MN - George Floyd, 46, died in police custody, Minneapolis, 25 May 2020 #13 - Chauvin Trial Day 10

[ElizaKate]

And a perfect defense strategy.

No. That's not reasonable doubt. MOO

 

[Rhozwen]

Not necessarily IMO. If an entire pill weighed about 0.397g, was determined to be 1% fentanyl (testified to by BCA & NMS scientists), and various pieces, possibly totalling 0.100g were missing. If only those missing pieces were possibly consumed by someone, they could contain 1000 mcg of fentanyl, which is not an insignificant dose IMO.

I can see your point in this. It could plausably cast doubt for one juror to believe he died of an overdose.
GF had 11 nanograms of fentanyl in his system I believe and the experts all seem to agree that wasn't enough of a finding to rule an overdose. Not to mention all signs point to asphyxiation due to lack of oxygen. So even if this pill issue did resonate with a juror, there is enough testimony on the contrary to refute it during deliberations.
I always try to think of things in reasonable terms and sometimes my reasoning is not shared by others. Thank you for offering this perspective.

 

[Katerz]

Well talking heads on Court TV...they think Nelson had a great day!

Were they watching the same day of trial we just watched?

 

[ElizaKate]

Example of 'reasonable doubt' that I noticed today:

Nelson: "The heart disease as well as history of hypertension and the drugs that were in his system contributed to his death?"

Dr. Baker: "In my opinion, yes."

Contributed sure. The cause of death remains the same, compression of the neck from law enforcers...

 

[kittythehare]

Example of 'reasonable doubt' that I noticed today:

Nelson: "The heart disease as well as history of hypertension and the drugs that were in his system contributed to his death?"

Dr. Baker: "In my opinion, yes."

Not really, he qualified that by deferring to other professionals. He is not an expert in pulmonology or toxicology so their opines supersede.

 

[branmuffin]

@cathyrusson
·
6m
#DerekChauvinTrial - More info on juror that was questioned this morning. Pool reporter says she sits in seat #11. My notes show this is PJ#55, white woman, 50s. Hobby: rides motorcycles, it was her late husband's passion. Single mom, 1 older child, 1 teenager.

IMO, the jury should be sequestered. This isn't an ordinary case. With the amount of social media, including texting, facetime, FB and just general interest from immediate relatives make it almost impossible to maintain complete removal from those influences. When the Manson murder trial was on, Richard Nixon made a comment that the defendants were guilty. Next day, it was front page news. It almost caused a mistrial.

 

[Katerz]

IMO, the jury should be sequestered. This isn't an ordinary case. With the amount of social media, including texting, facetime, FB and just general interest from immediate relatives make it almost impossible to maintain complete removal from those influences. When the Manson murder trial was on, Richard Nixon made a comment that the defendants were guilty. Next day, it was front page news. It almost caused a mistrial.

I wonder if the defense didn’t address the juror misconduct because he wants to try to use it later for an appeal

 

[Rhozwen]

I don’t think the State can prove 2nd degree murder, I don’t think they will prove 3rd degree murder (although it’s not over), but I think they have proven manslaughter.

They will have to prove intent for 2nd. We know based on testimony that he was trained and required to provide medical aid, but he did not do so. Was it malicious intent? Ignorance? That is what will determine cause for the higher charges.
I agree, manslaughter is clear at this point in the trial.

 

[Legally Bland]

Example of 'reasonable doubt' that I noticed today:

Nelson: "The heart disease as well as history of hypertension and the drugs that were in his system contributed to his death?"

Dr. Baker: "In my opinion, yes."

The way I read the defense's proposed jury instructions for 2nd deg murder heart disease, hypertension and drugs would need to be causal, not contributory, for reasonable doubt:

The fact that other causes contributed to the death does not relieve the defendant of criminal liability. However, the defendant is not criminally liable if a “superseding cause” caused the death. A “superseding cause” is a cause that comes after the defendant’s acts, alters the natural sequence of events, and produces a result that would not otherwise have occurred. An overdose or heart failure that causes death is a superseding intervening cause.

https://mncourts.gov/mncourtsgov/me...20-12646/ProposedJuryInstructions02082021.pdf

 

[Legally Bland]

They will have to prove intent for 2nd. We know based on testimony that he was trained and required to provide medical aid, but he did not do so. Was it malicious intent? Ignorance? That is what will determine cause for the higher charges.
I agree, manslaughter is clear at this point in the trial.

Quoting from the defense's proposed jury instructions:

FELONY MURDER IN THE SECOND DEGREE

Under Minnesota law, a person causing the death of another, without intent to cause the death of any person, while committing or attempting to commit a felony offense, is guilty of the crime of murder in the second degree.

https://mncourts.gov/mncourtsgov/me...20-12646/ProposedJuryInstructions02082021.pdf

 

[tlcya]

I believe it was a smart move not to view it prior to autopsy. He did view it prior to releasing the body, so if the video would have given him cause to look for anything additional relevant to what was seen on it , he had the opportunity to do so.
The defense would had a hay day with it if he had viewed it prior to the video IMO.

*Edited to remove what could appear to be drunk texting. Geesh.

I tend to agree. Nelson seemed to find it odd, but I think I would have waited to watch it too. As an ME, I would first want to let the body tell me what it could before looking outward at other available evidence (such as the video).

 

[tlcya]

Were they watching the same day of trial we just watched?

