I previously wrote that the key to conviction in the Derek Chauvin trial (and avoiding a cascading failure in all four cases) is the autopsy findings and the role of drugs (including fentanyl) in the body of George Floyd. Prosecutors are now asking the jury to effectively dismiss the findings of the only official autopsy in the case and insist, contrary to those findings, that Floyd died from asphyxia, or, lack of oxygen. Some new disclosures may make that claim more difficult for the prosecution.
Last week, special prosecutor Jerry Blackwell admitted to jurors that Hennepin County Chief Medical Examiner Dr. Andrew Baker pointed to cardiac arrest as Floyd’s cause of death. However, he insisted that the state would prove that “was … not a fatal heart event,” but asphyxiation.
It is a bold move since it could invite reasonable doubt on the cause of death. The question is whether a case of manslaughter could have been advanced without the need of opposing the state’s own coroner on such findings. The failure of Chauvin to respond to a medical emergency speaks more to manslaughter than murder but it could be framed consistently with these findings. Instead, the prosecution has asked the jury to effectively reject the coroner’s findings — a risky maneuver.
We have previously discussed key defense elements in the case:
Conversely, Chauvin’s attorney, Eric Nelson, sounds more like the typical prosecutor noting that there is only one official autopsy and one official report on the cause of death. He told the jury “Dr. Baker found none of what are referred to as the telltale signs of asphyxiation. There was no evidence that Mr. Floyd’s airflow was restricted and he did not determine [it] to be a positional or mechanical asphyxia death.”
Nelson can rely on other aspects of the official record. When Baker went over findings in a meeting last December with the Minnesota Attorney General’s Office, he specifically noted that the knee restraint was not likely to produce asphyxiation: “[I]t appeared to Dr. Baker that the pressure to the neck was coming from the back or posterior lateral portions of the back, and none of these strictures would impact breathing or cause loss of consciousness,” said a document summarizing the meeting.” He noted a study that found that placing 200 pounds of weight or more on a healthy person did not have an “observable impact on breathing.”
Instead, Baker cited the drugs in the system as well as the 75-80% narrowing of coronary arteries that “put him at risk for a sudden cardiac arrest.” The record of the meeting states “Dr. Baker offered that one possibility for the pathway of Floyd’s death is that Floyd’s heart was starting to fail because of the stress, drugs, enlarged heart, and [heart] disease . . . He said that once the heart starts to fail … one of the symptoms is the perception that you cannot breathe.”
After those findings were released, Baker’s office had to be put under police protections due to threats to him and his staff.
By focusing the jury on the autopsy report, and asking them to effectively dismiss the conclusions of the only official report, the prosecutors increase the chances of a hung jury and even an acquittal. I previously expressed reservations about the push for murder charges because the case is better suited for a manslaughter case. If a jury feels the prosecutors have over-charged a case, it can produce a loss of credibility in the case. When you add an argument to dismiss the state’s own autopsy findings, you risk magnifying such skepticism or mistrust with jury members.
How can a prosecutor ask a jury to disregard the results of the autopsy as determined by the city’s own medical examiner?
Seems to me the judge should have intervened and stopped the states attorney or instructed the jury to disregard the prosecutors request and inform the jury otherwise.
Disregarding the autopsy is grounds for appeal or overturning the verdict
I figured the jury would find the cop guilty no matter what the evidence but since the autopsy concludes drug overdose then the cop is clearly not guilty
The fix is in
What’s denying a motion for change of venue, if not grounds for appeal?
The prosecutor can’t order anything. That would be the judge. The prosecutor can in fact ask the jury to ignore the facts being presented by the defense, while the defense can reiterate them and show that the prosecution failed to meet their burden.
If Chauvin is found guilty, there would be ample grounds for appeal. The facts of the case do not support murder and most likely manslaughter charges.
they want a acquittal so they have more riots, more division
nonsense
Is everyone suggesting that a conviction is the only answer in order to save the city from being burned to the ground…
Well, then the prosecco should aim at an “affordable solution” like manslaughter, maybe even involuntarily, instead of going all-in with “Murder of the 1st + Do Not consider the forensic facts”. He aims high and will fall down low, riots on their way (who gives 27 millions to the family of a convict, is beyond morals of any sort).
In every cause of death finding outside of natural causes (accident, suicide, homicide or other), a postmortem forensic toxicology test is performed. The test is based on more than a dozen body samples, including hair and fingernails. It is the most scientific and conclusive as to cause of death. The test takes 4 to 6-weeks, so it should have been available around the 4th of July in 2020. In the case of Prince Rogers Nelson (“Prince”), Carver County Minnesota released the results 6-weeks after his death. The conclusion was fentanyl as the cause of death. The autopsy, and yes there is always only one autopsy, used blood drawn at the hospital. It is less definitive, to say the least.
I am absolutely baffled why no media outlet is asking about the results of the postmortem forensic toxicology report. I have repeatedly asked the Hennepin County Medical Examiners office and they will not respond on the topic. [“Post-Mortem Forensic Toxicology – determines the absence or presence of drugs and their metabolites, chemicals such as ethanol and other volatile substances, carbon monoxide and other gases, metals, and other toxic chemicals in human fluids and tissues, and evaluates their role as a determinant or contributory factor in the cause and manner of death;”]
The report has been on the internet since about July/August 2020. But you really had to look for it. And I mean really look for it. I read the whole report and noted that the Fentanyl level looked high along with the meth. Lawandcrime.com has it and that article was dated 6/3/2020. I bookmarked it, but switched browsers and lost it. Not sure if I can post the link, but I’ll try. https://lawandcrime.com/live-trials/live-trials-current/george-floyd-death/authorities-just-released-george-floyds-complete-autopsy-report-read-it-here/
“I am absolutely baffled why no media outlet is asking about the results of the postmortem forensic toxicology report. I have repeatedly asked the Hennepin County Medical Examiners office and they will not respond on the topic. [“Post-Mortem Forensic Toxicology – determines the absence or presence of drugs and their metabolites, chemicals such as ethanol and other volatile substances, carbon monoxide and other gases, metals, and other toxic chemicals in human fluids and tissues, and evaluates their role as a determinant or contributory factor in the cause and manner of death;”]
”
-=-
Because this information didn’t fit the narrative where the city and the police wanted to sacrifice these men in an effort to quell the rioting and calm the public down.
BLM has added Floyd to the rolls of their poster children. Almost all tend to be bad examples where they died resisting police w the exception being the Zimmerman case where he fired in self defense.
Sorry but its these types of cases which take away from true abuse of force like what happened in Charleston SC.
Is it really so baffling? The MSM flat out ignores anything that goes against their narrative, like an autopsy report that establishes that Floyd’s cause of death was a drug overdose. The autopsy also establishes that George Floyd was a lowlife POS. Nothing to do with his race, but as MLK said, everything to do with his (lack of) character. A career criminal who died from an overdose. And he’s a victim and a hero?
The officer likely did not kill George Floyd. His undoing might be the fact he kept his knee on the side of his neck for over 10 minutes. THEN he nor anyone else performed CPR. This makes him and the other officers look like they just didn’t give a shit about the guy. 10 minutes is way too long, like 8 or 9 minutes too long. The guy was cuffed, no reason to keep him down like that once they got control of him. Still this does not mean he killed him, but it sure doesn’t endear him to the jury.
If my memory serves me right they were trying to get him to comply with being placed in the back of the cruiser. He was freaking out screaming he was gonna die before they wrestled him to the ground. I don’t disagree that as he was in cuffs there is likely a claim of excessive force but that isn’t the same as deadly force. Kind of like dealing with a 4 year old, just how long are you going to let hime make a scene in the middle of the aisle before you forcibly make the child comply?
Full transcript of police body cam footage during their incident with George Floyd from beginning to end. He acted erratically and became increasingly frantic before he ever was on the ground:
https://www.twincities.com/2020/07/09/george-floyd-transcript-read-it-in-full-here/
I can’t copy and paste this transcript, as it is an image.
Some interesting quotes. I’ve put a space between different parts of the transcript:
Lane to Shawanda Renee Hill: “Why’s he getting all squirrelly and not showing us his hands, and just being all weird like that?”
Hill: “I have no idea. Because he’s been shot before.”
Lane to Hill: “Okay, well, so here’s the thing, someone passed a fake bill in there. We came over here, he starts grabbing for the keys, and all that stuff, starts getting weird, not showing us his hands. I don’t know what’s going on, so you’re coming out of the car.”
Lane to Floyd: “Are you on something right now?”
Floyd: “No, nothing.”
Kueng: “Because you’re acting a little erratic.”
Floyd: “I’m scared, man.”
Lane: “Let’s go.”
Kueng: “You’ve got foam around your mouth too?
Floyd: “Yes, I was just hooping earlier.”
Kueng: “Stand up, stop falling down! Stand up! Stay on your feet and face the car door!”
Floyd: “I’m claustrophobic, man, please, man, please.”
Then he argues about not wanting to get in the car, feeling claustrophobic, and arguing why they don’t believe him.
Floyd: “I can’t choke! I can’t breathe, Mr Officer! Please! Please!” (Note that this is still pretty early in the confrontation.)
