Quote:

---

This means that Floyd stopped breathing and his heart stopped beating (cardiopulmonary arrest) because of the injury caused by his restraint in the custody of law enforcement officers, to include asphyxia from neck compression.

Asphyxia means that there is a lack of oxygen going to the brain. It can happen from obstruction of the airway, restriction of breathing from compression of the neck or chest,

---

Quote:

---

or the prevention of blood flow to the brain by collapsing the blood vessels in the neck.

---

Que Te Gusta Mas said:

---

You're making arguments that are physiologically impossible based on the evidence.

Quote:

---

This means that Floyd stopped breathing and his heart stopped beating (cardiopulmonary arrest) because of the injury caused by his restraint in the custody of law enforcement officers, to include asphyxia from neck compression.

Asphyxia means that there is a lack of oxygen going to the brain. It can happen from obstruction of the airway, restriction of breathing from compression of the neck or chest,

---

Asphyxiation via chest compression would have required 400+ pounds of pressure and resulted in broken ribs, neither of which were present.

Asphyxiation via neck compression would have resulted in injury to the neck tissue, which wasn't present. The amount of force required would have also broken the hyoid bone, which didn't occur.

Quote:

---

or the prevention of blood flow to the brain by collapsing the blood vessels in the neck.

---

This would have required both carotid arteries to be simultaneously blocked by exact pressure being applied on both sides of the neck by the knee and the ground. Chauvin's knee was nowhere near the carotid. It was on the back of Floyd's neck. Instead of slowly fading over 8 minutes, consciousness would have been lost within a matter of seconds if this had occurred.

---

Quote:

---

Minneapolis city officials convened during a Zoom call Monday morning to go over public safety preparations for the Derek Chauvin trial, which is set to begin next week.

During the meeting, it was announced that the city will be dropping its plan to pay social media influencers for sharing city-approved messages during the trial. The city originally planned on paying six social media influencers, all coming from various minority communities, $2,000 each during Chauvin's and the remaining three former Minneapolis police officers' trials that will take place later in the year.

"At this point, we will not move forward with this strategy," said David Rubedor, director of the Neighborhood and Community Relations Department for the city of Minneapolis. "While I believe in and support the intention of this recommendation, we have seen that the impact has caused harm in our communities. And for that, I am sorry."

City Coordinator Mark Ruff added, "When we make a mistake, we acknowledge that and do better."

---

Quote:

---

Attorneys for former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin are asking the Minnesota Court of Appeals to dismiss an appeal regarding a third-degree murder charge following an announcement by the state's highest court in the case of another former police officer.

Monday, the Minnesota Supreme Court announced it will review the third-degree murder conviction of former Minneapolis police officer Mohamed Noor. Oral arguments in the case will begin in June 2021.

Following that announcement, Chauvin's attorneys asked the Court of Appeals to dismiss the state's motion to add a third-degree murder charge against Chauvin given the fact that the high court is planning to review whether third-degree murder even applies to the actions of Noor.

"[Chauvin's attorneys'] theory is that because the Supreme Court is going to hear the Noor appeal, until the Supreme Court reaches a decision in the case, Noor can't have any impact on the Chauvin trial," Rachel Moran, a University of St. Thomas Law Professor, said.

---

Quote:

---

"To be at this point and have crucial law unsettled as to one of the key changes, that's very unusual," University of St. Thomas Law Professor Mark Osler said.

Osler added if the Court of Appeals says prosecutors can add third-degree murder charges, the Hennepin County judge has the option to possibly delay Chauvin's trial to await the Supreme Court's interpretation of third-degree murder or decide to start the trial on Monday, March 8.

---

Que Te Gusta Mas said:

---

You're making arguments that are physiologically impossible based on the evidence.

Quote:

---

This means that Floyd stopped breathing and his heart stopped beating (cardiopulmonary arrest) because of the injury caused by his restraint in the custody of law enforcement officers, to include asphyxia from neck compression.

