying force to Floyd, witness concurs but adds more compliant. Explains that the position of Floyd's hands were not consistent with a fully compliant suspect. An angry Schleicher asks, "so attempting to breathe while restrained is being slightly non compliant? Witness responds No.
Shown yet another video of several bystanders, witness was asked if it was a threatening crowd, witness responds no. Adds that he heard officer Lane state that Floyd was passing out. Agrees that Floyd was not resisting arrest at that moment but in same prone control position.
Schleicher getting somewhat overwrought and frustrated with the witness states that Floyd wasn't resisting yet defendant was still in the same general position. That such was not a reasonable action. Nothing further.
Cross examination ends.
Re direct examination by Nelson.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 13, 2021, 09:47:56 PM
The problem is that they supposedly knew each other as they worked in the same club at one stage albeit Chauvin outside and Floyd inside.
If that was the case then Chauvin knew that Floyd was a passive resistor. I'm surprised this hasn't come out at the trial yet.
What? Does that mean what I think it means?
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 13, 2021, 11:40:22 PM
A Summary of the trial - Week 3 Day 2 cont'd...
Re direct examination by Nelson.
Witness states that the prone position is a control hold. That it doesn't impact on the structures of the neck. That a suspect can continue to move his head. That he observed Floyd move his head while in the prone position. That Floyd appeared to have a strong pulse according to the visible veins in his arms.
Nelson asks if when the defendant first came upon the scene and saw Floyd resist the police officers, would that have been a warning to be cautious. Witness affirms yes.
That three officers failed to get Floyd to stay in the squad car. That there was active agression by Floyd at the start of the prone restraint. Asked if officers are trained to assess the risk, witness responds yes. And the threat, witness responds yes.
Asked if a person is saying he can't breathe but continues to actively resist albeit at a lower level, would a reasonable officer take that into consideration, witness responds yes.
Asked about the time when the defendants boot came off the ground, would that be an increase in force, witness responds that he couldn't tell.
Asked about the moment when the defendant had to put his hand on the squad car, was that an increase of force or am attempt to regain his balance. Witness states the latter as Floyd was moving about so defendant lost his balance momentarily.
Asked if he saw a movement of the defendant's weight between his two knees, witness responds constantly.
Asked if you can underestimate a bystander just by age, agrees.
Asked if a 17-year-old can pose a danger, responds certainly.
Asked if traffic was an issue, responds that that was an environmental hazard as there were no barriers around them.
Asked if he agreed that a group of people are peaceful and placid at one moment, would they be so at the next. Responds no.
Should a reasonable officer be prepared for a change in a crowd. Responds that that would be part of the situational awareness in the planning process.
Witness states that an officer is trained to address with what they see as the greatest risk.
Is a reasonable officer trained that if someone is passed out that they might be more violent when they regain consciousness, witness agrees that they can be and adds that he has personally experienced such a situation in his own career as a police officer.
End of re direct examination.
Re re cross examination.
Schleicher asks if witness saw the autopsy photos showing the bruises on Floyd's face and shoulder. Responds no.
Again asks if struggling to breathe is not active resistance. Witness responds not to him but might have been to the officer.
Asks if an officer might not realise that they are contributing to positional asphyxia. Agrees.
End of re re cross examination. Witness excused. Jury excused.
Judge has further issues to discuss with counsel.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: carlymichelle on April 14, 2021, 12:08:04 AM
here is the full police cam of that day be aware it it is quite distressing
the police at the start are calm but like john said he was refusing to get in the car also he is making police nervous and he has foam around his mouth
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 14, 2021, 01:31:57 AM
Thanks for posting that video Carly, it certainly catches just about everything. Don't know why it hasn't been played in its entirety to the jury yet.
An awful incident which could so easily have been avoided. I just about caught Floyd say "I don't want to go back there" just as he emerged from the Mercedes SUV at 3.55
I'm thinking he meant prison, that was his real dread I think.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: carlymichelle on April 14, 2021, 04:03:38 AM
john i thought the police were handling him quite well at the start then he started fighting them and you hear the police saying he was acting erratic which was true
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 14, 2021, 11:57:21 AM
john i thought the police were handling him quite well at the start then he started fighting them and you hear the police saying he was acting erratic which was true
A lot of people have said that George was not the type to offer active aggression, clearly it was passive resistance that we saw on his arrest. He just didn't want to go back to jail for a $20 bill. I also believe Morries Hall has a lot to answer for in this case.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 14, 2021, 04:44:32 PM
A Summary of the trial - Week 3 Day 3 pre testimony debate
Defence motion for a judgement of acquittal.
A motion for judgment of acquittal rests on the claim that the evidence at trial was insufficient for a conviction. In other words, the defendant argues that no reasonable jury could possibly find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. A defendant can ask a judge to acquit on all of the charges or just some of them.
Eric Nelson for the defence argued that the numerous prosecution witnesses have generally given opposing views as to the cause of death of George Floyd. He argued that no jury could come to a reasonable decision given such conflicting testimony.
Steve Schleicher for the prosecution opposed the motion arguing that the issue is not about inconsistencies but about taken as a whole rests on whether the state has proved its case. He claims that most witnesses have opined that the defendant's use of force was unreasonable. That the force was unnecessary and carried on too long.
Judge Cahill refused the motion. States that the court must view the evidence in a light most favourable to the state.
Will Morries Hall testify?
Next issue was the question as to whether Morries Hall will testify. You might remember that Hall was the guy who was lurking in the Cup Foods store with George Floyd, in fact, was seen to pass his something just before Floyd made the purchase of cigarettes with a fake $20 bill. Hall was the front seat passenger in the SUV driven by George Floyd when police arrived on the scene and was seen to throw away a packet after Floyd had been removed from the SUV. Hall fled the Minneapolis area and was picked up in another state. He now refuses to testify by reason of self incrimination.
Attorney for Adrian Cousens and Geoffrey Isaacman acting for Morries Hall who is present at court. States Hall cannot answer any defence questions. Hall cannot put himself in that car with Floyd as it opens him up to drugs possession charges. And that is the casesl regardless of whether Chauvin is convincted or acquitted. Putting himself in that car gives the state free rein to bring third degree murder charges against him.
Judge Cahill tells Hall that he does have a 5th amendment right. Adds that ultimately it is his choice. Asks would he be willing to answer those questions.
Morries Hall states "no I am not". Add that he is fearful of criminal charges going forward.
Judge Cahill finds that Hall has a complete 5th amendment privilege here and accordingly quashes the subpoena.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 14, 2021, 07:35:02 PM
A Summary of the trial - Week 3 Day 3
First defence witness today was Dr David Fowler, an eminent retired forensic pathologist of some 37 years repute.
Direct examination by defence attorney Eric Nelson.
Witness states that he was formerly employed at the office of the chief medical examiner for the state of Maryland. Was educated in Capetown, South Africa and graduated there in 1983. Has taught at multiple hospitals. At one stage was a chief pathologist. As an assistant medical examiner was responsible for teaching other junior forensic pathologists. Responsible for recruiting and evaluating medical staff. Has testified in many hundreds of case previously. Has published many articles on pathology. Has reviewed on average 500-600 per year.
A member of the Forensics Panel. A committee which looks at and evaluates in order to ensure that case reviews are based on known science. It has experts from all medical fields. States that he first got involved in this case when approached by the defence. That he submitted the case to the Forensics Panel for review and that 13 professional individuals were involved in doing so. States that 7 of the peer reviewers are forensic pathologists l, that others include behavioural health specialists, pulmonologists, ER physicians and toxicologists.
States that the primary reviewer receives the entire package of materials in the case and that the others receive a smaller portion depending on their specialisms. Prosecution objects...line of questioning changes.
Asked about NAME (National Association of Medical Examiners), states that he is a member of that committee and was a former chairman. Adds that it incorporates a standards committee. Gives some detail as to what is involved in a death investigation. Explains that the death certificate concludes both the primary cause of death and includes other contributing conditions.
Asked about the death certificate in this case, states that the drugs contributed to Floyd's cardiac arrest. His opinion is that Floyd had a sudden cardiac arrhythmia due to his heart disease during his restraint by the police. That the use of fentanyl and methamphetamine, possible carbon moxide poisoning from the squad car exhaust, paraganglioma or the natural disease process that he had contributed to his death.
In respect of the cardiopulmonary arrest in Dr Baker's autopsy report, stated that Floyd's heart was enlarged. Explains that there are two methods to study the weight of a heart, the Molina and the Mayo. Bottom line was that Floyd had an enlarged heart. Explains that Floyd's enlarged heart would have needed increased nutrients. Explains that replenishment of the required nutrients is via the coronary arteries. Heart racing, palpitations, shortness of breath are all signs of an increased heart rate. That cardiac arrest will follow if subject doesn't rest.
States that Floyd had hypertension and an elevated blood pressure. That he had a narrowing of the arteries which resulted in a reduction of the supply of blood and nutrients. That the significance of the narrowing depends where the narrowing occurs. That Floyd had a 90% narrowing in one of his coronary arteries but was still able to go about his daily activities.
States that Floyd's blood pressure was greatly inflated and much higher than he would expect. Asked about the other contributing factors, states that carbon monoxide poisoning might have contributed to his death. States that there was evidence the squad car was running. Prosecution objection... sidebar.
Continues that the squad car was running as water droplets runoff could be seen on the road beside Me Floyd.
Explains how carbon monoxide can starve the body of oxygen and ultimately cause death. That subjects with heart disease are affected quicker. That Floyd's close proximity relative to the exhaust of the squad car could have been a contributing factor in his death.
States that studies have shown that a subject handcuffed in the prone position with weight applied to the back had no significant effect on breathing. Agrees that young healthy individuals were used, that it was not on a hard surface or that the subjects were not subject to stress. That the weight of Chauvin's knee on Floyd was considerably less than that used in the experiments.
Asked about injuries to Floyd, witness responds that there were no injuries at points where officer Chauvin had placed his knees. There was no bruising on his back or shoulders. I'm his opinion the absence of such injuries indicates that the force applied to Floyd was less than that required to restrain him.
States that Floyd's death was a sudden cardiac arrest on basis that his heart was vulnerable because it was too big, it demands lots of oxygen, it has very narrow vessels, there are certain drugs that are present in his system that put it at risk of arrhythmia, methamphetamine and fentanyl which slow down the breathing, we have the carbon monoxide which has the capacity to rob that additional oxygen-carrying capacity from the body and then we have vasoconstriction. At some point Floyd's heart exhausted it's reserves of metabolic supply and went into arrhythmia and stopped pumping blood effectively.
Nelson shows video of Floyd in the SUV when the police arrive showing that he had a white tablet in his mouth. Analysis of white tablets found in the SUV afterwards determined that Floyd's saliva and DNA was on them. Witness states that respiratory rate is decreased by fentanyl. That anything that lowers his oxygen saturation in the blood will act again to restrict the oxygen supply to his heart muscle past any blockage. States that methamphetamine has three major factors. It can cause arrhythmias, vasoconstriction and it causes the heart to beat faster. And that would impair someone with heart disease like Mr Floyd.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 14, 2021, 08:28:37 PM
A Summary of the trial - Week 3 Day 3 cont'd...
Witness states that the toxicology report would suggest that Floyd ingested fentanyl quite some time before his altercation with police but that the methamphetamine had been ingested closer to the event. (As Floyd had his hands cuffed in the back seat of the squad car, the tablets found there must have fallen out of his mouth.)
Asked what the relevance of finding a paraganglioma in this case, witness responds that it will cause the subject to be hypertensive (high blood pressure).
Asked if he had formed ultimately opinions as to the cause and manner of death of Mr Floyd. Witness responds yes. Adds that Mr Floyd died of a cardiac arrhythmia due to hypertensive atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease during the restraint.
Asked if there were contributing causes. Responds yes. Adds the substances, the fentanyl and the methamphetamine, the potential of a carbon monoxide role and the potential of the paraganglioma was adding adrenaline to this whole mixture making things even worse.
Asked how he would classify the manner. Witness responds that he would fall back to undetermined. Agrees that there were many contributing causes. No further questions.
Direct ends.
Cross examination by Jerry Blackwell.
Right out of the starting block Blackwell is on the attack. Firstly he refers to Chauvin's weight and asks the witness where he had got it from. Witness responds that he got it from counsel. But Blackwell points out that the calculation was made without the weight of the police equipment being added to it. Witness acknowledges that to be correct.
Blackwell then brings up the subject of the claimed carbon monoxide poisoning and refers witness to the autopsy report which has no reference to carbon monoxide. Witness agrees.
Blackwell then points out that carbon monoxide poisoning dies not feature in any report to which the witness replies that it wasn't tested for. Witness is then asked if he physically inspected the squad car alongside Floyd was restrained. Witness stated that he had not. Blackwell then asks how the witness knows it was even running to which witness responds that you could see the tell-tale signs of water dripping from the vehicles exhaust as Floyd was restrained beside it.
Blackwell then shows George Floyd loitering about in the Cup Foods store where he appeared to be chewing something white. Witness states that he never said it was a pill, that it was something white.
Asks witness about a scientist called Dr Ray and a discussion he had had with defence counsel, witness is asked about the withdrawal of a study on use of force restraint in relation to positional asphyxia which scientist later denied he had withdrawn. Witness responds that he hasn't completely withdrawn his opinion. Blackwell interrupts.
Witness agrees that The Forensic Panel is a business, that is not a government department or a no profit organisation.
Witness agrees that in a substantial number of cases of positional asphyxia, that there are no sign at autopsy of bruisings or any other manifestations of force having been applied.
Witness corrects Blackwell and states that he referred previously to sudden cardiac arrest and not sudden death. Agrees that immediate emergency care should have been given when he went into cardiac arrest.
Agrees that an anoxic seisure means that the brain is suffering because of a lack of oxygen. Agrees that no oxygen to the brain will result in a PEA.
Witness asked about the effect on fentanyl in overdose. Witness states that Floyd didn't die from a fentanyl overdose but it contributed.
Blackwell again refers to the pills found in the SUV. Witness agrees that no pills were found in Floyd's stomach.
Referring to the methamphetamine, witness agrees that the amount found in Floyd's bloodstream was consistent with that in a therapeutic environment.
Blackwell asks about the timeline in witnesses report. Witness states that he has no reason to disagree with that at this time.
Cross examination ends. Afternoon break.
Re Direct.