Kueng: “Fine”
Floyd: “My wrist! My wrist, man! <b<I want to lay on the ground! I want to lay on the ground! I want to lay on the ground!"
Lane: “You’re getting in the squad.”
Floyd: “I want to lay on the ground! I’m going down. I’m going down. I’m going down.”
Kueng: “Take a squat.”
Speaker 9: “Bro, you about to have a heart attack and s*&^&t man, get in the car!”
Floyd: “I know. I can’t breathe. I can’t breathe.”
Then Floyd continues to say he can’t breathe, so they lay him on the ground. He keeps saying he can’t breathe. Then you hear Chauvin.
Chauvin, Lane, and Kueng all tell Floyd that he’s talking. Essentially, they use the line of reasoning that if you can talk, you can breathe. As an asthmatic, I really hate this myth. You can say at least a few words right up until you pass out and die. They escalate the EMS code from 2 to 3. They talk about him being high on something, and that they found a pipe.
At one point onlookers are calling out that he appears to have passed out. They keep asking the officers to check his pulse and if he is breathing. Two of the officers say he is still breathing. Lane repeatedly asks if they can move him to his side or something.
@Karen S you wrote:
“As an asthmatic, I really hate this myth. You can say at least a few words right up until you pass out and die.”
That’s not exactly true.
The quote and issue is that if you can speak, that means your throat / airway is clear and you can breathe.
That doesn’t deal with pulmonary edema or other factors.
But what you post should clear Chauvin.
When the officers first try to put Floyd in the car, he was already going into Cardiac arrest. He was dying and at that point, no one could stop it or save him.
Anonymous – it is common for people to say, “If you can talk, you can breathe.” But you can absolutely be experiencing worsening respiratory distress while still able to voice words. I knew a woman who died of an asthma attack, in front of her husband and kids, saying, “No!” over and over again before she collapsed and died in their arms. I know multiple people who suffered from low oxygen, one of them due to heart failure. They would pass out mid-conversation.
When you’re in respiratory distress, from an asthma attack or any other cause, it creates more fear when someone tells you that you’re fine, since you’re talking. It creates a surge of adrenaline, as you realize they have no idea what you’re feeling, and you have to waste more air trying to get them to understand you actually are in a critical situation. While people say things like this to calm people down, it just makes them more afraid.
The best thing to say, in my opinion, to someone who says they can’t breathe and are scared, is that you hear them, help is on the way, and let’s try some different positions to sit or lie in. I could hear George Floyd still trying to convince Chauvin that he couldn’t breathe up until the end.
I agree with you that George Floyd was already in serious trouble, and I think he was dying no matter what. But I also think that there reached a point in the altercation where Floyd had stopped fighting. That police department should have followed the example of others across the country and stopped using that hold as too dangerous. Regardless, from my perspective, Chauvin used that hold way longer than he should have, even giving him the benefit of the doubt that it was an allowed hold at the time. He went way past the point where Floyd stopped struggling with any strength, and I didn’t see him try different positions or make any effort to assist his breathing. If he thought that people high out of their minds on drugs were unpredictable, still, Floyd had reached the point where he couldn’t struggle anymore. He didn’t even try to help him with his breathing. Bystanders were calling out that it looked like he’d passed out, and yelled to check his pulse and breathing. If he had gotten off him, tried to sit him up, or tried moving him to different positions, then he would have shown effort to help him besides just holding him still while waiting for EMTs. Even if he would have died anyway, the officers would at least have been actively trying to save him at the time instead of passively waiting for the EMTs.
I think Chauvin exhibited poor judgement and callous disregard. Perhaps he’d wrestled with too many drug addicts. Regardless, I have seen no evidence that he set out to murder George Floyd. I’m still open to the possibility that Chauvin’s hold might have hastened the death of an already dying man, but it would depend upon the evidence. When someone takes fentanyl and meth, they’re at high risk of dying.
I really wish people would stop getting addicted to drugs. It ruins their lives and all too often, ends them.
You think “he was dying no matter what”. Based on what, besides your racism?
Natacha – name one racist remark I have ever made in the history of commenting on this blog.
Stop lying because you won’t answer the question as to why George Floyd repeatedly said he couldn’t breathe, and had foam around his mouth, before Chauvin ever touched him.
Transcript of 911 call that first sent police to George Floyd:
Operator: 911 what’s the address of the emergency?
Caller: This is ah 3759 Chicago Ave.
Operator: How can I help you?
Caller: Um someone comes our store and give us fake bills and we realize it before he left the store, and we ran back outside, they was sitting on their car. We tell them to give us their phone, put their (inaudible) thing back and everything and he was also drunk and everything and return to give us our cigarettes back and so he can, so he can go home but he doesn’t want to do that, and he’s sitting on his car cause he is awfully drunk and he’s not in control of himself.
Operator: Okay, what type of vehicle does he have?
Caller: And …. um he’s got a vehicle that is ah … one second let me see if I can see the license. The driver license is BRJ026.
Operator: Okay, what color is it?
Caller: It’s a blue color. It’s a blue van.
Operator: Blue van?
Caller: Yes, van.
Operator: Alright blue van, gotcha. Is it out front or is it on 38th St.?
Caller: Ah it’s on 38th St.
Operator: On 38th St. So, this guy gave a counterfeit bill, has your cigarettes, and he’s under the influence of something?
Caller: Something like that, yes. He is not acting right.
Operator: What’s he look like, what race?
Caller: Um, he’s a tall guy. He’s like tall and bald, about like 6 … 6 1/2, and she’s not acting right so and she started to go, drive the car.
Operator: Okay so, female or a male?
Caller: Um…
Operator: Is it a girl or a boy?
Caller: (Talking to somebody else) — he’s asking (inaudible) one second. Hello?
Operator: Is it a girl or a boy that did this?
Caller: It is a man.
Operator: Okay. Is he white, black, Native, Hispanic, Asian?
Caller: Something like that.
Operator: Which one? White, black, Native, Hispanic, Asian?
Caller: No, he’s a black guy.
Operator: Alright (sigh).
Caller: How is your day going?
Operator: Not too bad.
Caller: Had a long day, huh?
Operator: What’s your name?
Caller: My name is (deleted)
Operator: Alright, a phone number for you?
Caller: (Deleted)
Operator: Alright, I’ve got help on the way. If that vehicle or that person leaves before we get there, just give us a call back, otherwise we’ll have squads out there shortly, okay?
Caller: No problem.
Operator: Thank you.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/28/us/minneapolis-george-floyd-911-calls/index.html
I appreciate the Professor’s professionalism and decorum, but this is what we used to call bullsh*t. Period. Our courts are a bloody mess. He died the way he died and no amount of propaganda will change that. It was the logical result of how he chose to live, no white person was forcing highly toxic drugs down his throat. Enough is enough.
Derek Chauvin has zero chance of a fair trial. ZERO. And you’re all just fine and dandy with it until it’s your turn. This is a guy who served his community for crappy pay, made a mistake, and is now going to go to hell on Earth as a sacrificial lamb. It’s all good as long as it’s someone else getting the shaft. May God have mercy.
Wake up and smell the coffee, people. The jury is going to convict him of something in the hope that the mostly peaceful usual suspects won’t burn the city down. That hope will likely go unrealized.
Bull. The jury is going to follow the judge’s instructions on how to apply the facts of the case and the law. And the public will accept the decision either way as justice.
Those malcontents who commit crime after the jury verdict will be dealt with a criminals.
Stand up for your legal system. Stop predicting failure of our core institutions.
Pb: “The jury is going to follow the judge’s instructions on how to apply the facts of the case and the law.”
***
OJ Simpson
@pbinca,
If the courts were to follow the rule of law, then Chauvin would never have been on trial for murder.
This isn’t even good enough to rate as a bad case.
Someone already cut-n-pasted the transcript from what happened. The moment Floyd was placed under arrest and even before Chauvin arrived… he was already in cardiac distress and heading in to full arrest.
This is what the defense will prove thru examining the autopsy. The toxic/lethal levels of fentanyl along w Floyd’s medical history will make it impossible for any prosecution to even meet their burden for any murder charge.
“Stop predicting failure of our core institutions.”
The BLM and Antifa riots were a success of our core institutions?
The specific dangers of positional asphyxia, something all MPD officers are trained to avoid as life-threatening, will make for dramatic testimony from Medical Examiner Baker. The deceptive way Baker tries to rule out asphyxia in his Report will come back to haunt him.
Positional asphyxia may not even exist: https://www.forcescience.org/2019/01/new-study-more-evidence-against-the-myth-of-restraint-asphyxia/
Officer Chauvin respond immediately and appropriately to Floyd’s medical emergency – he summoned emergency services. Chauvin was restraining Floyd in the manner he had been taught (by this PD and it’s training manuals) because Floyd was struggling and being combative, attempting to kick an officer while he was already on the ground and in cuffs. He restrained Floyd as long as he did because that’s how long it took emergency services to arrive. The medics transported Floyd three blocks away before they initiated live-saving efforts, because the hostility of the crowd at the scene didn’t provide a stable environment in which to proceed – the same reason why the officers at the scene made no such effort, having their hands full controlling Floyd and the growing, and hostile, crowd.