Asphyxia means that there is a lack of oxygen going to the brain. It can happen from obstruction of the airway, restriction of breathing from compression of the neck or chest,

---

Asphyxiation via chest compression would have required 400+ pounds of pressure and resulted in broken ribs, neither of which were present.

Asphyxiation via neck compression would have resulted in injury to the neck tissue, which wasn't present. The amount of force required would have also broken the hyoid bone, which didn't occur.

Quote:

---

or the prevention of blood flow to the brain by collapsing the blood vessels in the neck.

---

This would have required both carotid arteries to be simultaneously blocked by exact pressure being applied on both sides of the neck by the knee and the ground. Chauvin's knee was nowhere near the carotid. It was on the back of Floyd's neck. If this had occurred, instead of slowly fading over 8 minutes, consciousness would have been lost within a matter of seconds.

---

2PacShakur said:

---

Que Te Gusta Mas said:

---

You're making arguments that are physiologically impossible based on the evidence.

Quote:

---

This means that Floyd stopped breathing and his heart stopped beating (cardiopulmonary arrest) because of the injury caused by his restraint in the custody of law enforcement officers, to include asphyxia from neck compression.

Asphyxia means that there is a lack of oxygen going to the brain. It can happen from obstruction of the airway, restriction of breathing from compression of the neck or chest,

---

Asphyxiation via chest compression would have required 400+ pounds of pressure and resulted in broken ribs, neither of which were present.

Asphyxiation via neck compression would have resulted in injury to the neck tissue, which wasn't present. The amount of force required would have also broken the hyoid bone, which didn't occur.

Quote:

---

or the prevention of blood flow to the brain by collapsing the blood vessels in the neck.

---

This would have required both carotid arteries to be simultaneously blocked by exact pressure being applied on both sides of the neck by the knee and the ground. Chauvin's knee was nowhere near the carotid. It was on the back of Floyd's neck. If this had occurred, instead of slowly fading over 8 minutes, consciousness would have been lost within a matter of seconds.

---

You excluded the non-mechanical example the Medpage author listed because it didn't fit your narrative. The airway doesn't have to be completely obstructed for there to be asphyxia, the medical examiner said so in the 302 posted earlier. And I agree, the fact it took over 8 minutes illustrates how persistently adverse his action was.

E: for grammar.

---

Quote:

---

It can also happen from the replacement of oxygen in the blood by carbon monoxide, or depletion of oxygen in the atmosphere, like in a fire.

---

silverleaf said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

He couldn't be restrained any other way, including in a car, because he was manic ('excited delirium') and already struggling to breathe from the massive amount of fentanyl he'd ingested that would absolutely kill him.

The knee to the back of the neck had nothing to do with his lungs filling with fluid, and was an approved method of restraint.

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2020/09/02/new-evidence-in-the-george-floyd-case-that-could-change-everything-n2575428

It's in their manual. How can people still not know this?

---

I'll just help everyone out again by bumping this.

I honestly want to see how this gets downplayed in trial, because it's basically the perry mason moment

---

Quote:

---

Jury selection in the trial of former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin in the death of George Floyd is slated to begin on Monday, March 8th. Due to restrictions caused by the pandemic, it's going to take a while to seat 12 jurors and four alternates, so the actual trial will not begin before March 29 at the soonest. We'll probably be well into April before a verdict is delivered,

---

Quote:

---

Whether or not there will be riots largely depends on the outcome of the trial. And that will probably depend on how things go during voir dire. As I mentioned above, the jury selection will be handled a bit differently because of COVID restrictions. Only eight potential jurors will be questioned per day, four in the morning and four in the afternoon. Each will be examined by the prosecution and the defense singly. There is no limit to the number of potential jurors who can be rejected for cause. Also, the prosecutors will have nine peremptory challenges available while Chauvin's defense team gets 15.

---

Quote:

---

During the trial, the jurors are expected to hear from a number of other people who were arrested by Chauvin over the years, telling stories of how excessive force was used against them. (NBC News has a list of several of these witnesses and their accounts.) The defense will no doubt seek to have such testimony thrown out as being unrelated to the incident involving George Floyd.