Asks if the state ever provided the weight of police equipment. Witness answers no.
Asked about the bruising, witness responds that the more energy that is applied to the body the more the likelihood of an injury and the heavier the person the more likelihood there will be more energy so yes.
Witness states that he has seen bruising associated with positional asphyxia in other cases.
Asks witness if the State of Minnesota has provided any information testing on the possibility of carbon monoxide poisoning, states no. Witness confirms that only in the last few days has the State of Minnesota provided him with photos of the underside of squad car 320.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 14, 2021, 11:25:08 PM
A Summary of the trial - Week 3 Day 3 cont'd...
Asked about a white object in Floyd's mouth in the Cup Foods store and in the SUV when officer Lane approached him. Witness states that he cannot say if it was the same object in both cases or even what it was.
Asked about the drugs found in the back of squad car 320. Confirms that drugs tested positive for Mr Floyd's saliva and DNA. Confirmed Floyd was rear handcuffed in the squad car.
Asked about the affidavit by Dr Ray, witness states that he didn't retract his comments wrt obsese subjects.
With reference to The Forensic Panel committee, witness states that his expert opinion would not change simply because he was paid.
Judge sustained an objection from the prosecution when Nelson asked the witness if people who volunteered their time were more trustworthy.
Witness states that the defendant's knee did not obstruct Floyd's carotid artery and even if it had instructed one, the other one and the two other veins would have continued to supply the brain with enough blood for it to function.
Witness states that it is common to see bruising with asphyxia cases.
Witness states that he has not been provided with any toxicological report relating to Floyd's stomach contents. Asked if he has been made aware if any subsequent tests by the pathologist who carried out the autopsy on Floyd, witness states he hasn't.
Witness agrees that Floyd complained of breathing difficulty even before being put in the prone position.
Re Direct ends
Re cross examination.
Blackwell refers to one pill found in the back of squad car 320. Asks witness if he saw any video that showed Floyd spitting out a pill. Witness states he did not.
End of cross examination. Sidebar.
Proceedings ended for today.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 15, 2021, 11:04:50 AM
It was noted yesterday that Judge Cahill disallowed a question from prosecution attorney Jerry Blackwell who asked forensic pathologist Dr David Fowler if he considered evidence from those who had given evidence for free more reliable than that of paid witnesses. Seems the bitchiness has begun!
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 15, 2021, 01:25:53 PM
It was noted yesterday that Judge Cahill disallowed a question from prosecution attorney Jerry Blackwell who asked forensic pathologist Dr David Fowler if he considered evidence from those who had given evidence for free more reliable than that of paid witnesses. Seems the bitchiness has begun!
Interesting. Did the Defence have to pay its expert witnesses for their testimony then?
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 15, 2021, 01:38:54 PM
Interesting. Did the Defence have to pay its expert witnesses for their testimony then?
That would be the norm.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 15, 2021, 03:49:17 PM
A Summary of the trial - Week 3 Day 4 pre testimony discussion
Mr Chauvin not to testify
Judge Cahill today formally advised the defendant that he has the 5th Amendment right not to testify. The defendant told the court that he does not wish to testify. Judge Cahill asked the defendant if this was his free choice and that he was under no external pressure to make such a decision. The defendant stated that the decision was his and his alone.
Withheld test results
Much discussion yesterday centred on the possibility that George Floyd might have been subject to carbon monoxide poisoning. The court was told that there were no tests done to establish if this had in fact occurred.
It appears that overnight, the pathologist Dr Baker contacted the States Attorney Office and revealed that such tests were undertaken on Mr Floyd on the night of 25 May 2020 but for one reason or another have never been provided to the defence.
Defence attorney Eric Nelson stated that he only received this information at 7.53am today. That the state retains the blood samples and have had ample opportunity to provide the test results. That it is incredibly prejudicial to the defence since Dr Fowler has now left the state. Nelson states that Dr Tobin may have seen these test results done at the autopsy, there is no indication if these are new test results or other test results. Nevertheless, it is the defence possible that these test results should not go before the jury and if they were that he would be moving for a mistrial.
State seeking to call rebuttal witnesses
Jerry Blackwell for the prosecution stated that they would not be having these discussions had Dr Fowler not raised new opinion. One issue being the evidence in respect of Floyd's enlarged heart. States that Dr Fowler did not enter the reference to an enlarged heart in his report and only did so while on the stand. Blackwell wants to call a pulmonologists to rebut such evidence.
Blackwell again states that Dr Fowler testified in relation to hypoxia but did not offer such in his report.
In relation to the carbon monoxide tests, Blackwell states that the prosecution again wishes to recall a witness to speak to these tests.
Judge Cahill rules that Dr Fowler came right out in his report and stated that the state should have tested Floyd's blood for carbon monoxide. That Dr Baker called the States Attorney's Office and said that the results are there or should be there. Judge adds that he is not claiming any bad faith on the States part but that it is very odd that the state medical centre failed to turnnovervtest results which may have be buried a little deeper. That their standard operating procedures should be checked and ensure that this not happen again. That defence is correct that it is untimely for this to happen, that the defence witness has now left the state. Rules that Dr Tobin will not be permitted to re-testify about the lab results. Should he do so it will be a mistrial pure and simple. Judge adds that this late disclosure is not the way we should be operating here. Rules that Dr Tobin can again testify about carbon monoxide generally and if the squad car was running or not, or of the potential effects of Floyd lying on the ground near the car exhaust. But cannot testify about the newly revealed test results.
Judge is concerned that state wants a pulmonologist to testify in respect of the size of Floyd's heart, but will allow it based on previous studies. Will not allow Dr Tobin to talk about hypoxic seisure, scientific research supporting narrowing will be allowed, lab tests are not allowed, but can talk about carbon monoxide in the likelihood of a high and breathing based on environmental factors and he may opine as to whether George Floyd's heart was enlarged or not.
Prosecutor Jerry Blackwell points out that both sides have the test results from May 2020 relating to the oxygen levels in Mr Floyd's blood. States that a high CO level would create a low oxygen level is inversely related.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 15, 2021, 04:53:58 PM
A Summary of the trial - Week 3 Day 4
Defence attorney Eric Nelson states that the defence rests. (Given Derek Chauvin has chosen not to testify).
Prosecution to recall rebuttal witness.
Witness Dr Martin Tobin recalled to the stand. Irish American Dr Martin Tobin from Freshford in Ireland is a physician in pulmonary and critical care medicine at the Hines VA Hospital and Loyola University Medical School in Chicago.
Prosecutor Jerry Blackwell rebuttal.
Asks witness about the issue of Floyds potential exposure to carbon monoxide. Asked if he viewed Dr Fowler's evidence yesterday, witness affirms that he was. Shown a slide which states that, "In 7 minutes Mr Floyd's carboxyhemoglobin could have increased by 10 - 18%". States he does not agree.
Witness explains that the carboxyhemoglobin is formed when the carbon monoxide combines with the protein in a blood. It is important because when the CO combines with the proteins in the blood it displaces the oxygen. To breathe properly you need the oxygen in the haemoglobin and not the carbon monoxide.
Witness states again that a carboxyhemoglobin level of 10 - 18% is not reliable because I base it on the arterial blood gas (ABG) level when Floyd was in the emergency room at Hennepin County Hospital. Sidebar called by defence.
Judge Cahill sustains objection by defence.
Blackwell asks witness to explain oxygen saturation testing in the blood. (NB: Blackwell is on dangerous ground here as a mistrial could be called if witness strays into out-of-limits area).
Witness explains that the ABG test was done on Floyd at the hospital. This combined with the oxygen level test found that the blood was 98% saturated. This means that the CO level could only have been 2% which is within the normal range.
Asked about pressure on Floyd's back and the narrowing of the hypopharynx. Asked if he had found research on this. Responds that studies show that if you lower the size of the lungs you decrease the size of the hypopharynx...all the studies show that. Asked if there are studies that pressure on the neck narrows the hypopharynx, witness responds no. Adds that when they do readerch, they try and do research on studies that might be puzzling, that you would kind of be expecting a bit of a surprise.
Prosecution questions end. Court time out. Issues in court, Judge calls recess.
Defence attorney Eric Nelson.
Asks witness where the research relating to the narrowing of the hypopharynx is found. Witness responds that it is found in psysiological journals or a blend of psysiological and clinical.
Questioning ends.
Jerry Blackwell states that the State of Minnesota rests.
Judge Cahill tells jury that evidence is now complete and that the next step will be to listen to closing arguments on Monday.
Session ends early.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 15, 2021, 07:33:24 PM
Europe - general: https://euroexpert.org/fileadmin/Tmpl/documents/downloads/Remuneration_Study_2016.pdf
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 18, 2021, 04:56:59 PM
Democrat Maxine Waters On If Derek Chauvin Is Acquitted: ‘Get More Confrontational’ On ‘The Street’
Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) said on Saturday night that if Derek Chauvin is not found guilty of murder for the death of George Floyd that activists must “get more confrontational” on “the street” because the activists need to “make sure that they know we mean business.”
Democrat Maxine Waters On If Derek Chauvin Is Acquitted: ‘Get More Confrontational’ On ‘The Street’
Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) said on Saturday night that if Derek Chauvin is not found guilty of murder for the death of George Floyd that activists must “get more confrontational” on “the street” because the activists need to “make sure that they know we mean business.”
Could that be seen as an attempt to pervert the course of justice by influencing the jury?
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 18, 2021, 05:04:19 PM
Maxine Waters tells Minnesota BLM protesters 'to get more confrontational' one day after violent anti-police clashes erupted across US
'I am not happy that we have talked about police reform for so long,' Waters said. 'We're looking for a guilty verdict,' she added in regards to the Derek Chauvin trial. 'If we don't, we cannot go away.'
'We gotta stay on the street,' Waters was recorded saying, adding that protesters needed 'to get more confrontational' and they should ignore the curfew in place.
It really would be somewhat amusing to me if activists constant demands for justice were the very thing that prevented Chauvin's conviction.
Maybe that’s exactly what they want, to reinforce their sense of injustice, deepen their sense of grievance and give them an excuse to go on an almighty rampage?
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 18, 2021, 06:05:03 PM
Chauvin Trial Lawyers Bring Everything Together in Closing Arguments on Floyd’s Death
The livestreamed trial of ex-Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin in the death of George Floyd nears a conclusion Monday with two lawyers presenting their final, most compelling version of what happened on the street outside Cup Foods almost one year ago.
After 45 witnesses and 14 days of testimony in the Hennepin County District Court trial, special prosecutor Steve Schleicher and defense lawyer Eric Nelson will make their closing arguments, the final words the jurors hear from them before retreating behind closed doors to deliberate.
“The whole trial is about dropping the puzzle pieces in the middle of the courtroom and slowly putting them together,” St. Paul criminal and civil litigator A.L. Brown said. The closing argument is “putting them together how you see it.”
Mitchell Hamline School of Law Prof. Carolyn Grose said closing arguments are “where you get to say everything you’ve been hinting at. … The closing is where you tell the whole story without interruption.”
The prosecution, which goes first and gets a brief rebuttal by special prosecutor Jerry Blackwell after the defense, carries the bigger burden and has much more ground to cover. The prosecution’s job is to convince the jury of Chauvin’s guilt “beyond a reasonable doubt” on three charges: second-degree murder, third-degree murder and second-degree manslaughter. Nelson’s job is to convince at least one juror that there is reasonable doubt.
Mitchell Hamline School of Law Prof. Ted Sampsell-Jones said the state’s case was methodical and emotional, and he expects the closing to match. “They will walk through the three big pillars of evidence: the video and eyewitness testimony, the use-of-force experts and the medical experts,” he said.
Retired assistant Hennepin County attorney Judy Johnston, who delivered many closings in high-profile murder trials, said she always started by bringing the victim into the courtroom, projecting their image and saying, “This person should be with us today except this defendant made a series of decisions to take his life.”
She would then shift into the narrative of what happened before talking about the legal elements, but she didn’t want to focus solely on the law. “I wanted the jury to feel it from the victim’s perspective,” she said.
In a 1995 Hennepin County case, the victim was 3-year-old Adrian Brasch, whose stepfather slashed his skull and face with a knife. Johnston won a conviction after she explained in closing that defensive wounds on the boy’s hands indicated Adrian had crouched in a corner and held up his hands to fight off his attacker.
In closings, both sides can use any evidence from the trial. In their case against Chauvin, the prosecutors have shown extensive video from surveillance cameras, police body-worn cameras and the worldwide-seen footage shot by teenager Darnella Frazier from the sidewalk on her cellphone.
Three weeks ago in his opening statement, Blackwell previewed Chauvin’s videotaped response to Floyd’s pleas.
“You will see that he does not let up and that he does not get up,” Blackwell said.
Brown expects the video to be shown in the state’s closings.
“The most powerful piece of evidence will be that video,” Brown said. “There were protests across the country and across the world because of the video.”
University of Minnesota law Prof. Jon Lee said the video also helps the state underscore an element of the crimes — Chauvin knowingly using force on Floyd. “It will evoke a reaction in jurors,” Lee said. “You want to create a compelling picture. You want them to have the feeling that they have to convict this person.”
Sampsell-Jones said the state will make an emotional appeal, arguing that Floyd “was a human, and how he did not deserve this treatment — and how Chauvin’s conduct was outrageous and wholly unjustified.”
But the prosecution can’t rely on emotion alone. It has to talk about the law and define the terms.
Prosecutors will say that Chauvin caused Floyd’s death while assaulting him and is guilty of second-degree murder. They will say he’s guilty of third-degree murder because he caused Floyd’s death while perpetrating an eminently dangerous act on Floyd.
There’s no time limit, but the prosecution has to be careful not to go on too long. “If you kind of suggest this case is more complicated by doing that, there’s some risk,” retired Hennepin County Judge Kevin Burke said.
Brown said prosecutors have a tendency to revisit every detail.
“This is a time to argue, not recite,” he said. “Explain why you brought the damn case in the first place.”
For most of the jurors, this is probably their first case and “they want the ‘Law & Order’-type closing,” he said, referring to the television show. “And as much as you can, you ought to give it to them. … For crying out loud, give them a little drama, a little passion.”
The defense attorney’s job in the closing is much more focused.
“You try to isolate one or two issues and argue the evidence on those issues and make the claim they haven’t proved it,” longtime Minnesota defense lawyer Joe Friedberg said.