The body-cam videos do not support a “growing hostile crowd”. The few bystanders who were vocal were trying to coach the police toward a successful outcome, not villify them. The voices were calling out specific feedback, such as “Did you take his pulse?” and “Look at him, he’s unresponsive”. Only a zoned-out, paranoid police officer would interpret those types of comments as an “angry mob” (as became a nightly event in Portland).
Spot on Dave
So placing someone into the back of a squad car is ‘positional asphyxia’?
That’s when Floyd’s life was ending and no one could stop it from happening.
” The deceptive way Baker tries to rule out asphyxia in his Report will come back to haunt him.”
Can you show us anything deceptive in the autopsy report regarding asphyxia? Such deception doesn’t exist. The medical examiner reports the findings and draws a conclusion. The findings show a lot of fluid in the lungs. That is what is seen in a lot of overdoses.
@pbinca , you wrote:
“The specific dangers of positional asphyxia, something all MPD officers are trained to avoid as life-threatening, will make for dramatic testimony from Medical Examiner Baker. The deceptive way Baker tries to rule out asphyxia in his Report will come back to haunt him.
”
This is not true.
First, in terms of positional asphyxia, Chauvin placed his knee on the back of the neck, right?
Not his back?
So asphyxia caused by Chauvin’s knee didn’t happen. The autopsy showed no damage to the throat or neck.
The asphyxia Floyd suffered was due to the pulmonary edema and the drugs.
Baker’s autopsy findings will vindicate Chauvin. This is why the prosecution wants to tell the jury to ignore it.
Chauvin should be fired, but not guilty of murder.
So what happens to people who have COVID-19? Their lungs fill up with fluid which makes them unable to breath. What happens to people with Covid-19 who have pre-existing conditions such as heart disease? What happened to Floyd’s mask in his attempt to protect those around him from his virus? Chauvin should have looked into his crystal ball and tested Floyd for COVID-19 and immediately put him on the respirator in the back of the squad car. All else should be considered a shirking of his duty.
Being COVID positive does not mean that you are symptomatic. Also, did Floyd know he was COVID positive?
“did Floyd know he was COVID positive?”
***
I think he told the police he was.
He should have been wearing a mask and isolating.
Oh my Natacha. It doesn’t matter if Floyd knew that he was positive for COVID-19. He was suffering the symptoms whether knew it or not. The lungs fill up with thick mucus restricting the breathing of the infected person. If quickly placed on a respirator there’s a chance of survival. Even if on a respirator when co-existing conditions such as heart disease are present the possibility of death increases to a high degree. This is why protecting of our elderly with pre-existing conditions is so important. George Floyd made himself prematurely aged, did not protect himself and suffered the consequences.
@Thinkitthrough.
COVID is not even a factor here unless you want to say that it contributed to the pulmonary edema which was due to the prolonged drug use.
With a level of 11 ng/ml of Fentanyl in his blood stream… that’s going to be a major factor in terms of his cause of death.
No one knows what the level of fentanyl was in his blood stream. I don’t know how many times now I’ve posted the study from the Annals of Toxicology that found that with proven pre-death administration of fentanyl, post-mortem levels are 9 Xs higher than pre-mortem levels.
If fentanyl caused or contributed to his death, the autopsy report would say so. It does not say so.
It really blows my mind how you racist ignoramuses will believe anything to let a killer cop off the hook.
“. . . you racist ignoramuses . . .”
I must’ve missed that day of Debate 101.
“[Evidence]? We don’t need no stinking evidence!”
– Blazing Saddles
______________
NO DEATHS FROM NECK RESTRAINT
_ _ _ _ _
“Minneapolis Police Used Neck Restraints 237 Times, Left 44 People Unconscious Since 2015, Records Show”
Minneapolis Police Department officers have used neck restraints to subdue at least 237 people since 2015, according to an NBC News report published on Monday.
The report, which analyzed Minneapolis police records dating back roughly five years, also found that officers’ use of the disarming restraint tactic caused subjects to lose consciousness in 44 of those instances. Data showed that 60 percent of individuals restrained by police using this method were black, 30 percent were white, and the remainder were Native Americans, NBC News said in its evaluation.
– Newsweek
__________
“Floyd tested positive for coronavirus in April, and again following his death last week,…final autopsy results show.”
“…final autopsy results released by the Hennepin County Medical Examiner.”
“Floyd had bruises and cuts on his head, face, mouth, shoulders, arms and legs from when the officer forced him to the ground and knelt on his neck.”
“It found no evidence of major neck injuries, skull or brain injuries. There was no damage to internal organs, it said.”
“The thyroid cartilage and hyoid bone are intact,”
“…finds no evidence that any of those injuries directly would have killed him.”
“The final autopsy says Floyd had heart disease and a history of high blood pressure.”
“It includes a more complete toxicology report that said Floyd had evidence of several drugs in his blood and urine, including morphine, fentanyl, cannabis and methamphetamine,…”
– CNN
Floyd had ingested a lethal dose of fentanyl to prevent the officers from finding the drug on his person. He also had meth in his system. Fentanyl kills by filling the lungs with water (Floyd was reported by a witness to be “foaming at the mouth”) and meth causes extreme agitation (realized as resisting arrest and struggling after being handcuffed and restrained on the ground).
“Fentanyl kills by filling the lungs with water . . .”
And by causing a *heart attack*:
“Fatal overdoses of fentanyl usually result from respiratory collapse, although the drug’s capacity to depress central nervous system activity can cause other dangerous or deadly side effects, including brain damage due to oxygen deprivation, heart attack, or organ failure.”
https://www.altamirarecovery.com/fentanyl/risks-fentanyl-overdose/
Very nice, cogent article by Professor Turley.
I disagree that manslaughter for failure to treat is as strong an option as it once seemed. The crowd was getting threatening and it was obviously distracting the police from completing an efficient arrest. Even the people with the ambulance preferred to get clear of the scary crowd before initiating a full range of treatment on Floyd. The police were in a potentially more dangerous situation. Logically I think manslaughter based on failure to treat under those circumstances is out. But it is a political trial so we know ordinary standards of proof don’t apply.
Andrew Branca, attorney, made an interesting observation while blogging about the trial. He pointed out that the expert police witnesses, Zimmerman for one, who testified that what they saw on video was not proper procedure were compromised experts because the information they based their opinions on was compromised. They were allowed to see only carefully cut and edited portions of the entire set of recordings. As most of us have learned, the recordings in full cast the event in almost an entirely different light. No expert is better than the information he is working with and it was almost corrupt for the state to feed these ‘experts’ crafted and reshaped information.
When the defense shows more of the videos the prosecutors will look like liars.
One of the commenters on Branca’s reports listed a number of links to reports of officers being badly injured and even killed by criminals in handcuffs after they were ‘safely’ subdued. It isn’t always over when the cuffs are on.
There is only one actual, scientific examination and report on Floyd’s cause of death. The autopsy clearly indicates that the knee restraint [lawful and taught in that police department] did not cause Floyd’s death. He was not asphyxiated. Only one obvious cause of death can be seen and that is the overdose of dangerous drugs he administered to himself. That, of course, is why the prosecution is trying to sideline the only genuine evidence it has.
The only scientific evidence that state has benefits the defense. If the state didn’t introduce it [reluctantly] the defense would have to.
If Chauvin didn’t cause Floyd’s death he is innocent.
State’s evidence shows Chauvin did not cause Floyd’s death.
Well stated Young but none of it matters. Derek Chauvin is a sop for Cerberus, nothing more, nothing less. He would have been far better off to become a drug dealer or hitman rather than trying to serve his community for pennies a day. This country deserves what is coming to it.
@Young,
Yes you are correct in your assessment.
However… the simple fact is that Floyd was dying before Chauvin got on the scene and that there was nothing anyone could do to stop it.
His health, edema and then the drugs were a more than lethal combination.
The city should never have settled.
Chauvin should be found innocent of the charges, yet should still be fired from the force.
Those who praise Floyd and hold him as a martyr should be hit with a massive clue by four.
Anon – “If the courts were to follow the rule of law, then Chauvin would never have been on trial for murder.”
***
That is true so long as one assumes the city was correctly assessing legal liability [next to zero] and was concerned about serving the citizens and using their taxes to benefit all.
But the more likely explanation is that the city didn’t care about the taxpayers and didn’t care that they probably faced no legal liability.
It could be argued that the city rushed to an early and large ‘settlement’ to influence the outcome of an already unfair trial.
If Chauvin is found innocent then all of their posturing and appeasement while the city was being destroyed by mobs loses any claim to justification that could be made. They look corrupt and stupid and an innocent verdict would confirm that assessment.
I imagine that if there is an acquittal or a mistrial from a hung jury the next rage will be aimed at the jurors and they know it. If I were a juror on that trial I would be looking for a new home far away from Minnesota.
