...aaaaaand there you have it. Of course the guy died of an overdose - he had a whopping EIGHT drugs in his system. It's not reasonable to believe that a single human could survive that, under any circumstance.
"In another new document, Baker said, "That is a fatal level of fentanyl under normal circumstances." But then Baker added, "I am not saying this killed him." "In Baker's final report after watching the videos, he ruled Floyd's death a homicide caused by "law enforcement subdual, restraint, and neck compression." The FBI asked the Armed Forces Medical Examiner to review Baker's autopsy and they agreed with his findings, writing "his death was caused by the police subdual and restraint" with cardiovascular disease and drug intoxication contributing."
That he was restrained after resisting arrest in a manner taught to the officers in their training manual. The coroner's report also indicates no injuries to the neck. Bruising to the shoulders and some abrasions on the face. This is actual evidence that the court has agreed to admit. No one is making things up. There is a video of his arrest from a year prior. The cops keep yelling at him to spit out what he just put in his mouth. Then he says something about it just being a pill. So a guy that has previously been seen swallowing something when stopped, who now has 4 times a lethal dose of fentanyl in his system (coroner's report indicates that he has 11ng/mL and "signs associated with fentanyl toxicity include severe respiratory depression, seizures, hypotension, coma and death. In fatalities from fentanyl, blood concentrations are variable and have been reported as low as 3 ng/mL" as well as methamphetamines and THC. Yes, he may have swallowed an overdose level of drugs. Any defense attorney would submit that in their defense case. All you need to do is generate reasonable doubt, that it is possible he died of a drug overdose. If there is a reasonable possibility that he died of a drug overdose, and not as a result of Chauvin's actions, then Chauvin must be found not guilty.
What the hell does video from an arrest a year before have to do with anything? Why are you ignoring the video that shows him kneeling on his neck for an extended time? Even if the drugs contributed to his death does not let Chauvin off the hook for not rendering aid when Floyd was visibly distressed and had become compliant even his fellow officers said he needed to be let up. What Chauvin did was not what he was trained to do he never put Floyd in a recovery position something else you are lying about or just talking from your kinds talking points. If this was done to a dog he would be up on a animal cruelty charge but for some reason you want to white knight Chauvin you despicable excuse for a human being. And why are you ignoring this? "In another new document, Baker said, "That is a fatal level of fentanyl under normal circumstances." But then Baker added, "I am not saying this killed him." "In Baker's final report after watching the videos, he ruled Floyd's death a homicide caused by "law enforcement subdual, restraint, and neck compression." The FBI asked the Armed Forces Medical Examiner to review Baker's autopsy and they agreed with his findings, writing "his death was caused by the police subdual and restraint" with cardiovascular disease and drug intoxication contributing."
Hypothetical...I am in hospice care and will die. Could be an hour, could be a day. A guy walks in and shoots me and kills me. Murder?
They are taught to use firearms too but that doesn't mean you can use your firearm in all situations. You have to consider the context and circumstances of the use of this technique. It's a technique meant to secure a suspect so your hands are free to disarm them and/or cuff them. It's not meant to be used for the purposes of punishment, which isn't something an arresting officer is supposed to be doing anyway. Floyd was already cuffed even before technique was put on him. Again this is a technique I've taught before including to people who went on to law enforcement. Judge Cahill has said they could admit video of the prior arrests on a limited basis and it sounds like he is specifically allowing it if the prosecution brings in a psychologist to testify on Floyd's state of mind. Regarding Floyd ingesting drugs in his prior arrest it's not clear if that will be admitted. Certainly the defense will bring up those arguments and you're definitely not making this argument or evidence up. It's possible it could work also and Chauvin is acquitted. I don't think it's as strong an argument as you present. I think it requires a leap to ignore the facts of the actual incidence and believe that if Chauvin had done nothing Floyd would've died anyway. Clearly Chauvin did something. Something that wasn't benign, that exceeded his duty and that even fellow LEO on scene expressed concern about it.
Agreed. The official cause of death is stated that it was the use of force from law enforcement that caused his death. It is only doubt from those seeking to spread misinformation or those that listened to that misinformation.
It could potentially show a pattern of behavior. I'm not, I just don't think it is the only thing that matters. In fact, Chauvin's manner in the video is the primary reason I reject any intentional murder outright. If the drugs caused his death, that lets Chauvin off the hook. Floyd was visibly distressed sitting in the car, complaining about not being able to breath. That is why they called for medical assistance to begin with. He had also become compliant only to resist again. There is a training manual from Minneapolis PD that has a photo that could be taken right off the body cam. If her were charged with animal cruelty, and all the same factors were seen there as here, I would say he should be found not guilty of that. I will charitably put aside your ad hominem personal attack. I'm not ignoring it. Like all doctors, they throw in everything and the kitchen sink. I'm surprised they didn't also call it a COVID death. I am saying the doctors own report states there is no trauma to the neck. There is no mention of petechiae on Floyd's face. During the period of restraint Floyd could be heard talking for minutes. I would say that my review of the totality of the evidence shows that Floyd could breath while being restrained, but had a lethal dose of fentanyl in his system and appeared extremely excited. Between the drugs, his poor overall health, and the stress and excitement of his encounter, I cannot say beyond a reasonable doubt that he would have survived without Chauvin's actions, or that Chauvin sped up his death. Yes, assuming his intent was to shoot you. There is no statement or other indication it was being used for punishment. To all appearances it was being used to restrain him until medical help arrived because he refused to be restrained in the patrol car and demanded to be put on the ground instead. Floyd was cuffed when they first got him out of his car. The entire struggle with him happened while he was cuffed. Cuffed doesn't mean not resisting and cooperative. Great. I don't know that Chauvin learned from you exactly what you have taught to other officers. Perhaps his training was different that the training you have provided. Then I may have access to more information than the jurors. That is not unusual in a criminal trial. It doesn't require ignoring anything. It requires only harboring a reasonable doubt that perhaps Chauvin's actions had no effect on Floyd's death, that he died as a result of a drug overdose in combination with his poor overall health and his struggle with law enforcement. We know that Chauvin did something, it is on video. I do not think we can say for certain that it was not benign or that he exceeded his duty. That fellow law enforcement officers said something to him can be considered, but so to can be considered that none of them pulled Chauvin off of Floyd, arrested him at the scene, pulled their guns and demanded that he release Floyd, or took any other action beyond expressing more concern for Floyd than Chauvin did. Two other officers also continuing to hold him down until EMS arrived. Even on their arrival, they didn't say, "OMG get off you are killing him, stop, stop." they calmly set up their gurney and then when they had everything ready to roll him over and lift him up, they finally said to move and roll him over. I just don't see people acting with an abandoned and depraved heart. I see three officers that were in a struggle with a huge guy that was kicking and squirming and high off his gourd from jump, they finally got him under control, and they were going to hold him still until he could be strapped to the gurney.
