Derek Chauvin Murder Trial is on

I can sum up their defense:

When he was breathing, he was non-compliant. After 9 minutes, he became compliant.

 

I think so, with most for convicting him of at least manslaughter.

 

if you notice in the videos it doesn’t matter if the knee stays there, and the coroner flat out said there was no damage to the next. Floyd is who REALLY f***** up.

 

I don't trust any politician. I was a Ron Paul supporter but his son Rand (also a doctor) is nothing like his father. The forensic pathologist hired by the defense is being sued for his quack testimony in another similar case of a police execution.The suggestion of carbon monoxide poisoning was truly pathetic. If he wanted to maintain a little bit of credibility he should have left that idiocy out of his testimony.

Chauvin's defense hired an alleged use-of-force "expert" witness who claimed that Chauvin's actions were reasonable and that he didn't use force because it didn't cause pain. So I would dispute the above.

I guess if you throw enough money at an expert witness, you could get him/her to say anything. If you note the pulmonologist testifying for the prosecution testified free of charge and I believe the cardiologist also volunteered his testimony.

 

I think the defense has just given up. They know he's going to be convicted, and how far do these attorney's want to go to sabotage their post-Chauvin careers?

 

You have to admit there was a certain practicality about it. Might have worked out, too, if those arsebite poor people didn't have smartphones.

 

I couldn't believe that move. Egads.

Doesn't look good for Chauvin.

 

Beats me what the defense is doing.

 

Would they do any different if they were not on camera??? I guess it depend on their motives.........

 

Would there be any evidence that could prove it?

 

It's not about damage to the neck, it's about restricting the airway. And I have not heard anyone, in the trial, support the idea of keeping an unconscious person in the prone position, much less one who was potentially having trouble breathing (nor have you given any justification of this). If your answer is, "It doesn't matter"-- as we have heard both doctors & senior police officers testify that this does make breathing more difficult, & should not be used longer than necessary-- you might just as well save your breath.

 

If you mean the carbon monoxide poisoning it has been proven that Floyd could not have more than 2% CO in his blood, which is within normal range. If you mean the engine running, the forensic pathologist testifying for the defense claimed he believed the car was running because there was a puddle under the car, which was a hybrid police car. I haven't heard whether his belief that the car was actually running was verified or refuted. So the former is evidence based and the latter is irrelevant.

 

There is no physical evidence that it was caused by Chauvin, just the conclusion one ME came to watching videos. Absent videos he would have called it a drug overdose.

 

I was pointing out that the guy didn't say "POISONING", or at least I haven't seen a direct quote of him saying that.

 

Nope , never certified in that technique, not allowed shoulder yes head no. And as far as I am aware no other force I worked with use it either - certainly not for prolonged periods once a suspect had been subdued/cuffed. Could it get used unofficially during the initial struggle? possibly, but it would be 'knee off head' asap as soon as they are secured. And complaints about breathing are an automatic red flag. Once cuffed you get them off their side and sitting on their ass, legs outstretched. You have control of their arms and the cuffs behind them and your partner is out of kick range side front.

 

Again, did the expert witness give a specific percentage of CO level? I'm not seeing that he did. I just saw that he said that CO may have contributed to his death. Exposure to CO and that causing a problem for someone, doesn't mean that it has entered their blood. I could be chloroformed and knocked out, but it wouldn't be because it entered my blood. My guess is that it wouldn't enter my blood AT ALL even after I'm knocked out.

What a ridiculous thing to say! OF COURSE there is reasonable doubt! Perhaps what you meant to say is that there is not iota of a doubt that Chauvin KILLED Floyd. And even that's too far! It is MOST reasonable to say that if Chauvin hadn't have had his knee on Floyd, that Floyd would have died anyway. What person on this planet WOULDN'T die from THREE TIMES the lethal dose of fentanyl?

 

and that justifies a protracted duration of the 'knee on neck/ throat technique?? What happened to humanity.......and dong things the humane way?? The fact is the world would not have ended if Floyd had gotten away. The could always have capture him later and in a more humane way..........if his crimes were so terrible. It is that Rambo mentality that has infected many ....losing sight of the bigger picture. But then aggression is favored in this kind of society.....bordering on the uncivilized. This whole situation is a sample of how deep the pathos is.

 

No, not at all. Which means that at the very least Chauvin could have been charged with illegal police practice, and could have been charged with it even if Floyd lived. And possibly he would've been fired after an investigation. My point has always been that there IS reasonable doubt for a murder charge. The trial has shown this.

Well by that definition, why catch murderers?

 

They already had Floyd's details so there was no rush to take him in right there and then. Would that apply to murderers?

 

The police could have a murderers details couldn't they?

 

It is HOW one catches them...........and Floyd was not a murderer. But Derek is (now)

 

If the police know someone is a murderer......why wouldn't they??

 

Has the trial concluded?

 

Because it wouldn't be the end of the world.

 

I believe he did and I tried to research it but couldn't find the range he suggested in his testimony. So relying strictly from memory I believe he mentioned at least 18%-20%+ but don't quote me on that. That amount would be enough to cause death. Look it up yourself if it matters to you. It makes zero difference because despite the defense's forensic pathologist's testimony, the maximum could not have exceeded 2% according to the actual oxygen saturation levels measured from the autopsy.

He mentioned many things that could have contributed to his death except the most obvious, the knee to the neck.

It's ridiculous to YOU because you insinuate YOU believe Floyd died from (pick one), anything but positional asphyxia caused by the knee to the neck exacerbated by the other knee to the back. Floyd's health condition may have been contributory factors but they were not the substantial causal factor. As the pulmonologist testified, Chauvin's actions would have killed any healthy person.

I meant exactly what I posted and I have not one reason to believe otherwise. I believe you asked what I personally think, if not I stand corrected, the defense did raise doubt for some others including yourself, but not for me. To reiterate and clarify, I stand by what I posted:

Despite your assertion of "3 times the lethal dose", the prosecution's expert witness (Dr. Tobin) testified that Floyd did not die from an overdose of fentanyl.

George Floyd died from lack of oxygen, not fentanyl, says expert

A toxicology report released last June said that Mr Floyd had the painkiller fentanyl and the drug methamphetamine in his system.

Since then, the defence has argued that the fentanyl caused Mr Floyd's loss of oxygen.

However Dr Tobin, an intensive care doctor, said that Mr Floyd's breathing did not slow down enough for the painkiller to have been a factor in his total loss of oxygen.

Forensic toxicologist Daniel Isenschmid, whose laboratory tested Mr Floyd's blood and urine samples following his death, said there was evidence that some of the fentanyl had metabolised, meaning that an overdose was less likely.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-56670912