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

[SouthAussie]

I haven't been able to catch up on the comments here but watched most of the testimony today. If the jury is feeling anything like I am they are bored, yawning and wonder why the same questions are being asked over and over and over again. I find the prosecutors questioning with the first responders as horribly repetitive. Essentially you are getting the exact same answers to the exact same questions from each of these witnesses. Some of the details are so minor I was expecting them to ask what side of the bed they got up from that morning. Much of it IMHO was completely unnecessary.

Sometimes it takes a few readings of a book, or a few watchings of a movie, to catch everything. I can see the need for repetition. To make sure each detail is clearly digested by every member of the jury.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

I agree. I think he's doing the best he can with what he has to work with.

I agree. Nelson knows he has an uphill battle to climb. I don't envy him at all. He knows I'm sure he's greatly disliked just because he represents this defendant.

If he lives there I'm sure at times he's worried about his own safety, and his family.

It's really sad because without defense attorneys the wheels of justice wouldn't ever turn.

Like I posted previously Nelson is one of the most unassuming defense attorneys I've seen. Many are ruthless, rude, nasty Bulldogs.

He has to be courageous, and an inwardly strong man to defend the most hated defendant there in the city, and everywhere else.

With emotions so high he knows he can become a target himself at any time.

I wonder if defense attorney Nelson has been provided security or perhaps the police union has provided him with a security detail?

I did see on SM where he's received death threats.

Jmho

 

[Tippy Lynn]

Does anyone have a quick comparison between 3rd degree murder and 2nd degree manslaughter in MN.

I would Google, but I really have to go and finish making dinner for my dogs

What is 3rd-degree murder and 2nd-degree manslaughter in Minnesota? | kare11.com

Minnesota’s sentencing guidelines recommend 12 1/2 years for a conviction on the murder count and four years on the manslaughter charge.

Murder in the third degree is committed when there isn't intent or premeditation.

Without intent to effect the death of any person, causes the death of another by perpetrating an act eminently dangerous to others and evincing a depraved mind, without regard for human life, is guilty of murder in the third degree," Minnesota statute says.

A person can be convicted of manslaughter in the second-degree if they can prove one of five means stated in Minnesota law.

 

[dixiegirl1035]

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.

Yes, it was car 330 (Chauvin and Thao) that called in the upgrade to code 3 (Lane and Keung were in car 320 on the dispatch screen. That is why Chauvin/Thao confirmed as one of them is who called the code 3 in and perhaps why Lane asked "to what?". MOO

1) Medical conditions GF suffered from (unknown to DC at the time):
(I) under the influence of methamphetamine (can cause agitation, illogical behavior, paranoia. Can cause increase in HR, BP, RR. Can contribute to cardiac problems, including hypertrophy and pulmonary hypertension). Meth can also cause pupil dilation (remember the questions about that today?)
(II) Under the influence of opiods (fentanyl). Opiods can adversely affect the lungs themselves, as well as depressing the respiratory drive which is controlled by the brain.
The effects of opioids on the lung - PubMed
(III) may bring up other health issues.

2) Trouble getting Mr Floyd in car and scuffle to get him out to show that restraint was necessary.

3) Dept training manual to show that SOME kind of neck restraint had been covered in training.

4) Previous problems with crowds (Nelson asked the ret Sgt this) to add to concerns about the crowd and whatever distraction it may cause.

5) Tunnel Vision (recognized concept in stressful situations). Sometimes, your brain doesn't see/hear/perceive/prioritize stimuli normally in high stress situations) Remember, that Nelson asked Ms Hanson about that.

I also think that the questions over response time of EMS/Fire could be seen to aid the defense, as they open the door to lessening full responsibility from DC. Would he have had a better outcome if they had got there sooner?

Note, I am not agreeing or disagreeing with the merits of any of the above ideas. I just think that they could be strategies the defense may use.

Thanks! It interests me greatly to discuss where we think the defense is going, and I too don't agree but like to see what others think strategy is. The only one I really think is viable for the defense is #1. Even with adding up the others it doesn't at this time sway me at all. Some of them insult my intelligence that he would think it would. But as was said upthread... they perhaps are talking to just one or two jurors iykwim.