Brown said a defense lawyer wants jurors to think, “Something’s off,” or “the defendant, I don’t particularly like him, but something’s not adding up.”
In this case, Friedberg said he’d argue that testimony and evidence failed to show Floyd’s blood flow or airway was compromised so Chauvin’s force didn’t cause his death. He said he’d argue the excited crowd was a distraction and Chauvin had no idea Floyd had died.
Bradford Colbert, who teaches at Mitchell Hamline and is a part-time public defender, agreed the defense is likely to argue that Chauvin wasn’t indifferent to Floyd, but was distracted.
Colbert and Lee expect Nelson to argue there’s reasonable doubt about what killed Floyd.
“All he will need to show is there was not proof beyond a reasonable doubt on that particular element,” Lee said, adding that if Chauvin didn’t cause Floyd’s death, “you can’t convict.”
To reach a verdict of guilty or not guilty, all 12 jurors need to agree on a charge. One dissenting juror can result in a hung jury.
So while a global audience looks in on the closings via livestream, the lawyers will be speaking to an audience not visible to anyone outside the courtroom.
“The whole world is watching,” Grose said. “But the whole world is not deciding.”
Thanks for posting that video Carly, it certainly catches just about everything. Don't know why it hasn't been played in its entirety to the jury yet.
An awful incident which could so easily have been avoided. I just about caught Floyd say "I don't want to go back there" just as he emerged from the Mercedes SUV at 3.55
I'm thinking he meant prison, that was his real dread I think.
Watching parts of Mr McMillans' testimony and with reference to the video shown. I am sure I heard FG saying while refusing to get in the car- something like "Am I going back to jail? or I am not going back there " The police officer replied something about being arrested for forgery...
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on April 18, 2021, 06:40:33 PM
The livestreamed trial of ex-Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin in the death of George Floyd nears a conclusion Monday with two lawyers presenting their final, most compelling version of what happened on the street outside Cup Foods almost one year ago.
After 45 witnesses and 14 days of testimony in the Hennepin County District Court trial, special prosecutor Steve Schleicher and defense lawyer Eric Nelson will make their closing arguments, the final words the jurors hear from them before retreating behind closed doors to deliberate.
“The whole trial is about dropping the puzzle pieces in the middle of the courtroom and slowly putting them together,” St. Paul criminal and civil litigator A.L. Brown said. The closing argument is “putting them together how you see it.”
Mitchell Hamline School of Law Prof. Carolyn Grose said closing arguments are “where you get to say everything you’ve been hinting at. … The closing is where you tell the whole story without interruption.”
The prosecution, which goes first and gets a brief rebuttal by special prosecutor Jerry Blackwell after the defense, carries the bigger burden and has much more ground to cover. The prosecution’s job is to convince the jury of Chauvin’s guilt “beyond a reasonable doubt” on three charges: second-degree murder, third-degree murder and second-degree manslaughter. Nelson’s job is to convince at least one juror that there is reasonable doubt.
Mitchell Hamline School of Law Prof. Ted Sampsell-Jones said the state’s case was methodical and emotional, and he expects the closing to match. “They will walk through the three big pillars of evidence: the video and eyewitness testimony, the use-of-force experts and the medical experts,” he said.
Retired assistant Hennepin County attorney Judy Johnston, who delivered many closings in high-profile murder trials, said she always started by bringing the victim into the courtroom, projecting their image and saying, “This person should be with us today except this defendant made a series of decisions to take his life.”
She would then shift into the narrative of what happened before talking about the legal elements, but she didn’t want to focus solely on the law. “I wanted the jury to feel it from the victim’s perspective,” she said.
In a 1995 Hennepin County case, the victim was 3-year-old Adrian Brasch, whose stepfather slashed his skull and face with a knife. Johnston won a conviction after she explained in closing that defensive wounds on the boy’s hands indicated Adrian had crouched in a corner and held up his hands to fight off his attacker.
In closings, both sides can use any evidence from the trial. In their case against Chauvin, the prosecutors have shown extensive video from surveillance cameras, police body-worn cameras and the worldwide-seen footage shot by teenager Darnella Frazier from the sidewalk on her cellphone.
Three weeks ago in his opening statement, Blackwell previewed Chauvin’s videotaped response to Floyd’s pleas.
“You will see that he does not let up and that he does not get up,” Blackwell said.
Brown expects the video to be shown in the state’s closings.
“The most powerful piece of evidence will be that video,” Brown said. “There were protests across the country and across the world because of the video.”
University of Minnesota law Prof. Jon Lee said the video also helps the state underscore an element of the crimes — Chauvin knowingly using force on Floyd. “It will evoke a reaction in jurors,” Lee said. “You want to create a compelling picture. You want them to have the feeling that they have to convict this person.”
Sampsell-Jones said the state will make an emotional appeal, arguing that Floyd “was a human, and how he did not deserve this treatment — and how Chauvin’s conduct was outrageous and wholly unjustified.”
But the prosecution can’t rely on emotion alone. It has to talk about the law and define the terms.
Prosecutors will say that Chauvin caused Floyd’s death while assaulting him and is guilty of second-degree murder. They will say he’s guilty of third-degree murder because he caused Floyd’s death while perpetrating an eminently dangerous act on Floyd.
There’s no time limit, but the prosecution has to be careful not to go on too long. “If you kind of suggest this case is more complicated by doing that, there’s some risk,” retired Hennepin County Judge Kevin Burke said.
Brown said prosecutors have a tendency to revisit every detail.
“This is a time to argue, not recite,” he said. “Explain why you brought the damn case in the first place.”
For most of the jurors, this is probably their first case and “they want the ‘Law & Order’-type closing,” he said, referring to the television show. “And as much as you can, you ought to give it to them. … For crying out loud, give them a little drama, a little passion.”
The defense attorney’s job in the closing is much more focused.
“You try to isolate one or two issues and argue the evidence on those issues and make the claim they haven’t proved it,” longtime Minnesota defense lawyer Joe Friedberg said.
Brown said a defense lawyer wants jurors to think, “Something’s off,” or “the defendant, I don’t particularly like him, but something’s not adding up.”
In this case, Friedberg said he’d argue that testimony and evidence failed to show Floyd’s blood flow or airway was compromised so Chauvin’s force didn’t cause his death. He said he’d argue the excited crowd was a distraction and Chauvin had no idea Floyd had died.
Bradford Colbert, who teaches at Mitchell Hamline and is a part-time public defender, agreed the defense is likely to argue that Chauvin wasn’t indifferent to Floyd, but was distracted.
Colbert and Lee expect Nelson to argue there’s reasonable doubt about what killed Floyd.
“All he will need to show is there was not proof beyond a reasonable doubt on that particular element,” Lee said, adding that if Chauvin didn’t cause Floyd’s death, “you can’t convict.”
To reach a verdict of guilty or not guilty, all 12 jurors need to agree on a charge. One dissenting juror can result in a hung jury.
So while a global audience looks in on the closings via livestream, the lawyers will be speaking to an audience not visible to anyone outside the courtroom.
“The whole world is watching,” Grose said. “But the whole world is not deciding.”
My take on this confused about the 'murder' charges. Holding back for the closing arguments I will say as my honest opinion: The police officer who has been charged did not set out that day to kill someone, nor did he set out to kill a black person, nor did he set out to kill FG in particular, and mitigating circumstances have to be given credence i.e the drugs and affect on FG's behavior. That being said The police officer does have what looks like a smug look on his face while kneeling on FG's neck.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 19, 2021, 05:56:41 AM
Ted Cruz slams Maxine Waters for 'encouraging riots and violence' after she called on BLM protesters to get 'more confrontational' - hours before two National Guardsmen were injured in drive-by shooting in Minneapolis
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 19, 2021, 06:18:35 AM
George Floyd killing: protests flare as Americans await verdict in Chauvin trial
Maxine Waters, one of the most influential Black members of Congress, joined protesters in Brooklyn Center shortly before a curfew on Saturday night, and spoke to them about the need to see accountability for Chauvin.
“I hope that we’re going to get a verdict that says, guilty, guilty, guilty,” Waters said. “And if we don’t, we cannot go away.”
“Not manslaughter, no,” Waters added. “This is guilty for murder.”
George Floyd killing: protests flare as Americans await verdict in Chauvin trial
Maxine Waters, one of the most influential Black members of Congress, joined protesters in Brooklyn Center shortly before a curfew on Saturday night, and spoke to them about the need to see accountability for Chauvin.
“I hope that we’re going to get a verdict that says, guilty, guilty, guilty,” Waters said. “And if we don’t, we cannot go away.”
“Not manslaughter, no,” Waters added. “This is guilty for murder.”
im sensing trouble in the us this week im not sure of the police officers in this case will be charged or not yes he was on his neck but george floyd admitted himself he had too much medicine on that full body cam i posted and his agitated state fighting the police etc most likley caused his heart to stop ie a heart attack i could be wrong of course also the person in the car was his drug dealer according to georges girlfriend and was the one who wouldnt testify incase he incriminated himself
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 19, 2021, 09:15:00 AM
im sensing trouble in the us this week im not sure of the police officers in this case will be charged or not yes he was on his neck but george floyd admitted himself he had too much medicine on that full body cam i posted and his agitated state fighting the police etc most likley caused his heart to stop ie a heart attack i could be wrong of course also the person in the car was his drug dealer according to georges girlfriend and was the one who wouldnt testify incase he incriminated himself
He's already been charged, that's why he's currently being tried.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 19, 2021, 09:28:58 AM
can i ask a ? those who are so anti police would you call them if you needed help?? wouldnt that be a bit hypocritical of you??
Are you directing that question to anyone on this forum Carly, as I don't think there are any posters here who are anti Police? Perhaps it was a rhetorical question..?
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Eleanor on April 19, 2021, 11:03:33 AM
Are you directing that question to anyone on this forum Carly, as I don't think there are any posters here who are anti Police? Perhaps it was a rhetorical question..?
I did call The British Police when I needed help. They did nothing and then later tried to stitch me up. This was concerning Iranians at the time of the deposing of The Shah, who were rampaging around England wrecking the property of others and treating women like dirt. The Police supported these Iranians.
So, you've got a bit of everything in there. I have never called The Police since.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 19, 2021, 01:23:30 PM
Today's sees the closing arguments by the prosecution and the defence and the Judge's instructions to the jury.
Out of interest, unless the state can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Chauvin knew he was creating a foreseeable risk of deadly force harm to Floyd, and also prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Chauvin has consciously disregarded that risk, they have not proven beyond a reasonable doubt either second-degree manslaughter or third-degree murder.
And in contrast with second-degree manslaughter and third-degree murder, the assault charge does not require that Chauvin knew he was creating a foreseeable risk of deadly force harm to Floyd, nor to prove that Chauvin has consciously disregarded that risk. Indeed, in order to convict on third-degree assault, the state need not prove that Chauvin intended any particular degree of harm to Floyd at all.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 19, 2021, 02:05:54 PM
Watching parts of Mr McMillans' testimony and with reference to the video shown. I am sure I heard FG saying while refusing to get in the car- something like "Am I going back to jail? or I am not going back there " The police officer replied something about being arrested for forgery...
That's right, he did say that he didn't want to go back to jail. Obviously that is why he resisted arrest so much.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 19, 2021, 05:43:24 PM
OMG. the Defence Attorney & Space Aliens @)(++(*
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on April 19, 2021, 05:53:57 PM
Ted Cruz slams Maxine Waters for 'encouraging riots and violence' after she called on BLM protesters to get 'more confrontational' - hours before two National Guardsmen were injured in drive-by shooting in Minneapolis
wasn't it a black man breaking the law what started his downfall? Now more black people will be breaking the law and not to be arrested as it is racist? Oh OK.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on April 19, 2021, 05:56:25 PM
George Floyd killing: protests flare as Americans await verdict in Chauvin trial
Maxine Waters, one of the most influential Black members of Congress, joined protesters in Brooklyn Center shortly before a curfew on Saturday night, and spoke to them about the need to see accountability for Chauvin.
“I hope that we’re going to get a verdict that says, guilty, guilty, guilty,” Waters said. “And if we don’t, we cannot go away.”
“Not manslaughter, no,” Waters added. “This is guilty for murder.”
Is it an all white male jury and are they wearing white pointy hats with white robes? cos if that the case then they should riot... If not do they want to repel laws and the courts as well as defund the police?
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on April 19, 2021, 06:01:19 PM
I did call The British Police when I needed help. They did nothing and then later tried to stitch me up. This was concerning Iranians at the time of the deposing of The Shah, who were rampaging around England wrecking the property of others and treating women like dirt. The Police supported these Iranians.
So, you've got a bit of everything in there. I have never called The Police since.
Nothings changed! look at the b@st ards grooming gangs around the country It is racist to call them Asian grooming gangs apparently! best to call BNP lol
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 19, 2021, 06:06:27 PM
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 19, 2021, 06:33:20 PM
Well anyway, I think the only reasonable response to the pigs head being left at the defence witnesses house is to nail a bag of Fentanyl to the prosecution witnesses front door.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 19, 2021, 06:34:16 PM
Well anyway, I think the only reasonable response to the pigs head being left at the defence witnesses house is to nail a bag of Fentanyl to the prosecution witnesses front door.
The repercussions of this prosecution will stretch far beyond the courtroom in Minneapolis.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 19, 2021, 06:37:08 PM
The repercussions of this prosecution will stretch far beyond the courtroom in Minneapolis.
IMO George Floyd was the agent of his own destruction. Had he not participated in criminal activity, taken drugs and fought with police he would probably be alive still.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Angelo222 on April 19, 2021, 06:42:22 PM
It appears the pig's head on a stick is a common theme here.
"Minnesota police have arrested 24 people amid clashes with Black Lives Matter protesters brandishing a pig's head on a stake on a fourth night of chaos on Wednesday following the police shooting of a black man there days earlier."
IMO George Floyd was the agent of his own destruction. Had he not participated in criminal activity, taken drugs and fought with police he would probably be alive still.
Do you think he deserved to die under the knee of the police officer?
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 19, 2021, 06:43:11 PM
The defence attempted to have it moved but judge Cahill wouldn't permit it.
The judge was of the opinion that moving it would only move the rioting and looting. Minneapolis was as good a venue as anywhere else in the State of Minnesota.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 19, 2021, 07:05:03 PM
Jesus H. I take it that in Los Angeloland the Cops are always the Good Guys and the Robbers always deserve to be executed on the spot.