Even Kafka would have had trouble imagining such a bizarre mess in one of his novels. Well, maybe the one in which the guy wakes up to discover he has turned into a giant cockroach and goes about his business as usual. Makes me wonder, are their any current photos of the city council members?
I’m just a lay person, but I strongly feel this case was not charged correctly. It seems more like mob justice than actual justice.
From my perspective, I think Chauvin behaved in a callous way towards George Floyd. After he stopped struggling, he should have been sat up, and different positions tried to help alleviate his respiratory distress while they awaited EMT. Based upon the condition of his heart and lungs, the presence of a fatal overdose of Fentanyl along with meth in his system, and his Covid-19 positive status, I surmise that George Floyd would have died anyway. But he would have died while the police were trying to help him.
George Floyd was an instrument in his own destruction. You don’t take Fentanyl if you want to live. Best case scenario is that it’s Russian roulette with your life for recreation. Worst case is that it’s deliberate suicide. How the heck do anesthesia drugs get to the street? This stuff is poison. George Floyd’s life was going very wrong, hurtling down the drain, the moment he took Fentanyl. There must have been a lot going wrong that led up to that fateful choice.
Chauvin featured at the end of his life. I have not heard evidence yet proving Chauvin killed George Floyd. But he sure as heck made his passing harder and more frightening. George Floyd’s lungs were filling with fluid and his respiration slowing due to the overdose. His heart was racing due to the meth, and likely panic. His instinct might have been to fight and run, but he couldn’t run away from what he’d done to his own body. I wish he had admitted to the police what he had taken, and how much, to get help. Why keep it a secret what he took? They’d give him a blood test anyway. Why not just say what he took and get specific help? But I guess when you’re that high you can’t think rationally.
Unless evidence is presented that change my mind, I don’t think Chauvin killed George Floyd. I think he acted with negligence, and maintained a hold that was in police policy far longer than reasonably indicated. I don’t think he tried to help his breathing, which was negligent, but I believe Floyd was dying because of the overdose. It is still possible that evidence might prove that Chauvin hastened the death of a dying man.
The other police officers were rookies one week on the job. I don’t think they should have been charged at all. The hold had been part of their training, and Chauvin was their superior officer. Chauvin was holding him, waiting for EMTs to arrive.
I am glad that this hold has already been removed from so many police training, as it had years ago with the LAPD. A silver lining is that this tragedy induced more police departments to abandon this type of hold, and to review how to deal with strong drug addicts who are fighting and out of their minds on drugs. I cannot imagine how difficult it is to deal with someone on drugs and fighting.
Good God –you again. You state as if it were an established fact that Floyd: 1. had a fatal overdose in his system; THERE IS NO RELIABLE EVIDENCE OF THIS; yet you know better; postmortem levels of Fentanyl bear no relation to pre-death levels; fentanyl overdose was not listed as a cause of death, and no amount of posts from Turley will change this fundamental fact; 2. “the condition of his heart and lungs” what about it? What condition, Dr. Karen? Whatever these conditions were, he was fine until Chauvin knelt on his neck; how you you know that kneeling on Floyd’s neck didn’t cause lung congestion? 3. COVID 19 status–what does this have to do with anything? Was he symptomatic? What role did COFID + status play? Any role? None is listed by the doctors. 4. Floyd would have died anyway. Did the video in the store appear that he was in distress or dying?
As your posts always prove, you think you are more sophisticated and knowledgeable than you are, especially about medical things. What you are is racist and gullible and an unsophisticated know it all who thinks her opinions on medical and legal matters are important. We can just hope there aren’t some of your kind on the jury.
Natch– “Whatever these conditions were, he was fine until Chauvin knelt on his neck;”
***
Actually not. He was acting goofy in the store and complained about breathing and other problems while standing. Not ‘fine’ at all.
If the autopsy is favorable to the prosecution why do you think they are trying to get the jury to ignore it?
“If the autopsy is favorable to the prosecution why do you think they are trying to get the jury to ignore it?”
That type of correct indirect thinking escapes a lot of the members of the blog. I wonder why. Could it be that this trial is based on politics? Will people burn the city down if Chauvin is found not guilty of murder? Is that what happens in most murder cases? Of course not. This case is political.
In which Natacha, with her usual hysterical disregard for facts, claims that a man with Fentanyl and meth in his system, who complained that he couldn’t breathe and started struggling, while speaking with the police, was “fine” before Chauvin knelt on his neck. Remember the part where an officer told Floyd he would sit with him in the back to help him calm down and get more air back there because he said he couldn’t breathe and was claustrophibic? Remember when they kept asking him what he took? That’s not “fine.”
Postmortem redistribution of Fentanyl will be discussed at trial.
It is frightening to think of you on a jury, as you’ve shown a consistent disregard for the facts or investigations. There have been so many times you have boldly stated that you just knew someone was guilty, only to be proven wrong, and then sullenly stop making such assertions. Eventually.
Falsely accusing me of racism is a real dirtbag thing to do, but hardly noteworthy in a troll who claimed to be both a nurse and a lawyer at one point.
Someone who claims she is a nurse thinks someone taking Fentanyl and meth is “fine” and not in imminent danger of death. My God, if you really are a nurse, that’s a problem.
See, here is how juries work. The prosecution has to prove their case. The evidence has to convince jurors beyond a reasonable doubt. Evidence like that autopsy that the prosecution is trying to throw out.
This isn’t a lynch mob; it’s supposed to be justice.
I have kept an open mind, and still caution that evidence might be brought that will prove Chauvin hastened or contributed to Floyd’s death.
Too bad you jump to so many conclusions, because you probably get jury summons like everyone else. The thought is chilling. You’d fit right in with a lynch mob.
This has always been your know-it-all modus operandi: claim that I’ve been corrected numerous times, which is a lie. You did the same thing with the Christine Blasey Ford’s testimony about Brett Kavanaugh. I’m still waiting for her to cash in on her fame, which is what you claimed was her motivation to lie about what he did to her. Last I heard, she still couldn’t return to teaching and her family still can’t return to their home. When is she going on the talk show circuit to promote her book, like you claimed she would do? When did I “boldly state” someone was guilty, only to be proven wrong? I didn’t say taking fentanyl or meth were “fine”. I said that the video of Floyd in the store minutes before Chauvin knelt on his neck showed someone who was standing, walking, talking and apparently unimpaired–not someone on the verge of death, like you try to claim. Turley threw in the fentanyl as a red herring: to get the jury distracted from Chauvin’s outrageous conduct.
Someone who panics over claustrophobia isn’t going to calm down because someone is sitting with him. Now I’m a dirtbag and troll, lying about my education and jumping to conclusions? That describes you perfectly. You demonstrate the height of hypocrisy by claiming you have an “open mind”. You have anything but. You’re willing to read into the cause of death carefully couched language that did not actually state that fentanyl caused his death. You’re willing to believe whatever Turley writes because you are racist and not well educated, just like you fell for Trump and his lies. The only defense Turley can come up with is to exaggerate what the ME’s report actually said, which was NOT fentanyl overdose. Yet, you know better.
Natch: “Turley threw in the fentanyl as a red herring: to get the jury distracted from Chauvin’s outrageous conduct.”
***
I wonder if you actually know that Professor Turley is not part of either trial team and he will not be handing red herrings to the jury for evidence of for lunch.
YSL – She might need more meds if she thinks Professor Turley is submitting evidence to confuse the jury.
If she is a lawyer I wish she had joined the other loons who volunteered to help the prosecution. So far the state has presented nothing to show that any of the police officers caused the death of George Floyd.
Apparently the chief brought up something about the department’s transgender policy. I can’t imagine why. They can’t possibly salvage this case by saying George Floyd was a black, transgender beauty queen trying to pirouette her life around before Evil Chauvin choked her to death. Can’t wait for the new tutu wall paintings in her honor, though.
Maybe Natch is part of the prosecution team.
Yeah, sure, Young. And maybe you’re part of the defense team.
Natacha:
“I’m still waiting for her to cash in on her fame, which is what you claimed was her motivation to lie about what he did to her.” You believed Christine Blasey Ford without any supporting evidence, and in the face of exculpatory evidence.
Women should be believed unless they accuse Joe Biden or Cuomo, is that it?
Again, you insist on disregarding facts. You just believe what you want to believe. It is a frightening possibility to think of you on a jury. I’m curious. Why do you think that George Floyd said he couldn’t breathe and began struggling, long before Chauvin ever put his knee on him? I’m not talking about at the end, while he was on the ground. I can post the transcript of the entire interaction with the police.
You can lie and call me racist all you want. It won’t make it true; but it does make you look dishonest. Falsely accusing someone of being racist because you are over faced with a discussion is a reprehensible act.
YOU are the only person claiming you know better than the facts presented at trial. You are the personification of the lynch mob, unreachable. By contrast, I’ve said I’m open to changing my mind if evidence convinces me.
Here is the transcript of the 911 call, during the time in which you claim Floyd was “fine”…while on Fentanyl and meth.
Operator: 911 what’s the address of the emergency?
Caller: This is ah 3759 Chicago Ave.
Operator: How can I help you?
