Okay, so I'm new here. Legs wobbly and still getting my bearings.
My timing was bad this morning, not realizing how the different threads work (end/close just before court goes into session) and I'd posted something just before the thread closed. I hope it's okay to post the link here, as I was looking forward to connecting with others who might want to explore some of the things that stand out to me about this case thus far). Either way, I'm happy to have found this website and am enjoying reading the information and opinions offered here.
Motive and Opportunity
George Floyd death / Derek Chauvin trial - Sidebar week 2
Your thoughts were very deep and detailed, and there was a lot to chew on. I agree with much of what you say. From what I understand, the biggest problem that day from a police stand point was their decision to put two rookie cops together on a shift. That was mistake number one. That was probably why a gun got pulled so fast, and it was probably why Floyd wasn't handcuffed properly. It was probably why the decision was made to take him off the wall and walk him to the squad car to put in him there instead of just leaving everyone sitting on the wall until backup arrived.
I don't know why GF didn't drive off after making his purchase. I heard things about why, but I don't know if those things are true. I think his friend will testify, and that could possibly shed light on why they kept sitting there.
All the cops arriving to the scene knew it was possible that GF was on something, so for me, they should have been using caution and descalation from the start. I think you do need to error on the side of caution and listen to the person complaining of pain and illness. Yeah, they could be lying -- but they could be telling the truth, too. This is where police must be patient.
I recall Nelson asking a witness if those being arrested got to choose whether to go in the car, sit on the curb, or lay on the ground. Well, I think that kind of attitude about power is what led us here, isn't it? Nelson talks a lot about an officer's right to use force. For me, having the right doesn't mean use it and/or use it to the full extent. Officers also have the power to descalate, which they should do whenever possible -- not forcing people into compliance.
For me, I'm not focused on whether GF overdosed. I don't think he did. I don't think he ate pills, either, because the ME said there was no proof of that in his stomach. In fact, the autopsy says he had bread in his stomach, not undigested pills. I'm focused on the fact that once GF was restrained, the cops should have rolled him on his side, sat him up, or something other than sitting on him for that length of time, especially after he was unresponsive and had no pulse.
In fact, I do see in the videos that the two officers in the back eased up pressure, and at times, Lang wasn't even touching Floyd. That lets you know that there wasn't enough threat to maintain the position. I saw Kueng picking something off tires, so he wasn't feeling threatened if he was doing that. Lang and Kueng asking if they can roll GF over is further proof that two reasonable officers on the scene thought the threat had lowered. I wish the prosecution had focused on what the other two officers were doing while DC relentlessly kept his position for 9 minutes.
For me, no matter what GF's conditions were that could have contributed to his death, I don't believe his death would have happened that day but for the restraint.
Maybe the defense if going to add something new that we don't know, but I really can't see them doing anything more than continuing to try to refute what the prosecution experts have to say.
We'll see, but if I'm reading the autopsy right, GF didn't take a bunch of pills 10 minutes before death. I read that it takes about 30 minutes for the stomach to dissolve pills, so if there are none in his stomach at autopsy then....Next, Floyd wasn't acting like someone who'd ODed, but if he was ODing, the cops should have recognized it and helped. Maybe he still would have died, but not acting is negligent.
Maybe the defense has something we don't know yet, so far, I'm unconvinced that the crowd was such a big concern that no one could roll GF into the recovery position. If they are such a big concern, why aren't the cops talking about the crowd being a concern at the time? Or why weren't they calling for backup? Why isn't dispatch sending more backup on its own? After GF left in the ambulance, DC and other cops did not seem one bit worried about the bystanders, proving they'd posed no threat.
The defense might again argue that DC's knee wasn't on the neck the whole time. To me, it was. But even if it wasn't, it was still critical to put GF into the recovery position or to take some sort of action once the man lost his pulse. I can't excuse not taking any type of action even after they couldn't find a pulse. It's got to be some type of crime for police not to render aid when someone is without pulse. The bystanders wanted aid delivered, so I don't see the danger of doing it.
Defense seems worried that letting up any pressure on GF would cause him to rebound harder, but police can't use fear of a hypothetical as an excuse to continue that restraint. If GF rebounds, well, restrain him again.
But that brings me to my biggest problem, which is why was he even in that situation? Because Lang was afraid of him when Lang went to his window. I don't know if cops are required to tell you that you are under arrest, but I didn't hear Lang tell GF that. Just put a gun in his face and started cuffing. I think GF would be alive today if Lang had let GF keep his hands on the wheel and focused on calming him down instead of trying to cuff and control GF like he's King Kong.
I don't know why police don't understand how bad it is to approach people with "force and comply" without even saying what's going on first. Lang had the highest level of force on GF before even speaking to him. That's bad. Yeah, Lang didn't know if GF had a gun. Cops never know, so it's the risk of the job. Cops act like they can't afford to break a nail at work these days. I know it's a risky and scary job, but that's the nature of the job. It's like being a cook but throwing water on the stove each time someone turns it on out of fear of getting burned.
I did read your post this morning, but it was right when they started up! Sometimes the threads move at a snails pace.. sometimes we get wrapped up watching and it's hard to go back! 
about 37:30 if it doesn't bring up the right time. 