Floyd was out of it even before the first police officers arrived on the scene, he was clearly intoxicated on illegal drugs. Add to this his heart condition and any exertion was a disaster waiting to happen. Chauvin wasn't to know Floyd was at risk medically. He might well be exonerated yet.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 19, 2021, 07:20:28 PM
Floyd was out of it even before the first police officers arrived on the scene, he was clearly intoxicated on illegal drugs. Add to this his heart condition and any exertion was a disaster waiting to happen. Chauvin wasn't to know Floyd was at risk medically.
Floyd was like a ticking time bomb, heart condition, drug abuse & Covid.
With all that in mind it was only a matter of time before a knee would have landed on his neck.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 19, 2021, 07:23:11 PM
Floyd was out of it even before the first police officers arrived on the scene, he was clearly intoxicated on illegal drugs. Add to this his heart condition and any exertion was a disaster waiting to happen. Chauvin wasn't to know Floyd was at risk medically. He might well be exonerated yet.
Anyone in Chauvin’s position of responsibility to the safe guarding of the public should not make assumptions that every person he encounters (whether a good guy or a bad guy) is fully fit and healthy. To treat someone in the manner Chauvin treated Floyd even if he had been in the prime of life with no intoxicating substance in his system would have been inexcusable, if he’d treated a dog like that you’d all be absolutely sick and disgusted.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 19, 2021, 07:27:52 PM
Anyone in Chauvin’s position of responsibility to the safe guarding of the public should not make assumptions that every person he encounters (whether a good guy or a bad guy) is fully fit and healthy. To treat someone in the manner Chauvin treated Floyd even if he had been in the prime of life with no intoxicating substance in his system would have been inexcusable, if he’d treated a dog like that you’d all be absolutely sick and disgusted.
It was a reasonable restraint but it went on too long.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Angelo222 on April 19, 2021, 07:52:12 PM
Nelson isn't doing a bad job so far considering what little he has to work with imo.
I'm only at the beginning of the defence summing up so can't answer that. I wouldn't be surprised if the jury fail to reach a verdict acceptable to them all.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 19, 2021, 08:06:56 PM
A Summary of the trial - Week 4 Day 1
The Derek Chauvin murder trial heard closing arguments today. The jury will now begin considering a verdict over the death of George Floyd that is anxiously awaited by millions of Americans.
Opening, Prosecutor Steve Schleicher said the key to the case lay in video footage of Chauvin pressing his knee on to Floyd’s neck even as he pleaded for his life, right to his very last words of “I can’t breathe”.
“This case is exactly what you saw with your eyes. It’s what you know in your heart,” he said.
Schleicher said the video showed Chauvin had a complete indifference to Floyd.
“For nine minutes and 29 seconds George Floyd begged until he could beg no more, and the defendant continued this assault,” he said.
The prosecutor said Chauvin’s “ego, his pride” led him to keep his knee in place, even as bystanders pleaded with him to stop, because he “wasn’t going to be told what to do”.
“He was going to do what he wanted, how he wanted, for as long as he wanted,” said Schleicher. “This was not policing, it was unnecessary, it was gratuitous, and he did it on purpose.”
If the jury agrees that Chauvin, 45, did commit an assault as he pinned Floyd to the ground, that will open the path to a conviction on the most serious charge of second-degree murder, which requires the former officer to have committed a felony that led to death.
“What the defendant did here was straight-up felony assault,” said Schleicher. “That killed George Floyd.”
If the jury does not agree that Chauvin’s use of force was criminal in itself but showed “reckless disregard for human life”, it could still convict him of third-degree murder. Chauvin also faces a manslaughter charge.
In instructions to the jury, Judge Peter Cahill said Chauvin was culpable if he took an action that caused Floyd’s death, even if other factors contributed to it.
That will help the prosecution because even if, as the defence claims, heart damage and drug use contributed to Floyd’s death, Chauvin will still be guilty if the jury finds his actions set heart failure in motion.
Schleicher derided defence claims that Chauvin’s actions were not the cause of Floyd’s death and that he succumbed to a heart condition, drug use and even carbon monoxide poisoning from car exhaust.
Schleicher asked if Floyd would have died that day if he hadn’t been pinned down by Chauvin and scorned the idea that he chose that moment to die of heart disease.
“Use your common sense. Believe your eyes,” he told the jurors. “Unreasonable force pinning him to the ground, that’s what killed him.”
Schleicher reminded the jury of testimony from medical experts who said the way Chauvin and other officers kept Floyd pinned to the ground cut off his breathing and was the sole cause of his death.
“George Floyd struggled, desperate to breathe, to make enough room in his chest, to breathe. But the force was too much,” said Schleicher.
Schleicher told the jurors they did not have to find that the defendant intended to cause harm or to violate the law in order to convict him of second-degree murder.
“The only thing the state has to prove is that he intended to apply force to George Floyd on purpose,” he said.
Chauvin’s lawyer, Eric Nelson, focused on whether the officer’s actions were “reasonable under the totality of circumstances”, as Floyd fought hard against getting into a squad car.
“Someone can be compliant one second and then fighting the next,” he said.
Nelson said it was reasonable for Chauvin to believe Floyd’s pleas that he could not breathe were a ruse to avoid arrest. The lawyer dismissed the evidence of a medical expert that the moment Floyd’s leg lashed out was evidence of a kind of brain damage due to lack of oxygen as made with hindsight and a medical degree.
“A reasonable police will interpret this as at least some form of minimal resistance,” he said.
Nelson portrayed Chauvin as distracted by crowd at the time Floyd took his last breath, saying he reached for his mace because he saw it as a threat.
“That changed Officer Chauvin’s perception of what was happening,” he said.
Nelson said the totality of the situation justified Chauvin’s actions and established his innocence.
“This was an authorised use of force, as unattractive as it may be. And this is reasonable doubt,” he said.
“There is absolutely no evidence that Officer Chauvin intentionally, purposively applied unlawful force.”
Nelson said it defied common sense for the prosecution to dismiss Floyd’s heart condition and drug use as causes of his death.
Prosecutor Jerry Blackwell on rebuttal accused Nelson of “distorting the facts” in claiming that the prosecution had to prove there were no other factors at play in Floyd’s death for Chauvin to be found guilty. It said Nelson’s claims “defied common sense”.
The closing arguments, unusually, went on for much of the day, reflecting the complexities of the case and the widely differing interpretation of events.
Jerry Blackwell, the special assistant attorney general, who opened arguments for the prosecution three weeks ago, had the last word before the judge sent the jury out to deliberate.
He told jurors that the case against Chauvin was so simple that a child could understand it, which was why a nine-year-old bystander told the police officer to “get off of” George Floyd.
Blackwell finished with an evocative line that went from the victim’s medical condition to the officer’s character and emotion.
He said to the jury: “You were told, for example, that Mr Floyd died because his heart was too big. And now, having seen all the evidence, having heard all the evidence, you know the truth, and the truth of the matter is that the reason George Floyd is dead is because Mr Chauvin’s heart was too small.”
The 12 jurors will be sequestered until they reach a verdict or fail to agree on any of the charges.
Deliberations will continue until 8pm each day. But the judge said if a verdict is reached close to that time, it will not be revealed until the following day.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: carlymichelle on April 19, 2021, 08:08:39 PM
i think what nelson is saying is making alot of sense personally i dont think it was anything to with his neck george died because of his heart/drug OD imo
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: carlymichelle on April 19, 2021, 08:27:56 PM
it sounds like it may be announced today??
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 19, 2021, 08:29:50 PM
i think what nelson is saying is making alot of sense personally i dont think it was anything to with his neck george died because of his heart/drug OD imo
Is that your professional opinion?
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: carlymichelle on April 19, 2021, 08:46:55 PM
its back live
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 19, 2021, 09:09:36 PM
i think what nelson is saying is making alot of sense personally i dont think it was anything to with his neck george died because of his heart/drug OD imo
It certainly contributed to his death according to the evidence.
A question I have never heard asked was what reasonable or unreasonable behaviour was George Floyd guilty of? Was his continued resistance reasonable or unreasonable?
Another question still unanswered was to what extent did Floyd's ingestion of drugs, namely fentanyl and methamphetamine affect his reasoning that day?
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: carlymichelle on April 19, 2021, 09:29:50 PM
It certainly contributed to his death according to the evidence.
A question I have never heard asked was what reasonable or unreasonable behaviour was George Floyd guilty of? Was his continued resistance reasonable or unreasonable?
Another question still unanswered was to what extent did Floyd's ingestion of drugs, namely fentanyl and methamphetamine affect his reasoning that day?
i would say if he had not been on drugs he would have been alot calmer meth can cause agitation i think
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 19, 2021, 09:59:15 PM
It certainly contributed to his death according to the evidence.
A question I have never heard asked was what reasonable or unreasonable behaviour was George Floyd guilty of? Was his continued resistance reasonable or unreasonable?
Another question still unanswered was to what extent did Floyd's ingestion of drugs, namely fentanyl and methamphetamine affect his reasoning that day?
you may be surprised to learn that George Floyd was not actually on trial.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 19, 2021, 10:10:05 PM
Mr Nelson has motioned for a mistrial re Maxine Waters comments.
Judge has denied.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 19, 2021, 10:14:48 PM
you may be surprised to learn that George Floyd was not actually on trial.
If Chauvin is found innocent that ipso facto means Floyd was guilty. If that happens I think his family should pay back the civil award & reimburse Chauvin for any costs incurred.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: carlymichelle on April 19, 2021, 10:21:30 PM
im sensing trouble no matter what the jury decides
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Eleanor on April 19, 2021, 10:25:45 PM
im sensing trouble no matter what the jury decides
I think you are absolutely right about that.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: carlymichelle on April 19, 2021, 10:28:12 PM
im wondering if the jury was shown the hour long video i posted?? you know with the paramedics working on george etc and the drug dealer in the car etc
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 19, 2021, 11:05:37 PM
If Chauvin is found innocent that ipso facto means Floyd was guilty. If that happens I think his family should pay back the civil award & reimburse Chauvin for any costs incurred.
Guilty of what - commiting suicide?
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 19, 2021, 11:06:40 PM
im wondering if the jury was shown the hour long video i posted?? you know with the paramedics working on george etc and the drug dealer in the car etc
What’s the paramedics working got to do with Chauvin’s actions which resulted in the death of George Floyd?
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: carlymichelle on April 19, 2021, 11:37:38 PM
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 20, 2021, 05:51:05 AM
Unsurprisingly, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has defended Maxine Waters incitement to riot & attempt to influence a jury, by accusing those in the GOP criticising her of siding with White Supremacy.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 20, 2021, 08:10:39 AM
Because everything is racist......
Pelosi defends ‘confront’ cops call, Waters accuses GOP of sending ‘message to white supremacists’
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) defended Rep. Maxine Waters’ (D-Calif.) call for protesters to “get more confrontational” if former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin is acquitted in the killing of George Floyd — as Waters ramped up the rhetoric, accusing Republicans of sending “a message to white supremacists.”
Waters has come under fire for her inflammatory rhetoric during her trip to Minnesota amid the trial, with GOP lawmakers accusing her of inciting violence and calling on her to apologize.
Pelosi argued that Waters’ remarks were justified.
“I myself think we should take our lead from the George Floyd family,” Pelosi told reporters on Monday.
”They’ve handled this with great dignity, and no ambiguity or lack of — misinterpretation by the other side. No, I don’t think she should apologize.”
While in Brooklyn Center, Minn., on Saturday night Waters called on protesters to “stay in the street and demand justice.”
“We’re looking for a guilty verdict and we’re looking to see if all of the talk that took place and has been taking place after they saw what happened to George Floyd. If nothing does not happen, then we know that we got to not only stay in the street, but we have got to fight for justice,” she said, according to videos posted to social media,” she said.
“We got to stay on the street. And we’ve got to get more active, we’ve got to get more confrontational. We’ve got to make sure that they know that we mean business.”
On Monday Waters defended herself amid the criticism, and fanned the flames some more.
“I am nonviolent,” she told The Grio, arguing that she was not inciting violence with her words.
”Republicans will jump on any word, any line and try to make it fit their message and their cause for denouncing us and denying us, basically calling us violent — any time they see an opportunity to seize on a word, so they do it and they send a message to all of the white supremacists, the KKK, the Oath Keepers, the [Proud] Boys and all of that, how this is a time for [Republicans] to raise money on [Democrats’] backs.”
Rep. Lisa McClain (R-Mich.) on Monday accused Democrats of being hypocritical for not condemning Waters’ comments, stating in a House floor speech that a drive-by shooting happened shortly after she made them.
“Once again this weekend we saw a member of the majority openly call for more confrontation in a Minneapolis suburb. That very night, there was a drive-by shooting in that community were police in the national guardsmen were targeted. If this were reversed, If this was said by a Republican, you know, Madam Speaker, that the majority in this chamber would move to strip that representative of their, of their committees, and possibly move to expel them from Congress — we’ve actually seen this before,” McClain said in her speech.
“If that was President Trump, and he said that on Jan. 6 — was inciting a riot — do the words get more confrontational? What do those words mean? Are those not the words of someone that someone would use if they wanted to incite more violence, or and insurrection?”
Pelosi, instead of rebuking Waters for the harsh rhetoric said McClain should apologize for insinuating Waters held any responsibility for the violence.
“That woman on the floor should be apologizing for what she said” Pelosi said.
“I don’t know [who McClain is] but she was attributing some murder– some incident that happened after that to Maxine’s statement. No, Maxine talked about confrontation in the manner of the Civil Rights movement.”
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 20, 2021, 08:18:12 AM
'Maxine Waters may have handed defense grounds for appeal and the turning over of this trial': Derek Chauvin trial judge blasts 'abhorrent' Democrat for calling for riots if no conviction
Derek Chauvin's defense attorney Eric Nelson called for a mistrial after the jury retired on Monday
He cited Rep Maxine Waters' comments on the case as he argued that there was no way the jury could be unbiased given constant media coverage
'Now that we have US representatives threatening acts of violence in relation to this trial it’s frankly mind-blowing,' Nelson said
Judge Peter Cahill replied: 'I grant that Congresswoman Waters may have given you something on appeal that may result in this whole trial being overturned'
But Cahill refused to grant a mistrial and adjourned the court until the jury comes back with a verdict
Does this mean that Trials should be abolished and people convicted on Public Opinion, providing you agree with them?