As others have said... they didn't recognize and react to a medical emergency. It is being shown again and again and again by his PEERS that it was something that needed reassessment. So what if the ambulance took way too long and needs looking into, and process didn't get fire which was 3 blocks away and was there in two minutes (think civil suit that settled) . They did nothing for someone who was obviously in distress and didn't use their training.. which Lane was reminding them of again and again.

It's astounding, just astounding to me that for Lane and Kueng... they had been solo police officers for less than ONE WEEK.......newbies just starting out in their careers......and then, this. I consider to think that Chauvin was doing macho man and couldn't shift gears perhaps with the newbies?

It reminds me of the asian airliner crashs... the bottom line was that the co-pilot didn't speak up as their "culture" said not to disrespect your superior was what the final report was. Changes made (this is my recollection MOO others may know what I'm referring to... but would be O/T to discuss more than adding a link MOO)

I don't give a flip (and no one should MOO) what the da*n reason is for such need if anyone is in medical distress. And someone trained... well... You're a junkie and we know it... Narcan! He didn't even evaluate for such. Check pupils, check pulse, etc etc. If you are limp, check and assess and regroup. He's been in many high stress situations prior for that chit to fly. MOO

ETA: RE NARCAN (aka Naloxone) Does naloxone reverse any overdose?

Naloxone only works on overdoses caused by opioids. This family of drugs includes prescription painkillers like OxyContin, fentanyl, methadone, and Vicodin, as well as street drugs like heroin. Naloxone will not reverse overdose resulting from non-opioid drugs, like cocaine, benzodiazepines (“benzos”), or alcohol. Given how safe naloxone is, a victim of a non-opioid overdose, or an overdose caused by a mixture of drugs will not be harmed by naloxone. In multiple drug overdoses (e.g., an opioid and a benzodiazepine) it is still worth administering naloxone as it will remove the effects of the opioid and may still reverse the overdose. HE TOLD THEM HE HAD BEEN HOOPING

 

[Sillybilly]

Where is the jury sitting in the courtroom? Witness box is on one side of the judge and is the jury on the other side? Thank you!

Image of courtroom setup

 

[UKslueth2018]

I would like to thank you for your rolling posts about what was happening during the trial. I appreciate them very much.

It is very late at night here in Australia while all of this action is happening, so it is great to wake up, sip morning coffee, and read your step by step posts.

No worries.. I am not working at the moment and I know if I was or wasn’t able to watch real time then I would appreciate some non-reporter updates

 

[Tippy Lynn]

Does anyone have a quick comparison between 3rd degree murder and 2nd degree manslaughter in MN.

I would Google, but I really have to go and finish making dinner for my dogs

What is 3rd-degree murder and 2nd-degree manslaughter in Minnesota? | kare11.com

Minnesota’s sentencing guidelines recommend 12 1/2 years for a conviction on the murder count and four years on the manslaughter charge.

Murder in the third degree is committed when there isn't intent or premeditation.

Without intent to effect the death of any person, causes the death of another by perpetrating an act eminently dangerous to others and evincing a depraved mind, without regard for human life, is guilty of murder in the third degree," Minnesota statute says.

A person can be convicted of manslaughter in the second-degree if they can prove one of five means stated in Minnesota law.

https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.195

609.195 MURDER IN THE THIRD DEGREE.
(a) Whoever, without intent to effect the death of any person, causes the death of another by perpetrating an act eminently dangerous to others and evincing a depraved mind, without regard for human life, is guilty of murder in the third degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 25 years.

(b) Whoever, without intent to cause death, proximately causes the death of a human being by, directly or indirectly, unlawfully selling, giving away, bartering, delivering, exchanging, distributing, or administering a controlled substance classified in Schedule I or II, is guilty of murder in the third degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 25 years or to payment of a fine of not more than $40,000, or both.

https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.205

609.205 MANSLAUGHTER IN THE SECOND DEGREE.
A person who causes the death of another by any of the following means is guilty of manslaughter in the second degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than ten years or to payment of a fine of not more than $20,000, or both:

(1) by the person's culpable negligence whereby the person creates an unreasonable risk, and consciously takes chances of causing death or great bodily harm to another; or

(2) by shooting another with a firearm or other dangerous weapon as a result of negligently believing the other to be a deer or other animal; or

(3) by setting a spring gun, pit fall, deadfall, snare, or other like dangerous weapon or device; or

(4) by negligently or intentionally permitting any animal, known by the person to have vicious propensities or to have caused great or substantial bodily harm in the past, to run uncontrolled off the owner's premises, or negligently failing to keep it properly confined; or

(5) by committing or attempting to commit a violation of section 609.378 (neglect or endangerment of a child), and murder in the first, second, or third degree is not committed thereby.