Caller: Um someone comes our store and give us fake bills and we realize it before he left the store, and we ran back outside, they was sitting on their car. We tell them to give us their phone, put their (inaudible) thing back and everything and he was also drunk and everything and return to give us our cigarettes back and so he can, so he can go home but he doesn’t want to do that, and he’s sitting on his car cause he is awfully drunk and he’s not in control of himself.
Operator: Okay, what type of vehicle does he have?
Caller: And …. um he’s got a vehicle that is ah … one second let me see if I can see the license. The driver license is BRJ026.
Operator: Okay, what color is it?
Caller: It’s a blue color. It’s a blue van.
Operator: Blue van?
Caller: Yes, van.
Operator: Alright blue van, gotcha. Is it out front or is it on 38th St.?
Caller: Ah it’s on 38th St.
Operator: On 38th St. So, this guy gave a counterfeit bill, has your cigarettes, and he’s under the influence of something?
Caller: Something like that, yes. He is not acting right.
Operator: What’s he look like, what race?
Caller: Um, he’s a tall guy. He’s like tall and bald, about like 6 … 6 1/2, and she’s not acting right so and she started to go, drive the car.
Operator: Okay so, female or a male?
Caller: Um…
Operator: Is it a girl or a boy?
Caller: (Talking to somebody else) — he’s asking (inaudible) one second. Hello?
Operator: Is it a girl or a boy that did this?
Caller: It is a man.
Operator: Okay. Is he white, black, Native, Hispanic, Asian?
Caller: Something like that.
Operator: Which one? White, black, Native, Hispanic, Asian?
Caller: No, he’s a black guy.
Operator: Alright (sigh).
Caller: How is your day going?
Operator: Not too bad.
Caller: Had a long day, huh?
Operator: What’s your name?
Caller: My name is (deleted)
Operator: Alright, a phone number for you?
Caller: (Deleted)
Operator: Alright, I’ve got help on the way. If that vehicle or that person leaves before we get there, just give us a call back, otherwise we’ll have squads out there shortly, okay?
Caller: No problem.
Operator: Thank you.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/28/us/minneapolis-george-floyd-911-calls/index.html
Karen: I can’t stomach reading any more of the drivel you write. You are an ignoramus know it all. There never was any “exculpatory evidence” to counter what Dr. Ford testified to, and she and her family are still suffering for speaking truth to power. That’s just one example of how you make things up to excuse your lack of education and to justify your ill-advised “opinions”.
Nothing you posted proves anything. Floyd was NOT dying of an overdose or anything else when he was in the store. A comment by someone calling 911 is evidence of nothing. Did you hear what the ER doctor said about how Floyd died? Maybe Hannity didn’t cover that, but he said Floyd was a victim of asphyxia. There is no evidence that he had COVID symptoms. The point of all of this is the extent to which you will believe any lie to avoid the obvious truth that Chauvin killed Floyd. The main motivation for such blind ignorance is racism, pure and simple.
Exculpatory evidence not in dispute:
1. Ford changed her claim of when this happened when it came out that Kavanaugh was not in the area that year.
2. Her friends that she’d listed as present had no recollection of the incident.
3. Kavanaugh had his journals to support where he was and when
4. Ford claimed she couldn’t fly to meet with Congress but her ex-boyfriend said they flew frequently
This is just off the top of my head and not limited to these examples.
As a nurse and a layer, as you’ve claimed to be, are you stating in your professional opinion, that Floyd had safe levels of Fentanyl and meth in his system, and was in no danger of dying from these drugs? How do you explain George Floyd saying he couldn’t breathe long before he ever laid on the ground or Chauvin touched him? All that’s been said is that he had Covid, not what his symptoms were of the disease. You have obsessed over postmortem redistribution of fentanyl and the ensuing difficulty in determining in vivo levels. However, you make the leap that Floyd was “fine.” How do you know he was “fine”? You don’t know what his in vivo fentanyl level was. If you claim that you can’t know the in vivo levels, then you also don’t know if they were fatal, or not. You are simply claiming they were not fatal for the expediency of wanting to nail Chauvin for murder, rather than simply negligence or some other lesser charge. Because if Floyd OD’d on fentanyl and meth, and did not die because of the restraint, but simply died while being restrained, then you have no case. Hence why over charging Chauvin was a mistake.
Indisputable facts:
Floyd had meth and fentanyl in his system, a history of heart disease, and was Covid positive. He said he couldn’t breathe, felt claustrophobic, and that he wanted to get out of the car and lie down on the ground (see body cam transcript). He repeatedly said he couldn’t breathe before Chauvin ever touched him.
You seem to have a problem with evidence. It doesn’t matter what you believe about Chauvin. What matters is what they can prove beyond a reasonable doubt, which is the basis of the criminal justice system. So while your opinion is immaterial, what is very concerning is that people like you serve on juries, who rely on emotions and opinions and disregard evidence. That is a miscarriage of justice.
Is this how you compensate for your lack of education–by refusing to back down when you don’t know what you’re talking about? You don’t even have average reading comprehension, and you put words into my mouth. I said that post-mortem concentrations of fentanyl do not establish pre-mortem levels, based on published scientific studies. You claim I said I claimed he had “safe levels” of fentanyl and meth. I never said that. I said that the post mortem levels do not prove overdose. That’s what the science says. But, you know better. Fentanyl overdose was not listed as the cause of death. I’ve repeatedly covered the careful wording used by the Hennepin County Medical Examiner. He didn’t conclude that Floyd died of an overdose, either.
Floyd said he was claustrophobic and that’s why he didn’t want to be put into the police car. Claustrophobia makes a victim think s/he can’t breathe. He did not have a “history of” heart disease. He had plaque in his coronary arteries. He had no history of heart attacks, and there’s no evidence that he ever suffered any chest pain or myocardial infarction, nor did he have a history of bypass surgery or stents. He didn’t have congestive heart failure. There are millions of people walking around with 75% plaque or more in their coronary arteries and they are asymptomatic. There are millions of people walking around who are COVID positive, too, but without symptoms. Floyd didn’t die of a heart attack or COVID. According to the ER physician, he died of asphyxia. You don’t address this simple, inconvenient fact. You’re just looking for reasons to let Chauvin off the hook by making things up and exaggerating irrelevant autopsy findings. You are the one who thinks she is sophisticated and knowledgeable, but you aren’t.
None of the things you say about Dr. Ford are true, but I did and keep challenging your claim that this woman, with an earned Ph.D. and responsible college teaching position, lied about Kavanaugh for profit, which is what you claimed, along with making up “facts” that she would cash in from her fame by writing a book and going on the talk show circuit. You are strongly opinionated and display your ignorance every time you write.
Natch– “Floyd said he was claustrophobic and that’s why he didn’t want to be put into the police car.”
***
Why wasn’t he claustrophobic sitting in his own vehicle?
Natacha said, “Did you hear what the ER doctor said about how Floyd died? Maybe Hannity didn’t cover that, but he said Floyd was a victim of asphyxia.” Honestly, Natacha, why don’t you read the transcripts of testimony before you post? It appears that whatever media source you are using only covered the first segment of Langenfeld’s testimony, perhaps in order to shape your opinion.
Here is what that ER doctor actually said, but maybe MSNBC didn’t cover that?
Nelson: There are many things that cause hypoxia that are still considered asphyxiation?
Langenfeld: Correct.
Nelson: Drug use, certain drugs, can cause hypoxia?
Langenfeld: Correct.
Nelson: Specifically fentanyl?
Langenfeld: That’s correct.
Nelson: How about methamphetamine?
Langenfeld: It can.
Nelson: Combination of the two?
Langenfeld: Yes.
Karen, thank you for posting the cross examination. It turns the claims of asphyxiation due to the knee on the neck into rubbish and demonstrates how the news is mishandling the data trying to make the public believe things that aren’t true. Even those that know better are being channeled into believing things that aren’t true. Those that are politically motivated still won’t care. They will lie, cheat and likely steal.
I think this short video will give everyone a laugh if they haven’t already seen it unless they are leftists who misuse fact, logic and mathematics.
Natacha, the last time I looked the Christine Blakey Ford go fund me page had collected over $1,500,000. Just a little manner of a million and a half of cashing in. Another convenient lapse of memory by the prestigious Doctor Natacha. I’ll offer a little leeway to Dr. Natacha. Maybe she just doesn’t know.
So you are saying that Christine Blasey Ford contacted investigators to report what Kavanaugh did to her so that she could lose her teaching position, her family would have to move and all of them went through death threats and alienation from family and friends, so she could create a “Go Fund Me ” account and cash in?
Do you even realize how stupid this makes you look? Another example of the lengths to which Trumpsters will go to justify their stupidity.
The motivation for political activists is politics. Democrats have been very motivated to prevent conservatives from being appointed to the Supreme Court.
Academica is heavily pro-democrat. Therefore, testifying against Kavanaugh will help her career. She did not lose her jobs. Rather, she took time off from them for a while.
She was named “Woman of the Year” by Assemblyman Marc Berman, D-Palo Alto.
She received a special proclamation from the City Council, Mayor Liz Kniss.
Universities Palo Alto and Stanford, where she teaches, made public statements in support of her.
