MN - George Floyd, 46, died in police custody, Minneapolis, 25 May 2020 #7 - Chauvin Trial Day 4

[dixiegirl1035]

I am not sure if it's this prosecutor that is just horrible at asking questions, or if this guy doesn't want to be there. His answers were much quicker when the defense was asking. Watching her ask questions, it's like pulling teeth!

This is what I was referring to earlier in that the prosecution vs. defense, and what type of questions they are allowed to ask at this time now is CIC (case in chief, more leeway for prosecutions' questions). You will note that if you listen closely to differentiate, most defense questions can be asked with a yes or know ... or correct... vs. prosecution questions which allow for more dialogue.

Someone else here can expound on differences of such.

 

[Sillybilly]

ADMIN NOTE:

Members have been previously advised not to trash the witnesses. They are not there for our enjoyment or entertainment and there is no need to publicly disparage them or belittle them.

Keep it classy folks !!

Thank you.

 

[dixiegirl1035]

And that is why he was saying unresponsive didn't equal why 3 men were restraining him... MOO that's what I got out of the testimony.

I just did a rewind while on lunch break. He said that "a note popped up on his screen about victim being restrained as they were just arriving".

That's what I thought must have happened! One of the 4 put that in the computer as they heard the siren/ambulance arriving... and waited until that exact moment to send that information into dispatch. Restraining = person is resisting... NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!! He had been unresponsive for some time MOO when that was called in.

 

[MsBetsy]

Because that's what the defence wants to implant into the minds of the jurors.,

I'm sure they do, but I wonder why the prosecution didn't object, since technically it wasn't an overdose call. It just seemed to be accepted without anyone challenging it.

Unless, maybe police did mention that drugs were a concern in one of the calls. If they did, they certainly didn't act like they were concerned, at least not for Floyd's safety.

 

[margarita25]

I think the expert witnesses such as doctors or pharmacologists will be very interesting but maybe boring for some. I guess it depends on how many there are and how long they are on the stand.

(Dixie’s going to be all over that. That’ll be her dream segment lol)

 

[ElizaKate]

Thanks folks. Watching back Officer Lane's bodycam I can hear him call it in originally now. Still can't hear him upgrading it to a Code 3 at the 20:21:35 point stated in the Timeline above. It comes over the radio at 20:26:35 about "EMS are on Portland, (they were advised?) to go to Code 3..." Lane asks "to what?" and Chauvin and Keung then confirm Code 3 was stated.... Still a bit unclear I think.

 

[missy1974]

I just did a rewind while on lunch break. He said that "a note popped up on his screen about victim being restrained as they were just arriving".

That's what I thought must have happened! One of the 4 put that in the computer as they heard the siren/ambulance arriving... and waited until that exact moment to send that information into dispatch. Restraining = person is resisting... NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!! He had been unresponsive for some time MOO when that was called in.

That is from your timline... do you know where you got that information from? where did that 'information for EMS' come from?

20:27:21 - Information for EMS, PD has him restrained on ground

I am really going to have to find the time to line up these times with cam footage so I can see what exactly was happening at these times. Right now it seems very confusing.

 

[MsBetsy]

(Dixie’s going to be all over that. That’ll be her dream segment lol)

I'm interested in that part of it, too. It will be interesting to see how they explain tolerance, and how they will interpret the levels of each drug found in his system, it's half life, etc. Even the experts can't always come to a definitive conclusion.

 

[margarita25]

I think the expert witnesses such as doctors or pharmacologists will be very interesting but maybe boring for some. I guess it depends on how many there are and how long they are on the stand.

Here’s what I’m anticipating re: when the medical experts get on the stand, both for the prosecution and the defense:

They’ll say two totally different things from each other, obviously, as we know, and it’s basically going to come down to which doctor(s)‘ opinion you want to believe.

As one who has lived in the doctor’s office for the past few years, I can sure tell you that different doctors can have opinions which are polar opposites from each other, but not only that, there is a lot of, hmmm how do we say this, “subjectivity” when it comes to “interpreting” the test results, sometimes, imo. This is a very obvious point I’m making, as we know the medical experts’ testimonies will differ, just sayin, I am expecting huge differences between them, and that’s where it’s going to get, tricky.

 

[MrsWatson]

I expect the medical experts to reach two very different conclusions.

Is there an addiction specialist on the witness list?

 

[ElizaKate]

Oh okay they're very similar.

 

[UKslueth2018]

Back in session

The second paramedic

 

[Katerz]

This dude does not want to be there!

 

[UKslueth2018]

Asking about training and job role

 

[branmuffin]

Yes, it felt very jerky.

She rephrases her questions or pauses so much the witness loses track of what she's asking.

 

[UKslueth2018]

Give examples of calls

Witness “car accidents, overdoses, stubbed toes” ( longer list but I didn’t hear all)

Does that include cardiac arrest

Witness “yes”

 

[Katerz]

I don’t know how great of a witness he is going to be. He seems kind of defensive. JMO I’m not trashing the witness!

 

[UKslueth2018]

Asking about 25th May now

Called code 2 non emergent to a mouth injury

 

[ElizaKate]

I do wonder whether these paramedics wish they were called as defence witnesses and not the states.... MOO

ETA: later in testimony this appears not to be the case!

 

[UKslueth2018]

did you have any additional info re code three

Witness “no not at that time”

What did you observe

Witness “police squad, individual on ground with 3 officers on top, multiple people, phones out, multiple tones”