If proven by a preponderance of the evidence, it shall be an affirmative defense to criminal liability under clause (4) that the victim provoked the animal to cause the victim's death.

 

[CrimeAway]

Yes, it was car 330 (Chauvin and Thao) that called in the upgrade to code 3 (Lane and Keung were in car 320 on the dispatch screen. That is why Chauvin/Thao confirmed as one of them is who called the code 3 in and perhaps why Lane asked "to what?". MOO


Thanks! It interests me greatly to discuss where we think the defense is going, and I too don't agree but like to see what others think strategy is. The only one I really think is viable for the defense is #1. Even with adding up the others it doesn't at this time sway me at all. Some of them insult my intelligence that he would think it would. But as was said upthread... they perhaps are talking to just one or two jurors iykwim.

As others have said... they didn't recognize and react to a medical emergency. It is being shown again and again and again by his PEERS that it was something that needed reassessment. So what if the ambulance took way too long and needs looking into, and process didn't get fire which was 3 blocks away and was there in two minutes (think civil suit that settled) . They did nothing for someone who was obviously in distress and didn't use their training.. which Lane was reminding them of again and again.

It's astounding, just astounding to me that for Lane and Kueng... they had been solo police officers for less than ONE WEEK.............and this. It reminds me of the asian airliner crashs... the bottom line was that the co-pilot didn't speak up as their "culture" said not to disrespect your superior was what the final report was. Changes made (this is my recollection MOO others may know what I'm referring to... but would be O/T to discuss more than adding a link MOO)

I don't give a flip (and no one should MOO) what the da*n reason is for such need if anyone is in medical distress. And someone trained... well... You're a junkie and we know it... Narcan! He didn't even evaluate for such. Check pupils, check pulse, etc etc. If you are limp, check and assess and regroup. He's been in many high stress situations prior for that chit to fly. MOO

I too thought about L & K's hesitance to speak up, and possible deference to Chauvin. I thought of comparison to the airline industry also, and this problem is why they now use something called "Crew Resource Management". I think MPD police need to look at their training in light of this.

Here's more on CRM from an airline pilot who campaigns for changes in healthcare:

 

[Tippy Lynn]

VERIFY: Derek Chauvin faces three charges in George Floyd's death | kare11.com

 

[shotgun09]

Per the testimony this afternoon, the MPD supervisor was handed a piece of paper from Officer Lane with Shwanda Hill's name on it, and a MN ID card with the name of William Smythe. Did Maurice or Morrise hand the LE a fake ID? Is William Smythe aka as Maurice? Or aka Morrise? It struck me as odd, coming so late in this guys testimony to have both "items'' brought up today

 

[dixiegirl1035]

https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.195

609.195 MURDER IN THE THIRD DEGREE.
(a) Whoever, without intent to effect the death of any person, causes the death of another by perpetrating an act eminently dangerous to others and evincing a depraved mind, without regard for human life, is guilty of murder in the third degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 25 years.

(b) Whoever, without intent to cause death, proximately causes the death of a human being by, directly or indirectly, unlawfully selling, giving away, bartering, delivering, exchanging, distributing, or administering a controlled substance classified in Schedule I or II, is guilty of murder in the third degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 25 years or to payment of a fine of not more than $40,000, or both.

https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.205

609.205 MANSLAUGHTER IN THE SECOND DEGREE.
A person who causes the death of another by any of the following means is guilty of manslaughter in the second degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than ten years or to payment of a fine of not more than $20,000, or both:

(1) by the person's culpable negligence whereby the person creates an unreasonable risk, and consciously takes chances of causing death or great bodily harm to another; or

(2) by shooting another with a firearm or other dangerous weapon as a result of negligently believing the other to be a deer or other animal; or

(3) by setting a spring gun, pit fall, deadfall, snare, or other like dangerous weapon or device; or

(4) by negligently or intentionally permitting any animal, known by the person to have vicious propensities or to have caused great or substantial bodily harm in the past, to run uncontrolled off the owner's premises, or negligently failing to keep it properly confined; or

(5) by committing or attempting to commit a violation of section 609.378 (neglect or endangerment of a child), and murder in the first, second, or third degree is not committed thereby.