Free Speach but only for me.
Free speech is racist, sexist, transphobic & must be abolished.
Due process is overrated & racist, we the people need a new system of insta-justice, where any non-black involved in the death of a black person, be it through negligence, intent or accidental, is immediately thrown to the lynch mob.
I expect this will be the Biden administrations next executive order, to redress systemic racism & the societal imbalance caused by slavery. That & same sex public bathrooms & abolishing the police.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Eleanor on April 20, 2021, 08:45:46 AM
Free speech is racist, sexist, transphobic & must be abolished.
Due process is overrated & racist, we the people need a new system of insta-justice, where any non-black involved in the death of a black person, be it through negligence, intent or accidental, is immediately thrown to the lynch mob.
I expect this will be the Biden administrations next executive order, to redress systemic racism & the societal imbalance caused by slavery. That & same sex public bathrooms & abolishing the police.
That's what I thought it meant. The Reinvention of The Ku Klux Klan. If they could but see the irony.
Sorry for the racist "They."
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 20, 2021, 08:51:46 AM
Free speech is racist, sexist, transphobic & must be abolished.
Due process is overrated & racist, we the people need a new system of insta-justice, where any non-black involved in the death of a black person, be it through negligence, intent or accidental, is immediately thrown to the lynch mob.
I expect this will be the Biden administrations next executive order, to redress systemic racism & the societal imbalance caused by slavery. That & same sex public bathrooms & abolishing the police.
You’re being ridiculous again.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Eleanor on April 20, 2021, 08:59:01 AM
I don't want to turn this into a joke, because it isn't funny. But I actually feel guilty when I refer to them as "They."
No I was joking, I don't think describing black people as black people or saying they or them in reference to them is racist, it would be no different to me being black & referring to white people the same way. But I imagine someone somewhere in a college campus safe space might be triggered by it.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Eleanor on April 20, 2021, 09:11:13 AM
No I was joking, I don't think describing black people as black people or saying they or them in reference to them is racist, it would be no different to me being black & referring to white people the same way. But I imagine someone somewhere in a college campus safe space might be triggered by it.
But you can see what all of this is doing to me. Perpetual guilt when I truly don't think I am racist.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 20, 2021, 09:24:36 AM
But you can see what all of this is doing to me. Perpetual guilt when I truly don't think I am racist.
You are meant to have white guilt, that's the whole point.
Your ancestors are responsible for slavery, systemic & institutional racism & you being white, have white privilege.
You continue to uphold systemic racism every time you participate in any societal function that benefited & came about from the use of slaves & oppression of black people.
(I was pretty much told all this during a discussion with a young white American liberal with green hair & a gender I couldn't distinguish)
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 20, 2021, 09:38:06 AM
Whilst I admit to being overtly racist for the fun of it, I'm mostly only racist in my own home & head.
In reality I don't treat people of different races any different during public interactions.
My local convenience store is run by an Asian looking woman & a black man (couple, presumably).
I don't deliberately avoid their store in favour of white owned businesses, nor do I treat them with any less courtesy than anyone else.
But If I was sat on a bus & someone shouted 'Allah Uh Akbar' I can't say I wouldn't be concerned.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 20, 2021, 09:42:07 AM
George Floyd death: Three Americans assess Derek Chauvin trial
Tensions are high in Minnesota this week as the jury in the trial of former police officer Derek Chauvin prepares to deliver its verdict.
Mr Chauvin faces two counts of murder and one count of manslaughter over the death of George Floyd, an unarmed black man, last May in Minneapolis.
Protesters crowded the streets in Mr Floyd's name in cities across the US and around the world over the summer.
The trial is being viewed as a referendum on policing in the US.
An African-American political hopeful, a Minnesota resident and a retired police veteran shared their thoughts with the BBC when the trial began in late March.
We reached out to them again and they told us what stood out to them over the past three weeks.
You are meant to have white guilt, that's the whole point.
Your ancestors are responsible for slavery, systemic & institutional racism & you being white, have white privilege.
You continue to uphold systemic racism every time you participate in any societal function that benefited & came about from the use of slaves & oppression of black people.
(I was pretty much told all this during a discussion with a young white American liberal with green hair & a gender I couldn't distinguish)
So, I am not allowed to disagree with these people? Not that I particularly want to talk to them. I haven't forgotten the one time I was accused of being patronising just for being pleasant.
Ban Sugar I say. It's terrible stuff. And we all know where that came from.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 20, 2021, 10:17:02 AM
So, I am not allowed to disagree with these people? Not that I particularly want to talk to them. I haven't forgotten the one time I was accused of being patronising just for being pleasant.
Ban Sugar I say. It's terrible stuff. And we all know where that came from.
If you do it's because you're racist.
My time on the Black Lives Matter supporters forum was cut short when I continually refused to accept any responsibility for what my fathers, fathers, father may or may not have done.
When I asked at what age do white children become responsible for White Supremacy & the actions of their ancestors? (Are 5 year old white girls or 2nd trimester foetuses inherently racist?) I couldn't get an answer.
But the impression I got was that they are.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Eleanor on April 20, 2021, 10:24:51 AM
My time on the Black Lives Matter supporters forum was cut short when I continually refused to accept any responsibility for what my fathers, fathers, father may or may not have done.
When I asked at what age do white children become responsible for White Supremacy & the actions of their ancestors? (Are 5 year old white girls or 2nd trimester foetuses inherently racist?) I couldn't get an answer.
But the impression I got was that they are.
Have you noticed that they never want to talk about the people who started all of this? The black men who rounded up people from other black tribes and herded them across deserts to sell at slave auctions. White men could not have done this.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 20, 2021, 10:34:27 AM
Have you noticed that they never want to talk about the people who started all of this? The black men who rounded up people from other black tribes and herded them across deserts to sell at slave auctions. White men could not have done this.
Yes, hasn't gone unnoticed.
Another point that got me in trouble with BLM, SJW's was, if all white's are racist were white abolitionists racist? There were plenty of them who opposed slavery a fought to end the trade. But their whiteness is not excused.
And dare ye not mention the first slavers to exploit Africa were probably the Arabs. Even to this day, (or as of the 1990's at least), Arab slavers were still at work in Sudan and Mauritania, buying and selling black Africans.
The Arab slave trade began earlier than 650 AD, whereas the first white men (Portuguese as it happens), didn't arrive in Africa until the 15th century.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 20, 2021, 10:42:11 AM
Whilst I admit to being overtly racist for the fun of it, I'm mostly only racist in my own home & head.
In reality I don't treat people of different races any different during public interactions.
My local convenience store is run by an Asian looking woman & a black man (couple, presumably).
I don't deliberately avoid their store in favour of white owned businesses, nor do I treat them with any less courtesy than anyone else.
But If I was sat on a bus & someone shouted 'Allah Uh Akbar' I can't say I wouldn't be concerned.
I think most reasonable people would not have an issue with that, however I did have a heated debate on this very subject with someone on this forum who made it very clear that when I confessed to being worried for my safety on a tube train when a young Muslim man in religious garb and a back pack got on and opened up his Koran and started mumbling verses of it to himself, I was treated with utter contmept by the other poster for making this "racist" confession. She absolutely refused to accept that my concern was a normal natural reaction. I hasten to add I did nothing to move myself out of potential peril as I rationalised to myself that in so doing I could be accused of racism, which is even worse than being blown up by a terrorist.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Eleanor on April 20, 2021, 10:55:08 AM
These people are in some danger of turning me into a racist because I am becoming afraid of them.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 20, 2021, 10:59:51 AM
VS.....That's something I detest about the term Islamophobic.
I don't think a fear of Islam is irrational if you're white, non Muslim, gay, walking along London bridge, riding the tube near Kings Cross, going to an Ariana Grande concert, passenger in an airplane or have job at a centre for world trade.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 20, 2021, 11:10:06 AM
VS.....That's something I detest about the term Islamophobic.
I don't think a fear of Islam is irrational if you're white, non Muslim, gay, walking along London bridge, riding the tube near Kings Cross, going to an Ariana Grande concert, passenger in an airplane or have job at a centre for world trade.
I think in the situation I described myself being in it's understandable to be fearful but I am not scared of all Muslims, just the ones that fit a certain profile - it's not my fault that I am fearful of them, and I really don't believe anyone, even the most strident right on liberal non-racist who wouldn't have had thoughts of 7/7 flash through their minds when the guy whipped out his Koran, no matter how hard they tried to suppress them. I think we have to acknowledge that judging others we pass in the street, or on public transport is a natural instinct that we have to alert us to potential threat and to deny it exists in ourselves is dishonest. I mean, I would also be fearful on a tube train full of white male pissed up Chelsea supporters for example, does that make me prejudiced?
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 20, 2021, 11:15:49 AM
Yes, stop discriminating against aggressive, pissed up football hooligans.
They are human beings just like you & anyone else (myself excluded obviously)
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 20, 2021, 11:40:35 AM
Years ago I was debating racism with a rather smart racist and he asked me a question which stuck with me and rather exposed my hypocrisy - he asked me if I was in an airport lounge filled with 50% black people and 50% white people half on each side with seats available in both halves where would I choose to sit. Honestly, I would almost certainly choose to sit with "my own kind". Why? Instinct I guess. It doesn't mean I hate or fear black people just that it's a natural instinct for birds of a feather to flock together. We are now expected to rise above this instinct and in fact deliberately go against it by choosing the opposite choice to that which our instinct is telling us to choose. I replied to the racist at the time that it would very much depend on what sort of black people and what sort of white people. For example if it was all white football hooligans on one side and all black family groups on the other I would probably choose the black side. It's wherever you feel safest I guess.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 20, 2021, 01:48:13 PM
Another point that got me in trouble with BLM, SJW's was, if all white's are racist were white abolitionists racist? There were plenty of them who opposed slavery a fought to end the trade. But their whiteness is not excused.
And dare ye not mention the first slavers to exploit Africa were probably the Arabs. Even to this day, (or as of the 1990's at least), Arab slavers were still at work in Sudan and Mauritania, buying and selling black Africans.
The Arab slave trade began earlier than 650 AD, whereas the first white men (Portuguese as it happens), didn't arrive in Africa until the 15th century.
It's all too convenient to forget that the Africans invented slavery, if one tribe conquered another then the losers ended up dead or slaves. The negroes were only too willing to sell their slaves to the white man who transported them to the sugarcane plantations of the west indies and beyond.
And now they want to rewrite history
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 20, 2021, 02:18:58 PM
Deliberations have resumed.
I'll be surprised if there isn't a guilty verdict before close of play, given the political pressure.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 20, 2021, 03:33:13 PM
VERDICT WATCH: Our legal experts break down today's closing arguments I Court TV
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HOHow55fjBI
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 20, 2021, 07:37:40 PM
George Floyd’s injuries revealed in new pictures as jury considers verdict
WARNING GRAPHIC IMAGES: Former police officer Derek Chauvin is on trial for the murder of George Floyd in Minneapolis, Minnesota, last year after he was filmed kneeling on the dad's neck for more than seven minutes
New pictures of George Floyd's injuries have been made public for the first time as part of the trial of former police officer Derek Chauvin.
Mr Floyd died after the former policeman knelt on his neck for more than seven minutes, despite the dad saying he could not breathe.
Chauvin was charged with murder and manslaughter after the 46-year-old African American died in Minneapolis, Minnesota, on May 25 last year.
The jury is now considering its verdict after the prosecution and defence delivered their closing arguments.
Pictures of Mr Floyd's injuries, which were previously shown during the trial, have now been made public for the first time.
One of the images shows bruises and abrasions on the left side of Mr Floyd's face.
Defence lawyer Eric Nelson argued Chauvin acted reasonably.
He cited testimony defending the use of 'the knee on the neck' as a valid restraint technique.
The lawyer also suggested Mr Floyd's pre-existing health issues and drug use could have killed him.
The jury have now retired to consider three weeks of testimony from 45 witnesses, including bystanders and medical experts, along with hours of video evidence that make up the most high-profile US police misconduct case in decades.
After listening to closing arguments for most of Monday, the jury must reach a unanimous verdict on each charge to convict or acquit.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 20, 2021, 08:25:42 PM
Breaking News Verdict Is In.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 20, 2021, 08:26:36 PM
I think we can be pretty sure it's guilty but on what charges.
Verdict will be announced at 9pm GMT.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: carlymichelle on April 20, 2021, 09:11:57 PM
verdict to be read in 20 to 40 minutes
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 20, 2021, 09:36:57 PM
Cringeworthy listening to addict Courtney Ross (Floyd's on-off girlfriend) speaking live on CNN.
One things for sure tonight, the MPD and the National Guard are going to be busy as Antifa is calling for violence regardless of the verdict. Nothing new there then.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 20, 2021, 10:08:18 PM
Justice is served.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: mrswah on April 20, 2021, 10:09:34 PM
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 20, 2021, 10:16:18 PM
BLM's rallying cry 'no justice, no peace'
There, they've got justice now, so could they please all shut up & go home.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 20, 2021, 10:23:29 PM
I don’t think this verdict fixes the issue once and for all so don’t expect BLM to be going anywhere or shutting up anytime soon.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 20, 2021, 10:31:43 PM
I know, we've still got the trial of Kim Potter to come next year & going by statistics there'll be at least another 8 unarmed black men kill by police before the year is out, so we can all look forward to that.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 20, 2021, 10:35:17 PM
This verdict doesn't bode well for the other 3 former officers due for trial next.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: John on April 20, 2021, 11:21:37 PM
I know, we've still got the trial of Kim Potter to come next year & going by statistics there'll be at least another 8 unarmed black men kill by police before the year is out, so we can all look forward to that.
She can look forward to 20 years in an orange jump suit too if tonight's verdicts are anything to go by.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 20, 2021, 11:24:14 PM
I know, we've still got the trial of Kim Potter to come next year & going by statistics there'll be at least another 8 unarmed black men kill by police before the year is out, so we can all look forward to that.
Maybe the police could undergo some extra training to learn how to tell their arses from their elbows before then.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 21, 2021, 05:51:48 AM
Former Officers, J. Alexander Keung, Thomas Lane & Tau Tao will be facing trial next, accused of aiding & abetting. Trial Date August 23rd.
After Chauvin, Minnesota set to prosecute three other officers in Floyd murder
With the conviction of former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin in the murder of George Floyd on Tuesday, prosecutors will begin turning their attention to making their case against three others who took part in the fatal arrest.