I don't think so but I have a coworker who appears to be watching the trial they are (makes for awkward water cooler conversations)

 

[Rhozwen]

The way I read the defense's proposed jury instructions for 2nd deg murder heart disease, hypertension and drugs would need to be causal, not contributory, for reasonable doubt:

The fact that other causes contributed to the death does not relieve the defendant of criminal liability. However, the defendant is not criminally liable if a “superseding cause” caused the death. A “superseding cause” is a cause that comes after the defendant’s acts, alters the natural sequence of events, and produces a result that would not otherwise have occurred. An overdose or heart failure that causes death is a superseding intervening cause.

https://mncourts.gov/mncourtsgov/me...20-12646/ProposedJuryInstructions02082021.pdf

IMO, I think a big hurdle for the defense to get over is the "natural squence of events" portion. The defendant's choice to continue to apply force after someone in their charge ceases to breathe or have a pulse is very damaging to their case.

 

[kittythehare]

IMO, I think a big hurdle for the defense to get over is the "natural squence of events" portion. The defendant's choice to continue to apply force after someone in their charge ceases to breathe or have a pulse is very damaging to their case.

..and to continue to apply it post mortem reminded me, personally, of a trophy hunter. JMO

 

[CrimeAway]

I can see your point in this. It could plausably cast doubt for one juror to believe he died of an overdose.
GF had 11 nanograms of fentanyl in his system I believe and the experts all seem to agree that wasn't enough of a finding to rule an overdose. Not to mention all signs point to asphyxiation due to lack of oxygen. So even if this pill issue did resonate with a juror, there is enough testimony on the contrary to refute it during deliberations.
I always try to think of things in reasonable terms and sometimes my reasoning is not shared by others. Thank you for offering this perspective.

I went into the case thinking that DC would quite possibly be found guilty of murder. This is based on the small amount of media coverage that I had seen last summer, plus the larger political pressures at play (IMO).

I am trying to examine and question all of the evidence, including researching what different experts may present as fact, especially if it is contradictory to other testimony.
I do not just accept someone's assertion of scientific fact, but I seek confirmation in source literature, as I have been trained to do.

I agree that the prosecution's medical experts called so far, have NOT stated that THEY believe Mr. Floyd died from a drug overdose (& neither have I, for the record).

However, Dr Baker did testify under cross examination today, that he had previously stated that had Mr Floyd been found dead, with no other definitive cause of death, he would have concluded the COD to be an overdose, based on the level of 11ng/ml fentanyl found.

I have also previously linked several reputable sources including peer reviewed scientific journals and the CDC, that describe fatal fentanyl overdoses with levels both lower and higher than that found in Mr Floyd's blood (11 ng/ml).

https://static.fox9.com/www.fox9.com/content/uploads/2020/08/Exhibit-4.pdf

Multiple Fentanyl Overdoses — New Haven, Connecticut, June 23, 2016

I think DC is guilty of something, but I'm keeping an open mind.

Thanks for rational and reasonable discussion

 

[delilah]

IMO, I think a big hurdle for the defense to get over is the "natural squence of events" portion. The defendant's choice to continue to apply force after someone in their charge ceases to breathe or have a pulse is very damaging to their case.

Absolutely. Once no pulse could be detected, Chauvin should have been jumping off GF, starting CPR, conveying urgency to the EMTs when they arrived. There was none of that.

Not that it should have got to the point of GF having no pulse anyway....

 

[Blondiexoxo]

I don’t know what to think of today. I went into today firmly in the 2nd degree murder club. I was hyped for the ME to seal it all up and affirm profusely what we were told yesterday and this morning. But it just fell a little... flat. For me anyway. I think I was expecting it to be the big (almost) finale, but it was a bit anti climactic.

I do think that the testimony of the other forensic experts was so wonderfully worded that it will have more of an effect on the jury than what we’ve just seen. They seemed much more certain and their testimony was so riveting the visual explanations in particular. When the DR yesterday was talking about the street and the pavement that GF was shoved into and scraped on I could almost feel the cool gravel up against my own face. When he was describing GF’s breathing and lack of oxygen I felt like my own chest tightened as I imagined how he felt. I understand that today was about his body, but I didn’t find it half as compelling as what we’ve seen over previous days.

Do we know if the defence have their own ME testifying? Will there be almost identical professionals up there giving the opposite opinion to what we’ve heard over the last 10 days and the state will cross examine and pick them apart? I wonder if they have anyone from the scene saying ‘the knee was on the shoulder’? If not then it just goes to show, if every person who witnessed what DC did that day was absolutely appalled, and no one who saw it with their own eyes has a differing opinion to the states witnesses. What they saw GF do must have been just as horrific as the videos show. All MOO.

 

[delilah]

The placement of DC’s knee would not physically cut off the air supply according to this witness.

Is this not consistent with the other experts? If GF’s airway had been completely cut off, death would have occurred much quicker. Instead, it was partially cut off, leaving GF to fight for air for several mins before dying.

But Court TV seem to think this was a win for the defence....

 

[Rhozwen]

..and to continue to apply it post mortem reminded me, personally, of a trophy hunter. JMO

That is such an awful possibility, but it could be true.
I can not understand why he wouldn't have attempted to offer aid. The crowd was "unruly" because he was not allowing or offering aid. One of the bystanders was an off duty EMT who could have offered aid. So the crowd being unruly is not a reason because to appease the crowd, all he had to do was offer medical aid which is a requirement of the very position he held at the time. So this is something that I can not see as anything other than criminal negligence on his part. The other officers did nothing as well which I find so upsetting that 5 officers found no reason to offer aid to someone eho clearly needed aid. So much so that people feet away could see GF desperately needed medical aid.

 

[CrimeAway]

..and to continue to apply it post mortem reminded me, personally, of a trophy hunter. JMO

IIRC, today, Dr Baker actually stated that Mr Floyd was still alive at the hospital. I think that it is during cross examination.
I don't have time to go back and find the exact time stamp, but I believe it's in this video. If I find the specific time later, I'll add it.