Here is her profile at Stanford:
https://casbs.stanford.edu/people/christine-ford
Here is her profile at research gate that still lists her as with Palo Alto and Stanford:
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Christine-Blasey
The Supreme Court should reflect the values of the entire American people. Kavanaugh, Gorsuch and Covid-Barrett do not. Barak Obama, legally elected by the American people, unlike Trump, nominated Merrick Garland, someone whose views reflect the majority of Americans who elected the president who nominated him, but McConnell blocked him from even receiving a vote. The reason was the proximity of the election, but when the tables were turned, the proximity of the election didn’t stop him from shoving Covid-Barrett onto the Court. And, you have the stupidity to complain about “Democrats” being the problem here?
Christine Blasey Ford suffered for speaking truth to power. She had to leave her teaching post and the family had to move, just for coming forward to tell the truth about Kavanaugh. There were 25 other victims who wanted to testify, but Republicans prevented them from doing so, so that they could ram Kavanaugh down the throats of the American people. And, you have the stupidity to complain about Democrats?
Natacha said, “The Supreme Court should reflect the values of the entire American people.” NO. That is not its job. How could anyone reface the values of the “entire American people” of 325 million, anyway? Maybe each nominee could belong to the political party of the nominating president at the time, but these are lifetime appointments. They’ll outlive the tenure of many Presidents, and witness different majorities. Its job is to correctly interpret Constitutional law. It doesn’t really matter whether or not each member is nice, kind, or sweet. What matters is if they are excellent jurists who can fairly apply the law as it is written.
Someone could be a card carrying Communist, but if they correctly and in an unbiased fashion apply the law as written, regardless of personal feelings, then they are an excellent jurist.
And all accusers with credible information were interviewed. Many recanted, or were proven to have fabricated the entire thing, such as the boat story and the red Solo cup rape train story. You asked why would anyone fabricate a story that would lead to disruption in their lives. Well, political motivation appears to have been the operant factor in those who admitted to having fabricated stories.
Why do you keep claiming that Ford left her post? She took a leave of absence. She is still listed as a professor, was named Woman of the Year, received over a million dollars, and has been showered with accolades.
I will say one thing, you’re consistent in not caring about proof. No one she claimed was there to witness this said it happened, one of them said she thought the story was totally bogus, she changed the year she said it happened after she discovered Kavanaugh wasn’t in the state at the time, and after she claimed to be incapable of flying to cooperate with testimony her ex said they flew together all the time. Said she loved air travel and did so regularly.
But why have to prove anything or deal with exculpatory evidence when it’s politically expedient, right, lawyer/nurse?
More exculpatory evidence that came to light after the Kavanaugh hearings:
A high-school pal of Brett Kavanaugh accuser Christine Blasey Ford says in a new book that she’s skeptical of Ford’s claim the Supreme Court justice sexually assaulted her at a party in the 1980s.
“I don’t have any confidence in the story,” Leland Keyser — who Ford has said was at the party where the alleged assault occurred — told two New York Times reporters in their book “The Education of Brett Kavanaugh: An Investigation.”
“Those facts together I don’t recollect, and it just didn’t make any sense,” Keyser insisted of Ford’s account, according to authors Robin Pogrebin and Kate Kelly.
Last year, Ford testified at Kavanaugh’s Senate confirmation that Keyser was at the Maryland house party in the summer of 1982 when Kavanaugh, then 17, attacked her. Ford was 15 at the time.
But in the new book, released Tuesday, Keyser threw cold water on that scenario.
“It would be impossible for me to be the only girl at a get-together with three guys, have her leave and then not figure out how she’s getting home,” Keyser told the authors. “I just really didn’t have confidence in the story.”
https://nypost.com/2019/09/17/christine-blasey-fords-friend-now-says-shes-skeptical-of-kavanaugh-accusation/
And…who is it that is writing books to cash in on this issue? BTW: someone saying they doubt another’s version of the facts is not “exculpatory” evidence. What about the 25 other witnesses who asked to testify, but were prevented from doing so by Republicans?
Natacha – this isn’t just anyone. It’s someone she claimed was there at the party where Kavanaugh allegedly assaulted her, and whom she named to back up her story. She said the story “didn’t make any sense.”
In fact, no one whom she named as witnesses to the party corroborated her story. SHE named them. They did not support her accusation.
That is exculpatory.
What do you think, that someone can claim a crime happened, those they said could verify instead said they can’t verify it, she changes her story, can provide zero supporting evidence, and we just nail the guy because of the GENDER of the accuser or the POLITICS of the accused?
It’s sick. This is Brown Shirt behavior.
If women are to be believed because coming forward with their stories creates upheaval in their lives, does that mean you believe Biden’s and Cuomo’s accusers? Do you believe all accusers, regardless of what political party their alleged assailant belongs to?
It would make it really easy to take down prominent Democrats, if Democrats were consistent in how they took allegations of sexual misconduct and assault.
Natacha, Christine Blasey Ford received over a couple of million dollars from a GoFundMe account that was above what her lawyers were paid. She did cash in and that was not a secret. I don’t remember much but the article I read said she was using it to change the entrance to her house & make a home office. Regarding Karen, some of what she is saying is true & I have watched every second of the trail. There are several problems with the prosecutions case but we don’t know the outcome & all of the evidence is not out yet. One issue is that the guy that took the fifth has been accused of being the drug dealer that gave Mr. Floyd the fentanyl and the Meth but don’t know how that plays out. Mr. Floyd’s girlfriend said that they had gotten drugs from a dealer that they didn’t know what was in it and she knew this because Mr. Floyd had been rushed to the hospital several months before for an overdose & she said they had no idea what was in the drug he took. One other point, Mr. Floyd was complaining about not being able to breathe before he was ever taken to sit in the car and had froth on both sides of his mouth (this can be an indication of struggling to breathe). When repeatedly asked if he took something he said NO. Fentanyl causes rapid fluid in the lungs and having Covid he probably already had lung issues with that. Having said all of that it doesn’t excuse Chauvin for not recognizing that he needed to get off of Mr. Floyd’s neck and the jury gets to decide if he was negligent in those circumstances. I don’t have a clue what the jury will decide and when I saw the video I felt that Chauvin did kill him. I was surprised by watching the whole video from start to finish though because it does show how much Mr. Floyd was fighting to not be put in the police car and he was successful in not being put in and showed serious strength against 4 officers. They were asking him questions the whole time about why he wouldn’t go in the car and he was seriously under the influence of something. I’m just glad i’m not on that jury because the pressure on them is tremendous and I pray they follow the evidence no matter where it takes them. Thanks,
JC:
I absolutely agree with what you said here:
“There are several problems with the prosecutions case but we don’t know the outcome & all of the evidence is not out yet. One issue is that the guy that took the fifth has been accused of being the drug dealer that gave Mr. Floyd the fentanyl and the Meth but don’t know how that plays out. Mr. Floyd’s girlfriend said that they had gotten drugs from a dealer that they didn’t know what was in it and she knew this because Mr. Floyd had been rushed to the hospital several months before for an overdose & she said they had no idea what was in the drug he took. One other point, Mr. Floyd was complaining about not being able to breathe before he was ever taken to sit in the car and had froth on both sides of his mouth (this can be an indication of struggling to breathe). When repeatedly asked if he took something he said NO. Fentanyl causes rapid fluid in the lungs and having Covid he probably already had lung issues with that. Having said all of that it doesn’t excuse Chauvin for not recognizing that he needed to get off of Mr. Floyd’s neck and the jury gets to decide if he was negligent in those circumstances.”
I agree with you that Chauvin should have gotten off of Floyd long before he did.
“when I saw the video I felt that Chauvin did kill him. I was surprised by watching the whole video from start to finish though because it does show how much Mr. Floyd was fighting to not be put in the police car and he was successful in not being put in and showed serious strength against 4 officers. They were asking him questions the whole time about why he wouldn’t go in the car and he was seriously under the influence of something. I’m just glad i’m not on that jury because the pressure on them is tremendous and I pray they follow the evidence no matter where it takes them.”
You said you felt Chauvin killed Floyd because of the video. What about when you read the autopsy and toxicology reports? While I agree with you that there are indeed problems with the prosecutor’s case, and the outcome is by no means certain, I have not read evidence proving that Chauvin actually asphyxiated Floyd. There is the family’s autopsy report which in some ways contradicted the state’s.
But we’ve got fentanyl and meth, a struggle that as you said showed “serious strength against 4 officers” and therefore provided a motivation for restraint besides murder, and that he “was seriously under the influence of something.”
What if the prosecution is successful in proving that Floyd took a fatal overdose, and that there is no evidence that Chauvin actually killed him. Would that change your opinion?
Where I’m at right now, with the evidence so far, is that Chauvin showed negligence and callous disregard for Floyd. But it has not been proven to me that Chauvin actually killed him. That might change later in the trial.
I think most of us saw that one segment of video and thought, “What’s wrong with you! Get off his neck!” Since 4 officers had trouble holding him, and he was clearly out of his mind, one can see a motivation to hold him. But it went on too long. Officer Lang several times suggested moving his position. But was it murder? Did it cause his death? Hasten the death of an already dying man? Or did it not contribute to death but made Floyd’s last moments more scary?