Tou Thao, J. Alexander Kueng and Thomas Lane, all of whom were fired and arrested days after Floyd died last May, face charges at a trial on Aug. 23 that they aided and abetted second-degree murder and second-degree manslaughter of Floyd.
Aiding and abetting murder is punishable by up to 40 years in prison, although sentencing guidelines can reduce the maximum to 15 years.
The following is a summary of Minnesota prosecutors' allegations against each of the men, all of whom are free on $750,000 bail:
ALEXANDER KUENG, 27
Kueng and Lane were the first officers to arrive outside the food store where Floyd was accused of passing a counterfeit $20 bill to buy cigarettes. Kueng had graduated from the police academy in 2019 and started as an officer in December.
During the fatal encounter, prosecutors said Kueng was between Chauvin and Lane, kneeling on Floyd’s back, with his hand on Floyd’s handcuffed left wrist.
After Floyd became unresponsive, it was Kueng who checked the right wrist for a pulse and said, "I couldn't find one," prosecutors said in their complaint. None of the officers moved from their positions, the complaint said.
THOMAS LANE, 38
Having arrived at the scene with Kueng, it was Lane who ordered Floyd out of his car and handcuffed him, prosecutors said. He had been on the police force for only a matter of days.
Chauvin, Kueng and Lane each used their weight to restrain Floyd on the ground after he balked at getting into the back of a squad car. Lane was positioned on his legs, "kneeling on them and pressing them down with his hands," according to the complaint.
At one point, Lane asked, "Should we roll him on his side?" Chauvin responded: "No, staying put where we got him." Lane then said, "I am worried about excited delirium or whatever," to which Chauvin said, "That's why we have him on his stomach."
TOU THAO, 35
Thao, who had rejoined the force in 2012 after losing his job to layoffs as a rookie in 2009, arrived on the scene with Chauvin after Floyd had already been handcuffed.
Although Thao was the only one of the four officers who was not in physical contact with Floyd, prosecutors said he had a direct look at how Chauvin and the others were restraining him.
Thao stood watch over the onlookers who were gathering at the scene, keeping himself positioned between them and the three other officers who were on Floyd's prone body.
When a bystander stepped off the curb, “imploring Chauvin to get off of Mr. Floyd, (Thao) put his hands on the citizen to keep him back,” the complaint said.
Police have shot and killed a young black girl just before Derek Chauvin was convicted of murdering George Floyd.
The shooting on Tuesday afternoon in Columbus, Ohio, came after police responded to reports of an attempted stabbing.
The caller had said females were trying to stab them and put their hands on them, according to Columbus interim police chief Michael Woods.
No further details were gathered from the caller who hung up the phone, according to The Columbus Dispatch.
It is unclear what then led to police shooting the girl but she was taken to hospital, where she was pronounced dead.
Nobody else was injured.
Woods said: "This is a tragic incident for all involved, but especially for the family of the female.
"As I said earlier, the Bureau of Criminal Investigation is conducting the criminal investigation into this incident.
"At the conclusion of that investigation, the divisional police will conduct an administrative review of the actions of this officer and all officers at the scene."
Franklin County Children's Services confirmed the teenager as Ma'Khia Bryant and that she was in foster care, according to The Dispatch.
Some reports said she was 15 and others said 16.
Columbus mayor Andrew Ginther said that police had body-worn cameras at the scene, adding: "We know, based on this footage, the officer took action to protect another young girl in our community.
"But a family is grieving tonight and this young 15-year-old girl will never be coming home."
According to The Associated Press, the footage showed the officer shooting Ma'Khia as she appeared to attempt to stab two people with a knife.
A black-handled blade resembling a kitchen knife or steak knife appeared to be lying on the sidewalk next to her immediately after she was shot and fell, the report said.
The death came about 25 minutes before a judge in Minneapolis read out guilty verdicts for former police officer Derek Chauvin on three charges.
These related to the death of George Floyd, a black man who died during an arrest in May last year, after Chauvin knelt on his neck for almost nine minutes.
Kimberly Shepherd, 50, has lived in the Columbus neighbourhood for 17 years, and said she knew the victim.
She and her neighbour Jayme Jones, 51, had celebrated the guilty verdict of Chauvin but things changed quickly.
"We were happy about the verdict, but you couldn't even enjoy that," Ms Shepherd said.
"Because as you're getting one phone call that he was guilty, I'm getting the next phone call that this is happening in my neighbourhood."
In that situation an officer is authorised to use lethal force.
Or maybe the cop should have just waited & let her stab someone, just to make sure, before opening fire.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 21, 2021, 06:50:09 AM
Paula Bryant tells me her 16 year-old daughter Ma’Khia Bryant was an honor roll student and a sweet child.
“Ma’Khia had a motherly nature about her. She promoted peace,” said the 16 year-old girl’s mother, Paula.
The girl’s aunt, Hazel Bryant, told The Dispatch that Bryant lived in a foster home and “got into an altercation with someone else at the home.” She said Ma’Khia had a knife but alleged she dropped it before being shot multiple times by a Columbus police officer.
“She was a good kid. She was loving. Yeah she had issues, but that’s okay. All of us go through s***. She was 15 motherf****** years old. She didn’t deserve to die like a dog in the street.”
https://heavy.com/news/makhia-bryant-shooting/
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Eleanor on April 21, 2021, 06:53:45 AM
I am shocked rigid. Members of Congress, including The President of The United States, attempted to interfere with the Course of Justice. This is outrageous. Unless they did it with purpose, which is what my son thinks.
They will lose this one in the end and then what will it all have amounted to? I would like to see the results of BLM storming The White House which appeared to support them.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 21, 2021, 06:57:16 AM
I am shocked rigid. Members of Congress, including The President of The United States, attempted to interfere with the Course of Justice. This is outrageous. Unless they did it with purpose, which is what my son thinks.
They will lose this one in the end and then what will it all have amounted to? I would like to see the results of BLM storming The White House which appeared to support them.
Chauvin certainly has grounds for an appeal, what with the timing of civil damages awarded to the Floyd family, the refusal to hold the trial in a different area, the refusal to sequester the jury for the full hearing & the unprecedented political interference with the case.
I don't think he'll get off though.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Eleanor on April 21, 2021, 07:07:49 AM
Chauvin certainly has grounds for an appeal, what with the timing of civil damages awarded to the Floyd family, the refusal to hold the trial in a different area, the refusal to sequester the jury for the full hearing & the unprecedented political interference with the case.
I don't think he'll get off though.
I don't actually know, Spammy. But I will be much surprised if The Police in good old USofA don't start backing off and leaving these people to rampage around a bit while killing a few others first. Then The Police can get done for Dereliction of Duty.
Now might be a good time to resign and find a job flipping ham burgers.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 21, 2021, 07:15:48 AM
Those of you who predicted trouble whatever the outcome must be a bit disappointed by the lack of rioting and civil unrest following last night’s verdict?
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Eleanor on April 21, 2021, 07:52:04 AM
Those of you who predicted trouble whatever the outcome must be a bit disappointed by the lack of rioting and civil unrest following last night’s verdict?
That isn't what it's all about for me. It is all just my opinion, which I believe I am entitled to, although I don't actually live in America, so quite possibly don't know what I am talking about.
I have never committed an act of violence against anyone. It isn't in my phsyche. Although there have been a couple of occasions when I might have done if I had been born with my brain wired differently. Thank God I wasn't. But I do have some vague conception of why some people do.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 21, 2021, 08:00:38 AM
Chauvin certainly has grounds for an appeal, what with the timing of civil damages awarded to the Floyd family, the refusal to hold the trial in a different area, the refusal to sequester the jury for the full hearing & the unprecedented political interference with the case.
I don't think he'll get off though.
The jury was fully sequestered during deliberations and therefore (if I’m not mistaken) would have presumably been unaware of Biden’s comment for one.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Eleanor on April 21, 2021, 08:05:48 AM
The jury was fully sequestered during deliberations and therefore (if I’m not mistaken) would have presumably been unaware of Biden’s comment for one.
I wasn't referring to Biden.
The comments from Maxine Waters should be enough for appeal.
We're supposed to imagine the jurors were living in an information vacuum for the past 4 weeks.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Carana on April 21, 2021, 09:31:03 AM
Significance Police violence is a leading cause of death for young men in the United States. Over the life course, about 1 in every 1,000 black men can expect to be killed by police. Risk of being killed by police peaks between the ages of 20 y and 35 y for men and women and for all racial and ethnic groups. Black women and men and American Indian and Alaska Native women and men are significantly more likely than white women and men to be killed by police. Latino men are also more likely to be killed by police than are white men.
Abstract
We use data on police-involved deaths to estimate how the risk of being killed by police use of force in the United States varies across social groups. We estimate the lifetime and age-specific risks of being killed by police by race and sex. We also provide estimates of the proportion of all deaths accounted for by police use of force. We find that African American men and women, American Indian/Alaska Native men and women, and Latino men face higher lifetime risk of being killed by police than do their white peers. We find that Latina women and Asian/Pacific Islander men and women face lower risk of being killed by police than do their white peers. Risk is highest for black men, who (at current levels of risk) face about a 1 in 1,000 chance of being killed by police over the life course. The average lifetime odds of being killed by police are about 1 in 2,000 for men and about 1 in 33,000 for women. Risk peaks between the ages of 20 y and 35 y for all groups. For young men of color, police use of force is among the leading causes of death.
https://www.pnas.org/content/116/34/16793
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Carana on April 21, 2021, 09:36:41 AM
The Minneapolis police officer who knelt on George Floyd's neck had 18 previous complaints against him, police department says
By Dakin Andone, Hollie Silverman and Melissa Alonso, CNN
Updated 2139 GMT (0539 HKT) May 29, 2020
(...)
Only two of the 18 complaints against Chauvin were "closed with discipline," according to a MPD internal affairs public summary. In both cases, the "discipline issued" column indicated that a letter of reprimand had been issued in response.
Chauvin was not the only officer on the scene that day with a history of complaints against him. Former officer Tou Thao had six complaints filed with internal affairs, one of which was still open, according to the public summary released Thursday. The other five complaints had been closed without discipline. The two other officers involved had no complaints filed against them, per MPD internal affairs.
The comments from Maxine Waters should be enough for appeal.
We're supposed to imagine the jurors were living in an information vacuum for the past 4 weeks.
Yep, it was a totally stupid thing to do, but I really can't see how the jury could have come to any other verdict other than the one they came to - I can' see that anything she said would have made any difference to the outcome. That said Chauvin is certainly going to appeal and if he gets off because of what she did it will be devastating for Floyd's family and for justice in America. IMO.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 21, 2021, 09:38:53 AM
Significance Police violence is a leading cause of death for young men in the United States. Over the life course, about 1 in every 1,000 black men can expect to be killed by police. Risk of being killed by police peaks between the ages of 20 y and 35 y for men and women and for all racial and ethnic groups. Black women and men and American Indian and Alaska Native women and men are significantly more likely than white women and men to be killed by police. Latino men are also more likely to be killed by police than are white men.
Abstract
We use data on police-involved deaths to estimate how the risk of being killed by police use of force in the United States varies across social groups. We estimate the lifetime and age-specific risks of being killed by police by race and sex. We also provide estimates of the proportion of all deaths accounted for by police use of force. We find that African American men and women, American Indian/Alaska Native men and women, and Latino men face higher lifetime risk of being killed by police than do their white peers. We find that Latina women and Asian/Pacific Islander men and women face lower risk of being killed by police than do their white peers. Risk is highest for black men, who (at current levels of risk) face about a 1 in 1,000 chance of being killed by police over the life course. The average lifetime odds of being killed by police are about 1 in 2,000 for men and about 1 in 33,000 for women. Risk peaks between the ages of 20 y and 35 y for all groups. For young men of color, police use of force is among the leading causes of death.
https://www.pnas.org/content/116/34/16793
Statistically, a young black man is more likely to be murdered by another black man than by a cop.
And one thing I don't understand is, if the killings of black men by cops is because of racism, why are they killing mostly men & not women?
Are we to assume the cops are both racists & misandrists as well?
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Angelo222 on April 21, 2021, 09:43:36 AM
Significance Police violence is a leading cause of death for young men in the United States. Over the life course, about 1 in every 1,000 black men can expect to be killed by police. Risk of being killed by police peaks between the ages of 20 y and 35 y for men and women and for all racial and ethnic groups. Black women and men and American Indian and Alaska Native women and men are significantly more likely than white women and men to be killed by police. Latino men are also more likely to be killed by police than are white men.
Abstract
We use data on police-involved deaths to estimate how the risk of being killed by police use of force in the United States varies across social groups. We estimate the lifetime and age-specific risks of being killed by police by race and sex. We also provide estimates of the proportion of all deaths accounted for by police use of force. We find that African American men and women, American Indian/Alaska Native men and women, and Latino men face higher lifetime risk of being killed by police than do their white peers. We find that Latina women and Asian/Pacific Islander men and women face lower risk of being killed by police than do their white peers. Risk is highest for black men, who (at current levels of risk) face about a 1 in 1,000 chance of being killed by police over the life course. The average lifetime odds of being killed by police are about 1 in 2,000 for men and about 1 in 33,000 for women. Risk peaks between the ages of 20 y and 35 y for all groups. For young men of color, police use of force is among the leading causes of death.
https://www.pnas.org/content/116/34/16793
I think you will find that THE leading cause of death of young black men in the United States is other back men. You can take the black man out of Africa but you can't take Africa out of the black man.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 21, 2021, 09:44:59 AM
Statistically, a young black man is more likely to be murdered by another black man than by a cop.
And one thing I don't understand is, if the killings of black men by cops is because of racism, why are they killing mostly men & not women?
Are we to assume the cops are both racists & misandrists as well?
It would be interesting to look at the stats on female deaths at the hands of US police, of course women commit far fewer crimes so that would explain why it's mostly men being killed. The fact that black men are more likely to be killed by other black men does not excuse police brutality or trigger-happy responses to incidents involving black men (or anybody for that matter).
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Carana on April 21, 2021, 09:45:12 AM
I thought Biden's phone call was after the verdict?
It was, but before that he also commented that he hoped the jury would return the right verdict (though I don't think he spelled out what verdict but it's clear what he meant).
