I missed most of today’s testimony and I wanted to clarify a few things, which prompted me to go back and watch the body cam footage again. I had been wondering about the spontaneous leg movement that experts testified occurred as a result of a seizure GF had (I can’t recall the exact name). I wanted to see if it were different from the initial “kick” I saw when he was being placed on the ground and it was. My question, and I don’t remember the defense bringing this up, was how would a non medical professional be able to distinguish that from an act of resistance? I couldn’t.
I guess maybe because I’ve been in many, many situations very similar to this, I see something different than most people when I watch these videos. GF was actively, and at times violently, resisting for most of this interaction. I feel like the UOF was justified. When experts testified to GF’s movements being efforts to breathe, I see more that he’s continuing to resist and tiring himself out in the process. All the way up to when the officer said “roll him onto his side”. I’m not sure I would have rolled him at that point either. From my perspective, he was still resisting. I had to go back and listen a few times when the officer did check his pulse to see what he said. I couldn’t hear over the radio traffic. I don’t know what would have been heard in person by different people.
At times when the crowd is yelling at these officers and some are responding, I can’t tell who’s talking to who and often times what everyone is saying. Especially the first time I watched it, which I feel could be similar to what each person would have experienced in that moment (I’m sure it was a little different in person). Meaning, they didn’t have the opportunity to rewind and listen to things again like we do. This goes back to that phenomenon I spoke of earlier (I’ve already forgotten the name). Basically, one would be able to hear people talking around you, but not necessarily hear specifically what anyone was saying at times.
I can see how people yelling what to do, even the off duty FF, would be distracting. Some would say it shouldn’t be and I agree to an extent. Attention was divided even though it shouldn’t have been. You’ve got an angry crowd of people yelling, I’d wonder if one had a gun (for example). Now you’ve got an actively resisting subject and the unpredictable crowd, along with other things. Where does one focus? Yes, there’s an officer “handling” the crowd and a couple more there with you. But in your mind, do you just stop worrying about all but one thing? A reasonable person might say YES, but could you? Reasonably? One might say, ‘well at least one officer said to roll him over’. Yes, but was he aware of what crowds like this are capable of? He hasn’t been on the job long, so maybe he has no clue they can turn on a dime. They seem innocent enough. So his attention is somewhere different than where others’ may be.
All these things would be going through my mind during this. And before you know it 9 minutes and 29 seconds has passed. The ambulance is there. Seems like in the blink of an eye. I’m sure that felt like an eternity to Mr. Floyd. Or maybe it didn’t. We can’t know.
Every time I watch the video in its entirety the things I would have done differently in that situation become fewer and fewer. At this point I honestly don’t know what one thing caused the death of GF. (ETA: Or played the greatest role) When I first heard about this case I thought I did. But now I just don’t know.
These are concerns/feelings I would bring up if I were on the jury. Am I wrong? I really don’t know. I’m glad this is a safe place that I feel comfortable enough sharing and having a civil discussion. Thanks!
It's usually just one case that sucks us in... then another.. and another... then our families think we are crazy... then you have to ask your best friend to destroy your computer if something ever happens to your husband 