I think the most likely bad outcome for Chauvin is that it might be proven that he hastened the death of an already dying man. Even if he hastened it 5 minutes, he would have contributed to his death. If you take fentanyl and meth, you have a high risk of dying. So was he dying anyway? Did the time of his death arrive faster?
The doctor who pronounced him dead confirmed on the stand that fentanyl with meth could produce asphyxia.
It would indeed be very difficult to be on that jury and decide what percentage, if any, of Floyd’s death was due to Chauvin, and which, if any, is due to the drugs.
@Natacha: “‘The pot calling the kettle black’ is a proverbial idiom that may be of Spanish origin, of which English versions began to appear in the first half of the 17th century. The idiom is glossed in the original sources as being used by a person who is guilty of the very thing of which they accuse another and is thus an example of psychological projection,[1] or hypocrisy.[2]”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_pot_calling_the_kettle_black
So Natacha, you have seen the elusive postmortem forensic toxicology report on George Floyd? Pray tell what did it say? [I am not writing of the toxicology report based on hospital blood found in the autopsy.]
@Natacha,
Perhaps you have difficulty understanding what you have read.
The medical examiner said Floyd had 11 ng/ml that’s almost 4x a level which could be considered lethal. (Meaning that coroners have determined that fentanyl was the cause of death in cases where the found levels were 3 ng/ml.
Add to this the other drugs in his system, and then his underlying health issues…
Chauvin was already in cardiac distress prior to Chauvin arriving on scene.
The only one being racist here is you. None of the facts of the case have a race component. Race is immaterial.
No, you are the one who lacks reading comprehension, aided and abetted by Turley who is being paid to help confuse the issues. First of all, you have to jump over the actual conclusion as to the cause of death, which was “cardiopulmonary arrest while under restraint.” The ME said, as to fentanyl, that if someone dies at home alone, and with no other apparent causes, it “could be acceptable” to conclude that it was a fentanyl overdose with that postmortem level. Floyd didn’t die at home, alone, and there is an apparent cause, per the ER doctor: asphyxia. Didn’t Hannity cover that testimony? The ER doctor said Floyd died of asphyxia. Asphyxia is what the doctor was trying to reverse. The doctor discussed with the EMTs what they observed about Floyd. He discussed the heart arrhythmias he observed that he testified were due to asphyxia. Those are inconvenient facts for you Trumpsters.
His “underlying health issues” had nothing to do with his death. You are speculating about this. Every autopsy report lists incidental findings. Floyd was NOT in “cardiac distress” prior to having his neck knelt upon. Where’s the proof of this? There isn’t any. If he was in “cardiac distress” what were his symptoms, and why didn’t Chauvin call for an ambulance immediately? If someone is dying from “cardiac distress” then how could they be combative? Floyd was handcuffed, and no threat to anyone. Did you hear what Chauvin said about why he was doing what he did? Because he was afraid of Floyd, due to his size. Did you hear the testimony of all of the police officers who have testified so far? What Chauvin did was wrong, not consistent with his training. Didn’t Hannity cover this, or was he too busy trying to drum up dirt on Hunter Biden?
These posts prove the extent to which you racist Trumpster ignoramuses will ignore the truth, experts and evidence to let a killer cop off the hook. Some of you dipshits even believe Chauvin is the victim.
Well, with police training, you would understand that you can de-escalate with this type of individual by waiting calmly for the few minutes until the EMTs arrive. The EMTs are authorized to administer ketamine to subdue the irrational fear the subject has whipped themself into. Then, the arrest process can proceed with a calmed person.
Chauvin forgot his training, and succumbed to instincts screaming “hurry up”, “dominate and control”. He ignored his responsibility to safeguard the health of his arrestee.
Incidentally, the decision to take down Floyd on the side of the car exposed to traffic and then remain there for 9 minutes showed poor judgment on Chauvin’s part. In doing this, he was exposing all 4 persons to serious vehicular injury. It shows a police officer who is running on instinctive impulses, and not doing the critical thinking required to keep harmful impulses in check.
Wait… where can EMTs administer ketamine? Are you talking about EMT-Bs, EMT-Is, or Paramedics? I was trained and certified (state and nationally) as an EMT-B in Washington state, and while I know that scope of practice can vary from county to county and state to state, I can’t imagine a situation where a responding EMT-B could administer ketamine to a patient. Was it BLS or ALS that responded to the initial call? If it was BLS they probably couldn’t administer ketamine. If they were waiting for ALS or trying to rendezvous with ALS this would require a longer wait time, in addition to the fact that the unknown nature of Floyd’s intoxication and erratic behavior would be a strong contraindication for administering another drug like ketamine.
Maybe you were trained as a cop, I have no idea, but it is very clear that you have limited understanding of emergency medicine and the appropriate standards of care for an individual in Floyd’s condition. Frankly you just sound like an idiot that doesn’t know what they are talking about.
Ketamine?
Are you frigging silly?
What we know from the tox report… he was already dying. Nothing could have saved him.
During interviews and at trial, the ambulance driver says George Floyd was on his left side. In the picture Eric Nelson showed in court, George Floyd appears to be at about a 45 degree angle to the ground. I don’t know how long he was in that position, but he was definitely not prone on the ground at that point.
Also, the drug was a speedball – fentanyl and methamphetamine. The meth prolongs the fentanyl high I believe. That is why in his opening remarks regarding fentanyl, Jerry Blackwell was disingenuous at best. Hooping is taking the drug rectally.
Sudden cardiac arrest is a leading cause of death – over 320,000 out-of-hospital cardiac arrests occur annually in the United States.
https://www.heart.org/en/health-topics/heart-attack/about-heart-attacks/heart-attack-or-sudden-cardiac-arrest-how-are-they-different
“Finally, the restraint using an officer’s knee on an uncooperative suspect was part of the training of officers, and jurors will watch training videotapes employing the same type of restraint as official policy.”
As the PD reps noted on the witness stand, the “knee restraint” maneuver is NOT appropriate and lawful once a prisoner is handcuffed and subdued. Jeez Jon!
Sarastro92, This is what is going to be presented by the defense because the prosecution & officer that were put on the stand said it was procedure but it is what was taught to the officers per their own manual and they are said to have video showing them training officers the use of the knee restraint method. I don’t know yet was amount of time or when they are suppose to stop this restraint so we will both have to wait on all the evidence. This method has been used all over the country and since this loss of life many police stations have stopped using it, others had already stopped, example LAPD several years before. We all need to what for the jury to judge what happened and what punishment. Let’s have hope that justice will be served based on the evidence and not emotions. Have a good day!
@JC , @Sarastro92,
No manual will give you a time limit. Its subjective and will vary based on the situation.
That said… its irrelevant to Floyd’s cause of death.
Floyd was already dying before Chauvin used his knee.
The autopsy report will show this and the defense will bring the coroner to the stand.
You can’t say depraved indifference because the officers didn’t know Floyd’s medical history or what drugs he consumed at the time.
There was nothing anyone could have done to save Floyd once he started to go into cardiac distress which leads to cardiac arrest.
That’s the sad truth no matter how you try to spin it.
Tell us…when, exactly, did Floyd go into “cardiac distress”? What were his signs and symptoms? Where’s the proof? Why did the ER doctor testify that Floyd died due to asphyxia? Why did the ER doctor testify about the abnormal heart rhythms he observed that were consistent with asphyxia? Do you think you know more than the ER doctor?
See, he was either a dying man who had no chance, and if that’s the case, then why weren’t the EMTs called right away? There was a witness from the MPD Academy who testified this morning that MPD officers are trained to recognize someone in distress, so if he was in distress, they failed to do their duty. Alternatively he was a healthy man who was killed by asphyxia due to a cop kneeling on his neck for 9 1/2 minutes. Why did the MPD fire Chauvin and all of them testify against him, if what he did was appropriate? The family has already received a settlement, so a looming lawsuit can’t be the reason.
Yeah. Stupid. Manslaughter would be open and shut. Chauvin is a classic psycho-cop. The only way to make a murder rap stick is a “But for” argument ie. “But for” the trauma Chauvin unlawfully inflicted, Floyd would still be alive… which is a tough hypothetical to make, but more feasible than opposing the Medical Examiner.
The insistence on a murder charge is to appease community outrage. But it may allow Chauvin to walk along with his buddies. (Though manslaughter is part of the indictment)
I’m still puzzled about the arrest itself. It’s not a crime to unknowingly pass counterfeit cash. “In Minnesota, penalties for knowingly passing or offering fake currency depend on the face value of the currency or the amount of property or services the person attempted to obtain. If the face value or property or services sought are less than $1,000, the crime is a misdemeanor with a maximum penalty of one year’s jail time.
So AT WORST Floyd should have been issued a summons since the face value of the bill in question was a mere $20. That’s looks like false arrest.
“I’m still puzzled about the arrest itself. It’s not a crime to unknowingly pass counterfeit cash.”