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Angelo222 on April 21, 2021, 09:47:09 AM
Yep, it was a totally stupid thing to do, but I really can't see how the jury could have come to any other verdict other than the one they came to - I can' see that anything she said would have made any difference to the outcome. That said Chauvin is certainly going to appeal and if he gets off because of what she did it will be devastating for Floyd's family and for justice in America. IMO.
The entire thing stinks, Chauvin should never have been convicted on the first two charges. Floyd was the instigator by his own initial criminal conduct and his continuous resistance to being arrested. Chauvin was stupid in not providing medical assistance once it was evident that Floyd was struggling medically. He should not have been convicted of murder though. This conviction will rightly be overturned at some later date imo.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Eleanor on April 21, 2021, 09:50:06 AM
Yep, it was a totally stupid thing to do, but I really can't see how the jury could have come to any other verdict other than the one they came to - I can' see that anything she said would have made any difference to the outcome. That said Chauvin is certainly going to appeal and if he gets off because of what she did it will be devastating for Floyd's family and for justice in America. IMO.
During the trial of George Zimmerman, the jury were sequestered for the full trial, precisely because of the high profile nature of the case (Hispanic man shot dead unarmed black teen), I read that they were put up in luxury hotels but without T.V, papers or radio. They apparently had access to gyms & pools & even a day out at a museum to reduce the impact of the isolation.
This case, being the most high profile police killing of all time, should have been treated in the same way imo.
It may well not have influenced the jury decision had they been sequestered in this way, but I certainly don't think the judge should have left anything to chance.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 21, 2021, 09:51:53 AM
During the trial of George Zimmerman, the jury were sequestered for the full trial, precisely because of the high profile nature of the case (Hispanic man shot dead unarmed black teen), I read that they were put up in luxury hotels but without T.V, papers or radio. They apparently had access to gyms & pools & even a day out at a museum to reduce the impact of the isolation.
This case, being the most high profile police killing of all time, should have been treated in the same way imo.
It may well not have influenced the jury decision had they been sequestered in this way, but I certainly don't think the judge should have left anything to chance.
I agree, it was a strange decision by the judge.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Carana on April 21, 2021, 09:52:00 AM
It would be interesting to look at the stats on female deaths at the hands of US police, of course women commit far fewer crimes so that would explain why it's mostly men being killed. The fact that black men are more likely to be killed by other black men does not excuse police brutality or trigger-happy responses to incidents involving black men (or anybody for that matter).
That's mentioned in the study I posted just above.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 21, 2021, 09:54:14 AM
Well I think the best thing to do is for cops to start killing more white people & black women to redress the statistical imbalance & create true equality.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 21, 2021, 09:58:07 AM
The entire thing stinks, Chauvin should never have been convicted on the first two charges. Floyd was the instigator by his own initial criminal conduct and his continuous resistance to being arrested. Chauvin was stupid in not providing medical assistance once it was evident that Floyd was struggling medically. He should not have been convicted of murder though. This conviction will rightly be overturned at some later date imo.
It's clear as day to me that Chauvin committed murder - it's right there on the video for all to see. He was an overly aggressive cop with a track record of complaints pertaining to his aggressive actions in the line of duty. It was the right decision IMO and I hope he goes down for a long time. No doubt in the meantime he will be elavated to the status of hero and martyr for those with a racist far right agenda.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 21, 2021, 09:59:05 AM
Well I think the best thing to do is for cops to start killing more white people & black women to redress the statistical imbalance & create true equality.
Silly.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 21, 2021, 10:01:23 AM
It's clear as day to me that Chauvin committed murder - it's right there on the video for all to see. He was an overly aggressive cop with a track record of complaints pertaining to his aggressive actions in the line of duty. It was the right decision IMO and I hope he goes down for a long time. No doubt in the meantime he will be elavated to the status of hero and martyr for those with a racist far right agenda.
I'm a member of many right wing groups on facebook etc, I rarely comment but the general consensus I read there since the verdict is that Fentanyl Floyd was a dangerous criminal who died of a drug overdose & Chauvin was just doing his job. We have to make allowances for these people's lack of intellect, they're American.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Eleanor on April 21, 2021, 10:10:31 AM
I have decided that I really don't care. Three separate Charges for one supposed Crime has got to be a howl a minute. If you don't get him on one then hope for one of the others.
They got him on all three. Which one was it? It surely can't be all three. Where was he when the other two were going on?
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Carana on April 21, 2021, 10:11:35 AM
The entire thing stinks, Chauvin should never have been convicted on the first two charges. Floyd was the instigator by his own initial criminal conduct and his continuous resistance to being arrested. Chauvin was stupid in not providing medical assistance once it was evident that Floyd was struggling medically. He should not have been convicted of murder though. This conviction will rightly be overturned at some later date imo.
What "criminal conduct" was there that could justify the subsequent events?
A potentially forged banknote?
Jeez, that's happened to me. I paid for something or other with a largish banknote (for me at the time) and it got put under a scanner wand thing that determined it wasn't genuine. The cashier handed the note back to me and asked to provide a different means of payment.
Except for feeling frustrated that somewhere along the line I'd lost the value of my hard-earned banknote, that was the end of the story. If I could have proven, or even remembered, how it had come into my possession, I'd have probably gone to the police myself.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 21, 2021, 10:14:22 AM
Given the high rate of controversial police killings, their inevitability & the amount of discussions they produce here........
May I suggest a senior moderator open a new page, board, discussion topics header thingamy jig, within which the individual cases can be added as individual topics?
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Eleanor on April 21, 2021, 10:17:32 AM
Given the high rate of controversial police killings, their inevitability & the amount of discussions they produce here........
May I suggest a senior moderator open a new page, board, discussion topics header thingamy jig, within which the individual cases can be added as individual topics?
You do it and then someone will decide if it makes sense. This could depend on how good you are with words.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 21, 2021, 10:19:51 AM
I'm a member of many right wing groups on facebook etc, I rarely comment but the general consensus I read there since the verdict is that Fentanyl Floyd was a dangerous criminal who died of a drug overdose & Chauvin was just doing his job. We have to make allowances for these people's lack of intellect, they're American.
This is probably a very racist thing to say but I do find that the majority of Americans are pig ignorant on the whole, and have found that their cops in particular are charmless rather terrifying Neanderthals in my very limited interaction with them (and I'm a white posh female).
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 21, 2021, 10:20:17 AM
Resisting arrest is an offence you can be arrested for.
If only Floyd had just got in the sodding car.
There were around 19 people killed during the 'mostly peaceful protests' following Floyd's death, including a retired black police chief, David Dorn, shot dead by looters, roughly $2 billion in property damage.
The whole situation is a stain on history & could have been completely avoided if Floyd hadn't done drugs & Chauvin didn't murder him.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 21, 2021, 10:21:49 AM
Given the high rate of controversial police killings, their inevitability & the amount of discussions they produce here........
May I suggest a senior moderator open a new page, board, discussion topics header thingamy jig, within which the individual cases can be added as individual topics?
To be honest I'm not massively interested in any of the other cases. This one has used up all my interest and I'd rather go back to supporting child neglectors.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 21, 2021, 10:25:33 AM
To be honest I'm not massively interested in any of the other cases. This one has used up all my interest and I'd rather go back to supporting child neglectors.
Well, BLM aren't going anywhere soon & theirs no shortage of police killings ever so there will always something waiting for you when you've had your fill of missing kids.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Eleanor on April 21, 2021, 10:27:24 AM
Well, BLM aren't going anywhere soon & theirs no shortage of police killings ever so there will always something waiting for you when you've had your fill of missing kids.
America is a cesspit. I have no interest in ever going there again. I don't really care that much if the place burns to the ground. Apart from New York. That can stay.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Eleanor on April 21, 2021, 10:34:07 AM
America is a cesspit. I have no interest in ever going there again. I don't really care that much if the place burns to the ground. Apart from New York. That can stay.
America used to be wonderful. I wouldn't have minded it 100 years ago. But I wouldn't be seen dead there now. Which I could well be.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 21, 2021, 10:34:17 AM
America is a cesspit. I have no interest in ever going there again. I don't really care that much if the place burns to the ground. Apart from New York. That can stay.
BLM..... 'All Cops Are b........s'
The several hundred New York cops who ran to their deaths trying to save people from the burning Twin Towers.
There are still New York cops dying to this very day from the cancer they earned for their heroics.
14 died last year & 1 this year already.
But the only good cop is a dead cop, apparently.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Carana on April 21, 2021, 10:49:19 AM
It might be a more achievable goal than actually reducing police killings, so I don't think the idea should be entirely ruled out.
Are you volunteering to help redress the statistics?
More seriously, I feel sorry for the vast majority of decent police officers (in most civilized countries) who put their lives on the line to keep the rest of us safe and have to sometimes make split-second decisions, which may - or may not - later be deemed appropriate.
That said, in this case, I can't find anything to warrant what happened to Floyd. It's not as if he'd, e.g., been spraying machine-gun fire into a crowd, or appeared to have had a pack of explosives tied to his chest.
He just went in to buy a pack of cigs and paid with what the poor cashier kid thought could have been fake, who then alerted the police, otherwise the amount would have been docked from his pay.
I hope this young cashier is getting some kind of counseling help.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 21, 2021, 10:57:53 AM
The several hundred New York cops who ran to their deaths trying to save people from the burning Twin Towers.
There are still New York cops dying to this very day from the cancer they earned for their heroics.
14 died last year & 1 this year already.
But the only good cop is a dead cop, apparently.
Apparently according to whom? Not me. I support policing as an institution, I just don't think police should be allowed to be judge, jury and executioner as well.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 21, 2021, 11:04:08 AM
Apparently according to whom? Not me. I support policing as an institution, I just don't think police should be allowed to be judge, jury and executioner as well.
Only Good Cops are Dead Cops is another sign I see regularly displayed at BLM marches.
I don't condone the police killing anyone unless it's in self defense, defense of another.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Carana on April 21, 2021, 11:04:40 AM
This is probably a very racist thing to say but I do find that the majority of Americans are pig ignorant on the whole, and have found that their cops in particular are charmless rather terrifying Neanderthals in my very limited interaction with them (and I'm a white posh female).
"Racist"? Are Americans of a different "race"?
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Carana on April 21, 2021, 11:09:18 AM
Only Good Cops are Dead Cops is another sign I see regularly displayed at BLM marches.
I don't condone the police killing anyone unless it's in self defense, defense of another.
I find things like that disgraceful and do more harm than good to such causes. Why can't everyone just be nice and get along? (A question I used to ask my mother as a child).
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Angelo222 on April 21, 2021, 11:48:40 AM
I have decided that I really don't care. Three separate Charges for one supposed Crime has got to be a howl a minute. If you don't get him on one then hope for one of the others.
They got him on all three. Which one was it? It surely can't be all three. Where was he when the other two were going on?
I agree totally, this was so wrong on so many levels.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Angelo222 on April 21, 2021, 11:49:41 AM
London isn't far behind. This must be stopped now, the lunatics are taking over the asylum.
Why is it that shooting these criminal thugs is such a bad thing, who would you call in an emergency, a thug or a police officer?
This is such a spurious argument it barely deserves an answer but I shall bless you with one anyway.
Of course it would depend on the emergency and who you were. If you were calling in a drug debt because you needed the money urgently to pay off another supplier you'd probably call in a thug. Or if your troublesome husband had pushed you to the limit and you wanted him to swim with the fishes, likewise. If you are a law abiding citizen who has been the victim of crime (say a shop assistant who has just been given a counterfeit note) then you would undoubtedly call the police, however unless you were also quite morally corrupt and sadistic yourself you would hope that the police dealt with the individual in question fairly and humanely and not kneel on his neck for 9 plus minutes until he died, especially not once he had ceased resisting, and had complied with being handcuffed. Do you really think the police should be given carte blanche to shoot anyone they fancy shooting, no questions asked?
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Eleanor on April 21, 2021, 02:23:26 PM
This is such a spurious argument it barely deserves an answer but I shall bless you with one anyway.
Of course it would depend on the emergency and who you were. If you were calling in a drug debt because you needed the money urgently to pay off another supplier you'd probably call in a thug. Or if your troublesome husband had pushed you to the limit and you wanted him to swim with the fishes, likewise. If you are a law abiding citizen who has been the victim of crime (say a shop assistant who has just been given a counterfeit note) then you would undoubtedly call the police, however unless you were also quite morally corrupt and sadistic yourself you would hope that the police dealt with the individual in question fairly and humanely and not kneel on his neck for 9 plus minutes until he died, especially not once he had ceased resisting, and had complied with being handcuffed. Do you really think the police should be given carte blanche to shoot anyone they fancy shooting, no questions asked?
I think you will find that it is the bad guys that are being shot. No loss to society really imo.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Venturi Swirl on April 22, 2021, 07:09:59 AM
I think you will find that it is the bad guys that are being shot. No loss to society really imo.
So police are always the good guys and always shoot bad guys and you are happy for them to be licensed to kill, (even if the occasional good guy gets killed by mistake, oh well shit happens?) And you think justice should be delivered at the end of a gun and not by lawful process? You basically approve a return to the Wild West then. Incredible, just incredible.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Carana on April 22, 2021, 09:36:42 AM
Under Minnesota's sentencing guidelines, he faces 12-and-a-half years in prison for his murder conviction as a first-time offender but prosecutors could seek a maximum of 40 years if the judge determined there were "aggravating factors". https://news.sky.com/story/george-floyds-killer-derek-chauvin-held-in-isolation-for-23-hours-a-day-in-maximum-security-prison-12283411
Seems one of the other officers (Thao) was involved in another case of police brutality against another Black guy (judging by his name) who was just walking home with his pregnant girlfriend. https://edition.cnn.com/2020/05/28/us/minneapolis-officer-complaints-george-floyd/index.html
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 22, 2021, 02:18:29 PM
Chauvin verdict a blow to ex-police trio awaiting trial over George Floyd death Tou Thao, J Alexander Kueng and Thomas Lane to go on trial in August, charged with aiding and abetting Floyd’s murder
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Carana on April 27, 2021, 07:16:32 PM
Not sure if it's worth a new thread, so I'll add it here.
This is not directly related to the racial aspect of cases of excessive force, but on the excessive use of force in general. I find it depressingly masochistic.
A US police officer has been accused of dislocating the shoulder of a 73-year-old woman with dementia while arresting her, and then leaving her without medical help for six hours.
Officer Austin Hopp, of Loveland Police Department in Colorado, arrested Karen Garner in June 2020 after she allegedly left a store without paying for about $14 (£9) worth of items.