So then, my "imminent" death doesn't impact your thinking. Therfore Floyd's health shouldn't matter in his death at the hands of Chauvin.
It is a question of causation. Your hypothetical was that someone killed you by shooting you. Causation is a given. If you are alive and I shoot you and blow your brains out, then the bullet caused your death. If you are dying in hospice care gasping for your last breaths and an attacker shoots you in the leg, and you proceed to die of cancer, the attacker did not cause your death, he would be guilty of shooting you, but not killing you. That would be outside of your hypothetical, because then the attacker did not shoot and kill you, just shot you. The difference in the Floyd case is that it is much harder to determine cause of death in that situation as it could be one or more factors that could include or exclude Chauvin. If an expert cannot testify that Floyd would have lived longer beyond a reasonable doubt without Chauvin's actions then Chauvin is not the cause of his death beyond a reasonable doubt and he is not guilty as a matter of law. That is why his health matters, because his death being at the hands of Chauvin is not a given, that is a conclusion.
The ME will testify to his report. His report says that Floyd died due to Chauvin's knee on his neck.
You are allowed but not required to accept any or all of the opinion testimony provided by an expert witness.
You wrote this "If an expert cannot testify that Floyd would have lived longer beyond a reasonable doubt..." An expert will testify to that. Whether or not the jury believes him is a different question, but an expert WILL testify that the cause of death was Chauvin's actions.
Yes, if an expert cannot testify that Floyd would have lived longer beyond a reasonable doubt, the case is likely over. If the expert testifies that in his opinion, Chauvin's actions were the cause of death, the jurors are allowed to accept that conclusion or to reject it and form their own conclusions based on the evidence the expert used to form his conclusions. That is the presumption of evidence and the burden of proof at work. Chauvin is presumed innocent and the people are required to prove his death beyond a reasonable doubt. Where there are two possible interpretations of the evidence, one which points to guilt and the other to innocence, the jurors are required to accept that which points to innocence. This is in the jury instructions for circumstantial evidence.
You seriously can't be arguing that a single image justifies an almost 9 minute event? Floyd couldn't have been resisting given not only was he cuffed, but also had two other LEO on him in addition to Chauvin and you have to consider the amount of time it was put on. Your argument ignores that these techniques are meant to be used for a limited amount of time. It would be like if I put someone in a chokehold and kept it on for minutes even after they had passed out (which is obvious in the video that Floyd is unmoving and the technique is still on) and then say, "Well I did it just like it shows in the picture". I didn't train Chauvin but I am very familiar with the technique. If the training he got is not addressing that it shouldn't be put on for an unlimited amount of time then there is something very wrong with the MPD that goes beyond even just this case. Neither of us know for sure what Chauvin was trained in exactly but your argument here is very speculative and given that the other LEO showed concern regarding Floyd's condition shows that they felt Chauvin's actions were excessive. For the record I did offer to provide expert testimony in this case. While I didn't hear back from the prosecution the Judge is allowing an MMA fighter who witnessed the incidence to provide testimony including on the technique used. Chauvin was the ranking officer and the one with the most experience. As such the other officers were deferring to him. Rank carries a lot of weight and it makes sense that young officers like Lane and Keung would be hesitant to go against a senior officer that could affect their career. That Lane does question Chauvin's actions publicly and show concern is already telling that were concerned about him.
Obviously none of us are on the jury and as a Hennepin County resident if I had been in the jury pool my guess is that I would've been dismissed quickly. Yes the jury can accept or reject the evidence provided and we have seen cases where most people felt the evidence went one way and the jury went another. You've decided to make the defenses argument which is fine for a debate and discussion but I will point out again your argument is based on conclusions not drawn by the ME, lack of knowledge on the technique used, and speculation on Chauvin's mind set.
I have a question for @StupidMoniker but anyone else if free to answer. If a suspect is unconscious are they resisting?
...if the suspect is a Negro... ...(especially one with a criminal history...and how many of us don't have one of those?)... ...who in their right mind would take any chances?
But the ME concluded cause of death was Chauvin. It was then reviewed by another professional who reached the same conclusion. Neither of them determined that cause of death was due to drugs.