***
The clerk was going to be docked $20 from his pay for accepting the bill. He approached Floyd and told him that the bill was obviously phony and tried to undo the transaction. Floyd refused. At that point he was arguably committing theft and he knew it.
Nothing about this looks like false arrest.
“At that point he was arguably committing theft and he knew it. Nothing about this looks like false arrest.”
I doubt that, but hey the lawyers should be haggling about this. In any case, Chauvin never tried to calmly sort out the facts and EVEN IF the bill was phony, at most it warrants a misdemeanor summons. Instead guns were drawn and an unjustified arrest was made.
“an unjustified arrest was made.”
**
Bet you would have a different view if Floyd had stolen $20 from you.
Sarastro92. Floyd had multiple previous arrests and had spent years in prison. With his record the likelihood was that he was going to be on his way back behind bars. He had to have been aware of the final result of his actions and therefore he resisted getting into the police car. He knew that a slap on the wrist was highly unlikely. Jail times take into account previous occurrences of law breaking. Mr Floyd was the victim of a stacked deck and he was the dealer who just couldn’t help it when he continually dealt himself a hand of aces and eights.
Sorry, this is crazy talk. I know you want to sadistically punish people again and again even when they don’t commit crimes. But Floyd committed no crime when he was taken down by Chauvin.
Counterfeiting is a crime punishable by up to 20 years in prison. The store clerk asked for the cigarettes and change back and Floyd refused to return the money and goods that he received for the counterfeit money. He could have simply returned the money and the cigarettes and asked for his $20.00 back. The scam was done and there was no way that he was going to relinquish the booty. Punishable by up to 20 years in prison. The amount of money is small but twenty dollars over here and twenty dollars over there can start to add up to a hefty sum. Great work if you can get it and your level of morality allows for it.
TIT thinks the death penalty, administered on the street, is a sufficient penalty for what could’ve been handled with a summons.
EB
You may have forgotten possession of schedule I narcotics in your comment about grounds for arrest. Oh and resisting arrest too.
DSB, as you recognize chronic forgetfulness of important things is part of leftism.
First, manslaughter would not be an open and shut case.
The issue is that Floyd was already going into cardiac arrest before Chauvin got on the scene. Floyd’s was dying and there was nothing that the police or paramedics could have done to save him.
Oh and on top of it. Floyd first lied about being on drugs which delayed any potential treatment.
There’s much more, but see what the defense does when it starts calling their witnesses.
Dear “doctor” Turley: why do you keep trying to peddle the same lies about Floyd’s cause of death? Who is paying you to do this? The autopsy report did NOT conclude that fentanyl overdose was the cause. The ME’s report is heavily couched, but you try to act like it’s black-letter medicine: “found dead at home, no other apparent causes, it could be acceptable” to call it an overdose. Floyd was NOT: 1. found dead at home; and 2. there were other apparent causes. “could be acceptable” does not establish proximate cause, any more than the condition of his coronary arteries.
Then you try to speculate that Floyd’s panic attack was really due a fentanyl overdose. The physician who pronounced him did not find a drug overdose. And, maybe when Fox sent you the memo about writing this piece of tripe, they forgot to tell you that the Minneapolis Police Department says that what Chauvin did was wrong, totally unnecessary. Chauvin was fired for killing Floyd. You’d think that if what he did is consistent with police training, the Department would fight for him. They didn’t.
Lastly, you try to imply that there must be physical signs of asphyxiation for Chauvin’s knee to have been the cause of death. Where did you get this? Which of your physician teachers instructed you on this, Turley, or are you just making it up?
The autopsy revealed a level of fentany in the blood THREE TIMES higher than what is considered to be FATAL.
Case closed, druggie thug dead, world better off.
Natacha, there is no doubt that you would lead the Chauvin lynch mob were he in a small town jail in the 1800’s.
Whether you like it or not, Chauvin has a right to due process and to be judged by a jury of his peers.
You should seek out psychological counseling for your sociopathic tendencies and BPD.
Meanwhile, George Floyd is dead. It was his time to go. Based on his long criminal history, it’s surprising that he lived as long as he did.
Doctor Natacha, okay let’s leave the fentanyl out of it. Would lungs that are three times normal size place a high degree of pressure on a heart that is trying to pump blood through blood vessels that are 75% clogged. A large amount of fluid in the lungs pressing on the heart of a man already diagnosed with heart disease does not come to the forefront in your oh so professional diagnosis Dr. Natacha. Dr. Natacha assures us that under the conditions the fentanyl was not a contributing factor. Dr. Natacha is a very lucky person because she found her Doctors license in a crackerjack box. Someone must be paying her so she can buy her special treat. You know those crackerjacks can be almost as addictive as fentanyl.
Cool. So now you’re establishing that Chauvin tortured Floyd through an overdose while ignoring MPD rules of engagement. S’all good, Everyone go home and say it was an act of god.
EB
ElvisBug at 4:17. No one is saying that it was an act of God. What they are saying is that an act of George Floyd had a lot to do with the cause of his death. It is certainly an act of ElvisBug to not admit any such possibility.
Hey Bugs.
Have you ever seen Floyd’s rap sheet in Texas?
He was a career criminal who finally ran out of road. A road littered with his victims.
Chauvin is obviously a bad cop. But he did not purposefully commit murder.
But all of the above was no deterrence for the Marxists working for the corporatist/fascists to use that slimeballs death as an excuse to kill and injure hundreds of innocent people all last Summer.
Not that you give a sh*t.
No, I don’t care what his record was in Texas when he was murdered in Minnesota.
EB
Bug, don’t you think evidence of violent behavior is something beneficial to the police when they arrest someone? I can’t believe some of the comments you make.
SM
Note, Allan, that initially when arriving on a call, identity of who police are dealing with is not known. Note, also, that Chauvin actually pulled his gun on Floyd before being able to discern that information. But why would you know that when just functioning off of what Fox news tells you while not actually being familiar with the footage introduced at the trial? But hey, keep talking out of your a^& and being convinced you know better. It makes you look smarter. Bahahahahahaha.
Bug, I think that Chauvin knew who and what Floyd was when he saw him.
Floyd resisted and with his size was an immediate danger to everyone around him. Pulling a gun when the policeman sees danger is not criminal and something police are trained to do.
“But why would you know that when just functioning off of what Fox news tells you”
Bug, you need help. Your knowledge of facts is too limited. You would be well served to listen to Fox instead of whatever you listen to. I don’t use Fox for news. I use the TV for movies not news.
You can continue to guess your way through life. You seem to have done so for most of it so at your age you might as well continue in the same fashion.
SM
Bug, can you show us the quote from the manual that demonstrates Chauvin acted illegally?
Bug, I note your use of the word torture. Can you tell us why your use of that word was appropriate? Did you ask Chauvin why he continued the knee hold for those three minutes of concern?
Can you inform us of the potential dangers created by the crowd?
Lots of questions need to be considered before drawing a conclusion unless it is a political conclusion. That seems to be the mechanism you use to draw all of your conclusions.
SM
Yes Allan. I consider someone kneeling on someone’s neck until they die to be torture. The crowd dangers weren’t a factor as evidenced by the footage of the incident, as well as their testimony, and the testimony of the medical first responders. And sorry, no, I don’t prefer your particular mechanism to draw conclusions because, well, I prefer not to shove my head up my ass for consultation sessions.
EB
“Yes Allan. I consider someone kneeling on someone’s neck until they die to be torture.”
That is fair. Someone might consider putting a criminal into jail torture as well.
“The crowd dangers weren’t a factor”
Bug, based on your previously demonstrated observational skills I wouldn’t take that opinion to the bank.
” I prefer not to shove my head up my ass for consultation sessions.”
But you do it anyhow.
SM
What was listed as the official cause of death: cardiopulmonary arrest while under restraint, NOT enlarged lungs, coronary artery disease, fentany overdose, meth overdose or any other type of overdose. Doctors know how to list fentanyl overdose as a cause of death, and fentanyl levels post death are massively elevated and not predictive of pre-death levels.
Turley is the one who keeps trying to come up with an alternative reality here. The ME did not say Floyd died of a fentanyl overdose. He said that in the absence of other causes, if someone is found dead at home, it “could be” acceptable to list fentanyl overdose as the cause. But, there are other causes, and Floyd was not found dead at home.
Karen Neiswinger at 4:37. Would lungs filled to three times their size with fluid restrain the heart from beating properly? People who have experienced a heart attack say that it feels like an Elephant sitting on your chest. You are correct. His heart was restrained by the pressure of his lungs. Floyd’s death was indeed caused by restraint.
Karen Neiswinger:
Why do you think the prosecutor is trying to get that autopsy finding dismissed?
More of your blindness, Karen, based on Turley’s paid spin. The prosecutor is not trying to get the autopsy finding dismissed.
It appears you too are waiting for the elusive postmortem forensic toxicology report. Most medical examiners would never state a cause of death before receiving the postmortem forensic toxicology report, especially with the autopsy toxicology report showing drugs. I believe they are still waiting to list a cause of death in the case of Brian Sicknick – 3 months now.
Trolling ingnat alert