His body camera footage shows Hopp catching up to her as she walks through a field along a road.
She shrugs and turns away from him and he quickly grabs her arm and pushes her 80lb body to the ground.
She looks confused and repeatedly says: "I am going home."
The arrest, which family members say left her with a fractured arm and a dislocated shoulder, and worsened her dementia symptoms.
In footage from the station after the arrest, told fellow officers "ready for the pop?" as he showed them his body camera footage.
The footage has been released by Ms Garner's lawyer.
The surveillance video captured in the Loveland police station shows two other officers, one male and female, watching the footage with Hopp as he makes the "pop" comment. The female officer, who helped during the arrest, says: "I hate this", and put her head in her hands.
The video then shows her pull her hat over her eyes while another male officer says: "I love it."
At the time the officers were watching the footage, Ms Garner was in a holding cell a few feet away, handcuffed to a bench.
The federal lawsuit filed on her behalf earlier this month said she received no medical care for about six hours after she was taken to jail.
Later in the surveillance video, Hopp and the other male officer fist bump at the part of the body camera footage where Hopp dismisses the concerns of a man passing the arrest scene who stops to object to how Hopp is treating what the man thought was a child.
After watching that part of the body cam video a second time, the second officer on the surveillance video reacts to the man who stopped at the arrest scene by saying: "What are you doing? Get out of here. This is none of your business."
On the police station video, Hopp says he is a little worried that Ms Garner is "like senile and stuff".
Police put Hopp on leave after the lawsuit was filed and announced they would conduct an internal investigation. The arrest is also being investigated by the District Attorney's office and the city.
Loveland police declined to comment on the new video footage from the police station, citing the criminal investigation being conducted at the district attorney's request.
The lawyer representing Ms Garner and her family, Sarah Schielke, said the latest video footage needed to be released to force the department to change.
"If I didn't release this, the Loveland Police's toxic culture of arrogance and entitlement, along with their horrific abuse of the vulnerable and powerless, would carry on, business as usual. I won't be a part of that," she said.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on April 29, 2021, 12:45:35 AM
Finding Derek Chauvin guilty of murdering George Floyd was a 'no-brainer', juror says
Brandon Mitchell says they could have completed deliberations in an hour to find Derek Chauvin guilty of murdering George Floyd.
Finding Derek Chauvin guilty of murdering George Floyd was a "no-brainer", one of the jurors in the trial has said.
Brandon Mitchell said he and the 11 other jurors could have completed their deliberations within the 10 hours they actually took - and might have finished in just 60 minutes.
They did not need much thinking time, the 31-year-old high school basketball coach added.
"For the most part, we did go in and come straight out," he told NBC's Today.
The jury was unanimous in finding Chauvin guilty last week. The former police officer could now spend decades in jail.
Presenter Craig Melvin asked Mr Mitchell if there was a "tipping point" that made him think Chauvin was guilty.
Mr Mitchell said he found the evidence given by Dr Martin Tobin particularly important, because he "broke everything down but still kept it very scientific".
Dr Tobin, a world-renowned breathing expert, told the courtroom in Minneapolis he had watched the footage of George Floyd's arrest "hundreds of times", and believed the 46-year-old died from a "lack of oxygen".
"That was kind of the point where I was like, okay, I don't know how the defence comes back from this," Mr Mitchell said.
He was unsure whether Chauvin could have made a difference by deciding to give evidence.
"But I don't think it would have hurt," he said. "I mean, we found him guilty on all charges, so I don't think it would have hurt. It probably could have only helped him at that point."
Nevertheless, Mr Mitchell said he thought the "evidence was overwhelming that he was guilty, in my opinion. I thought it was a no-brainer".
He told the TV network: "After Dr Tobin and all the other witnesses and all the evidence, I mean, I didn't see anything, any reason why we should have taken longer than an hour (to reach verdicts)."
Asked about Chauvin's demeanour during the trial, Mr Mitchell said the now convicted murderer "looked like he was very confident the first week/week and a half".
But that confidence weakened as "more and more witnesses came up".
Chauvin and his team of lawyers "seemed like they were deteriorating, their confidence, and it was getting lower and lower and lower as the trial went on", Mr Mitchell said.
Craig Melvin brought up reports claiming one of the jurors had been "on the fence", asking Mr Mitchell: "What ultimately brought that one juror around?"
Mr Mitchell replied: "I wouldn't necessarily say they were on the fence. I think they just wanted to do their due diligence and make sure that they understood the terminology correct and they understood exactly what the judge's instructions were in relation to that specific charge."
It was suggested to Mr Mitchell that "some corners of (the) media" felt the verdict had been "predetermined", that "you felt the pressure going in, and that if you didn't come up with a guilty verdict, that things were going to go badly".
But Mr Mitchell said that was "just so dismissive of the entire process".
He added: "We're everyday civilians that put our families, our jobs, and our days aside to serve justice.
"I mean, we all walked in with an open mind, and we left with a guilty verdict. We just felt the evidence was overwhelming for our verdict. It had nothing to do with pressure from anywhere."
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: carlymichelle on May 04, 2021, 11:27:48 PM
#BREAKING: The defense attorney for Derek Chauvin has filed a motion asking for a new trial for the former police officer who was found guilty in the murder of George Floyd, citing juror misconduct and denying a change of venue. https://8.wfla.com/33m50WF
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: rulesapply on June 11, 2021, 11:03:40 PM
Maybe Chauvin thought he'd get a medal for it. Happens all the time and no one cares until recently it would seem or maybe people have always cared but this was the last straw and because of internet, the world watching etc. ordinary people can now say to the world, look at this. This is what so many black Americans before us were talking about but there was only mainstream media. No choices. Two or three television stations in the UK and heavily monitored radio. I don't know about the rest of the world and the media available. I read earlier that someone said the policeman made a stupid mistake. Sitting on a person until they are dead is not a stupid mistake. Forgetting to lock my van is.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on June 11, 2021, 11:37:22 PM
Maybe Chauvin thought he'd get a medal for it. Happens all the time and no one cares until recently it would seem or maybe people have always cared but this was the last straw and because of internet, the world watching etc. ordinary people can now say to the world, look at this. This is what so many black Americans before us were talking about but there was only mainstream media. No choices. Two or three television stations in the UK and heavily monitored radio. I don't know about the rest of the world and the media available. I read earlier that someone said the policeman made a stupid mistake. Sitting on a person until they are dead is not a stupid mistake. Forgetting to lock my van is.
"Forgetting to lock my van is".....
.......especially if you live in a black neighbourhood.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Miss Taken Identity on June 14, 2021, 04:02:21 PM
#BREAKING: The defense attorney for Derek Chauvin has filed a motion asking for a new trial for the former police officer who was found guilty in the murder of George Floyd, citing juror misconduct and denying a change of venue. https://8.wfla.com/33m50WF
I'm Sure I read somewhere that it didn't help his case that the police paid out 72 million pounds compensation to the 'family' before he was convicted which could have given the wrong message to any juror. I will try and find that.
I do believe he played a part in Floyds death, but the responsibility rests with the man himself for being a criminal and trying to resist arrest. IMO this was NOT a race crime. BLM just got their 'messiah' at the right time.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: rulesapply on July 09, 2021, 05:42:26 PM
I'm Sure I read somewhere that it didn't help his case that the police paid out 72 million pounds compensation to the 'family' before he was convicted which could have given the wrong message to any juror. I will try and find that.
I do believe he played a part in Floyds death, but the responsibility rests with the man himself for being a criminal and trying to resist arrest. IMO this was NOT a race crime. BLM just got their 'messiah' at the right time.
I don't believe his criminal record and his resistance to arrest make him responsible for his own death. Not at all. His killer was the man who literally squeezed the life out of him. As for black Americans getting their messiah at the right time, I wonder if GF would like to be a living criminal or a dead god?
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Dexter on July 09, 2021, 05:52:27 PM
Maybe Chauvin thought he'd get a medal for it. Happens all the time and no one cares until recently it would seem or maybe people have always cared but this was the last straw and because of internet, the world watching etc. ordinary people can now say to the world, look at this. This is what so many black Americans before us were talking about but there was only mainstream media. No choices. Two or three television stations in the UK and heavily monitored radio. I don't know about the rest of the world and the media available. I read earlier that someone said the policeman made a stupid mistake. Sitting on a person until they are dead is not a stupid mistake. Forgetting to lock my van is.
Well said.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: rulesapply on July 12, 2021, 12:51:42 AM
Have you ever arrested a really big guy on drugs in the middle of a dangerous thoroughfare with a mob standing on the kerb howling abuse at you?
There were more than one arresting that really big guy. They looked like they were doing fine. Chauvin certainly didn't have to kill him. Floyd was under control way before his death.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on January 25, 2022, 10:08:24 PM
George Floyd: Federal civil rights trial of three ex-officers begins.
A federal civil rights trial for three US ex-police officers indicted in the murder of George Floyd has begun in Minneapolis.
J Alexander Kueng, Thomas Lane and Tou Thao helped senior officer Derek Chauvin detain Mr Floyd for allegedly handing a counterfeit bill.
Chauvin was filmed pressing his knee into the unarmed black man's neck for more than nine minutes before he died.
His death, filmed by a bystander, led to global protests in 2020.
Chauvin was convicted last June of murder and is currently serving time in state prison. In December, he pleaded guilty to federal charges of violating Mr Floyd's civil rights, averting a second trial.
Federal prosecutors allege the officers "wilfully deprived" Mr Floyd of his civil liberties during the attempted arrest and have submitted a list of 48 witnesses they could call to the stand.
Jury selection was completed in a single day on Thursday. The court expects to begin opening arguments next Monday with a full bench of 12 jurors and six alternates.
Two of the selected jurors appear to be Asian and the others are white, according to the Minneapolis Star-Tribune newspaper. The selected jury are composed of five men and seven women.
Judge Paul Magnuson questioned one juror on whether his daughter's involvement in protests in the wake of Mr Floyd's death would allow him to remain impartial. When the man said it would not affect his judgement, the judge responded that his granddaughter also "kind of got caught" up in the same thing, the newspaper reported.
The three men will also face their own state charges - for aiding and abetting Chauvin - in a separate trial later this year.
Here is what we know about the four former police officers and the charges they face.
Thomas Lane
What was his role?
Mr Lane, 38, was one of the first two officers called to the shop reporting a counterfeit $20 bill. At the scene, he approached Mr Floyd's car, pointed his gun at him and handcuffed him. He later allegedly held a struggling Mr Floyd's feet as Chauvin and Mr Kueng restrained him on the ground.
What are the charges?
He has been charged with one count of depriving Mr Floyd of his civil rights using "the colour of the law", including that he ignored the arrestee's "right to be free from a police officer's deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs".
What's his background?
Mr Lane became a cadet at the police department in February 2019, but started working for the force just four days prior to Mr Floyd's death.
His training officer was Chauvin. A criminal complaint against Mr Lane claims he questioned Chauvin's tactics during the arrest of Mr Floyd, asking: "Should we roll him on his side?"
The ex-officer had no track record of complaints.
A criminology graduate from the University of Minnesota, Mr Lane used to work as a guard at a juvenile detention centre and volunteered to mentor Somali school children.
J Alexander Kueng
What was his role?
Mr Kueng, 27, was first on the scene with Mr Lane. He helped Chauvin and Mr Lane pin Mr Floyd to the floor. He was also the first to find Mr Floyd no longer had a pulse.
What are the charges?
He faces two counts of using "the colour of the law" to deprive Mr Floyd of his civil rights, including that he "wilfully failed to intervene" to stop Chauvin using his knee on the arrestee's neck.
What's his background?
Like Mr Lane, Mr Kueng was relatively new to policing, entering the force in Minneapolis in February 2019 as a cadet.
According to a New York Times profile, Mr Kueng - whose mother is white and father is Nigerian - believed "diversity could force change in a Police Department long accused of racism".
He and Mr Lane graduated in the same recruit class and were promoted to officers in December 2019, with Chauvin as their field training officer. There were no previous complaints against him.
The death of Mr Floyd happened on his third shift.
Mr Kueng, who also speaks Russian, attended the University of Minnesota, where he studied sociology.
Tou Thao
What was his role?
Mr Thao, 35, stood near the other three officers while they restrained Mr Floyd. He stood between the officers and bystanders, telling the growing crowd to keep its distance.
What are the charges?
He also faces two counts of using "the colour of the law" to deprive Mr Floyd of his civil rights.
What's his background?
Mr Thao - a Hmong American - completed his police academy training in 2009 but was laid off when the force made budget cuts. He re-joined as an officer in 2012.
Up to his sacking, Mr Thao had six conduct complaints on his record. Five were closed without discipline and one was open at the time of his firing, but no details have been made public about any of the complaints.
Food service and security are among the sectors Mr Thao previously worked in.
Derek Chauvin
What was his role?
Chauvin, 45, was filmed kneeling on Mr Floyd's neck while he was handcuffed on the floor repeatedly pleading "I can't breathe".
What are the charges?
Chauvin was charged with second-degree murder, third-degree murder and second-degree manslaughter. He was convicted on all three counts and was sentenced last June to 22-and-a-half years in state prison. He is appealing his state murder conviction.
In December 2021, he pleaded guilty to federal civil rights charges stemming from the Floyd incident and an unrelated 2017 case of unreasonable force. Federal prosecutors have recommended a 25-year sentence.
What's his background?
Chauvin was the most senior officer involved in Mr Floyd's arrest, serving for almost 19 years with the Minneapolis Police Department.
Records from the Minneapolis Police Department's Internal Affairs Division reportedly show at least 15 conduct complaints against him. Most were closed without disciplinary action.
In 2006, Chauvin was recommended for a medal of valour for his role in the shooting of a man who aimed a shotgun at officers.
Prior to his career in the police, Chauvin served two stints in the US Army, as a member of the military police.
Title: Re: The Trial Of Derek Chauvin, Death Of George Floyd
Post by: Wonderfulspam on January 25, 2022, 10:20:06 PM
Of the 3 (former) officers who assisted Chauvin, Thomas Lane has the least worst defence & mitigation imo.
It was his 4th day on the job, he twice asked "should we roll him on his side" but was ignored by his superior & when Floyd was finally taken into the ambulance he went in with him & did chest compressions.
I think all 3 will be found guilty but Lane may receive a slightly lesser sentence than the others.