RSBMI've been really wondering WHY the state didn't bring in those prior to incidences as one shows he was praised for saving a life by putting in the prone stance.
I'm not 100% certain, but I think that the State may only be allowed to introduce that information of prior acts in order to refute direct testimony from DC that he believed his use of force and failure to turn GF to the recovery position to be reasonable. Perhaps a legal expert can weigh in on that?