If proven by a preponderance of the evidence, it shall be an affirmative defense to criminal liability under clause (4) that the victim provoked the animal to cause the victim's death.

Thanks, I'll add the last one here and move all to the media /docs thread MN - George Floyd, 46, Minneapolis, 25 May 2020 **Media & Timeline - NO DISCUSSION in one post for future reference!

609.19 MURDER IN THE SECOND DEGREE.
Subdivision 1.Intentional murder; drive-by shootings.
Whoever does either of the following is guilty of murder in the second degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 40 years:

(1) causes the death of a human being with intent to effect the death of that person or another, but without premeditation; or

(2) causes the death of a human being while committing or attempting to commit a drive-by shooting in violation of section 609.66, subdivision 1e, under circumstances other than those described in section 609.185, paragraph (a), clause (3).

Subd. 2.Unintentional murders.
Whoever does either of the following is guilty of unintentional murder in the second degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 40 years:

(1) causes the death of a human being, without intent to effect the death of any person, while committing or attempting to commit a felony offense other than criminal sexual conduct in the first or second degree with force or violence or a drive-by shooting; or

(2) causes the death of a human being without intent to effect the death of any person, while intentionally inflicting or attempting to inflict bodily harm upon the victim, when the perpetrator is restrained under an order for protection and the victim is a person designated to receive protection under the order. As used in this clause, "order for protection" includes an order for protection issued under chapter 518B; a harassment restraining order issued under section 609.748; a court order setting conditions of pretrial release or conditions of a criminal sentence or juvenile court disposition; a restraining order issued in a marriage dissolution action; and any order issued by a court of another state or of the United States that is similar to any of these orders.

https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.19

 

[Leilei]

https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.195

609.195 MURDER IN THE THIRD DEGREE.
(a) Whoever, without intent to effect the death of any person, causes the death of another by perpetrating an act eminently dangerous to others and evincing a depraved mind, without regard for human life, is guilty of murder in the third degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 25 years.

(b) Whoever, without intent to cause death, proximately causes the death of a human being by, directly or indirectly, unlawfully selling, giving away, bartering, delivering, exchanging, distributing, or administering a controlled substance classified in Schedule I or II, is guilty of murder in the third degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 25 years or to payment of a fine of not more than $40,000, or both.

https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.205

609.205 MANSLAUGHTER IN THE SECOND DEGREE.
A person who causes the death of another by any of the following means is guilty of manslaughter in the second degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than ten years or to payment of a fine of not more than $20,000, or both:

(1) by the person's culpable negligence whereby the person creates an unreasonable risk, and consciously takes chances of causing death or great bodily harm to another; or

(2) by shooting another with a firearm or other dangerous weapon as a result of negligently believing the other to be a deer or other animal; or

(3) by setting a spring gun, pit fall, deadfall, snare, or other like dangerous weapon or device; or

(4) by negligently or intentionally permitting any animal, known by the person to have vicious propensities or to have caused great or substantial bodily harm in the past, to run uncontrolled off the owner's premises, or negligently failing to keep it properly confined; or

(5) by committing or attempting to commit a violation of section 609.378 (neglect or endangerment of a child), and murder in the first, second, or third degree is not committed thereby.

If proven by a preponderance of the evidence, it shall be an affirmative defense to criminal liability under clause (4) that the victim provoked the animal to cause the victim's death.

I think that they've made the case for manslaughter, and are *this* close to third degree murder. Just hope the jury sees it.

 

[margarita25]

Image of courtroom setup

Additionally from the above link (BBC):

“Why is this such a high-profile case?
The video footage of Derek Chauvin kneeling on George Floyd's neck last May was replayed the world over.

To many, Floyd's death while in police custody became a vivid symbol of police brutality - particularly against people of colour - and it sparked worldwide demonstrations for racial justice.

But despite the global outcry this is not an open and shut case. In the US, police are rarely convicted for deaths that occur while they are on duty, if they are charged at all.

The verdict in this case will be widely seen as an indication of how the US legal system treats deaths that occur while in police custody.“

 

[CrimeAway]

I thought that I saw an officer (L or K) check for a radial (wrist) pulse using their thumb on the body cam
video yesterday. (IMO).

Just wanted to add that I found the video of this and took a screenshot from the MM video posted at YT

 

[dixiegirl1035]

VERIFY: Derek Chauvin faces three charges in George Floyd's death | kare11.com

Perfect addition... I'll do an ETA in the media thread so it's all now handy for the next 3 weeks if we need to refer to! Thanks so much.

 

[missy1974]

@missy1974

This is most recent one... haven't updated it yesterday/today... I'll do this weekend with references of where the information is from. There may be subtle mistake in here, I'll try to catch and do a good job!

oh oh oh I hope you didn't take it as a critique! I appreciate that I was able to go back to that and have a look to help to understand these times.

I am going to try to find the time to line some of them up with body cams on the weekend, just for my own mind!

Thanks again!

 

[CrimeAway]

https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.195

609.195 MURDER IN THE THIRD DEGREE.
(a) Whoever, without intent to effect the death of any person, causes the death of another by perpetrating an act eminently dangerous to others and evincing a depraved mind, without regard for human life, is guilty of murder in the third degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 25 years.

(b) Whoever, without intent to cause death, proximately causes the death of a human being by, directly or indirectly, unlawfully selling, giving away, bartering, delivering, exchanging, distributing, or administering a controlled substance classified in Schedule I or II, is guilty of murder in the third degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 25 years or to payment of a fine of not more than $40,000, or both.

Hmmm, part b is interesting also IMO. Sitting on hands...

 

[branmuffin]

I think that the female prosecution attorney was unnecessarily verbose and confusing with her questions, but I do see the points she was trying to get at.

We all probably have a better than average grasp of basic medical, LE and legal concepts here on WS than the average person.

The prosecution needs to use the witnesses to explain to the jury what CPR is, what it means to have no pulse etc. and why it is bad and needs to be corrected quickly.
They need to establish that the time GF was restrained, the way he was restrained, and the failure of DC to stop the restraint and administer immediate first aid contributed to GF's death. (IMO)
They are also trying to show that DC had a "duty of care" towards Mr. Floyd, that DC veered from approved methods of restraint as taught by the police department etc. etc.

I'm not sure but I think the prosecution is using a form of Socratic reasoning in the questions they ask. If they came right out and said "Isn't it true Mr.xxxx, that the defendant exhibited extreme negligence toward the victim causing his death" you might get push back from some witnesses. But asking discrete and incremental questions gets the witness to agree and support your conclusion or premise. Although, I don't think anyone whose been on the stand so far is what I'd call a hostile witness.

 

[GoJacks]

Image that was presented today at trial.
(I just saw this as mostly I can only listen to some of the testimonies during the day, and not actually watch)


For some reason this image spoke volumes to me, to who DC is as a person. (JMO)

context: Pleoger's body cam footage of them in hall of hospital.

 

[Tippy Lynn]

Additionally from the above link (BBC):

“Why is this such a high-profile case?
The video footage of Derek Chauvin kneeling on George Floyd's neck last May was replayed the world over.

To many, Floyd's death while in police custody became a vivid symbol of police brutality - particularly against people of colour - and it sparked worldwide demonstrations for racial justice.

But despite the global outcry this is not an open and shut case. In the US, police are rarely convicted for deaths that occur while they are on duty, if they are charged at all.

The verdict in this case will be widely seen as an indication of how the US legal system treats deaths that occur while in police custody.“

We've had a few high profile police related murder trials in the last few years.

In April 2019, Mohamed Noor, a Minneapolis Police Officer was convicted of third-degree murder and manslaughter, but was acquitted of intentional second-degree murder. In June 2019, he was sentenced to 12.5 years in prison for shooting and killing Justine D. Her family brought a civil lawsuit against the City of Minneapolis alleging violation of Damond's civil rights. The city settled for 20 million.

In 2016 the police shooting/killing of Philando Castile was also in the cities, but that officer was acquitted.

GUILTY - MN - Justine Damond, 40, fatally shot by Minneapolis LE, 15 July 2017 #3

NOTGUILTY - MN - Philando Castile, 32, fatally shot by police officer, 6 July 2016 #2