---

Quote:

---

The evidence shown to the public certainly suggests that Derek Chauving mishandled the arrest of George Floyd, cutting off his breathing significantly longer than was needed to get control of him. But does that add up to second-degree murder, which implies intent? They may have a better shot at the other charge of second-degree homicide, but even that is hard to say. The jury would have to agree that Chauvin was, at a minimum, excessively reckless.

But it only takes one or two jurors who will always find room to err on the side of caution when being asked to convict a police officer to see Chauvin walk free. (And perhaps he should. That's up to the jury.) It seems to me that the prosecutors would have done themselves and the public a favor by including at least one lesser charge such as reckless endangerment just so the jury could convict him of something.

---

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

This is very clearly a case of the DA intentionally overcharging an individual hoping he gets acquitted to advance a narrative. This could have been a quick, easy conviction for excessive force but there's absolutely no way in hell he's getting convicted on a murder 2 charge.

They want the riots that will ensue

---

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

This is very clearly a case of the DA intentionally overcharging an individual hoping he gets acquitted to advance a narrative. This could have been a quick, easy conviction for excessive force but there's absolutely no way in hell he's getting convicted on a murder 2 charge.

They want the riots that will ensue

---

TxAgPreacher said:

---

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

This is very clearly a case of the DA intentionally overcharging an individual hoping he gets acquitted to advance a narrative. This could have been a quick, easy conviction for excessive force but there's absolutely no way in hell he's getting convicted on a murder 2 charge.

They want the riots that will ensue

---

Not sure it was excessive force. Pretty sure he did things by the book...

---

Quote:

---

Oh, great. Prosecutors got their wish at the Minnesota Court of Appeals this morning, winning an appeal that would allow them to argue for reinstatement of third-degree murder charge against Derek Chauvin. However, that could force a postponement in the trial over the death of George Floyd and upend the city's preparations for security:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

The court ruled that its Feb. 1 ruling in an unrelated third-degree murder case is precedential, and overturned a ruling by Hennepin Count District Judge Peter Cahill that denied charging Chauvin with the count. The case has now sent the case back to Cahill for consideration of adding the charges.

The ruling comes as Chauvin prepares to go on trial next Monday on charges of second-degree murder and manslaughter, and four days after the Court of Appeals heard arguments on the issue. It's unclear, what, if any impact the ruling could have on the trial's start date.

---

Why would it necessitate a delay if the facts and evidence have been available to both sides? For one thing, two attorneys tell the Star Tribune, escalating the charge requires at least a rethink of strategy. There's more to it than chess, though:

A legal scholar and attorney have said it could cause a delay if Chauvin's attorney, Eric Nelson, asks the Minnesota Supreme Court to review the ruling, or, if Nelson invokes his client's constitutional rights to a fair trial and argues that he needs more time to prepare for the added count.

"If Eric Nelson is handed one week before trial a new charge he has to deal with, that's pretty difficult," Mitchell Hamline School of Law emeritus professor Joseph Daly said in an interview before the ruling was issued. "You have to rethink almost your entire approach. You have to rethink your theory of the case. It's like a chess match."

---

Quote:

---

Second-degree murder requires prosecutors to prove an underlying felony besides Floyd's death, whereas third-degree murder only requires proof of a depraved indifference to life. Without that charge, the two possibilities for sentencing would be between 25 years for the second-degree murder charge or five years for manslaughter.

Adding the third-degree charge gives prosecutors and jurors an option for splitting the difference if prosecutors can't prove an underlying felony. As another Hamline professor noted earlier in the week, prosecutors "want to have as many shots at the apple as they can."

Accordingly, the defense will have a tougher time dealing with this additional charge. If the court doesn't postpone to allow for adequate time to develop a defense against the intermediate charge, Chauvin's team will have a pretty good case for appeal if the jury ends up convicting on the third-degree charge.

The appellate ruling sends a pretty clear signal to Judge Cahill that prosecutors have the right to amend the indictment, even at this stage.

Given that he's already been skeptical on that point, Cahill would almost certainly go out of his way to allow for the defense to get more time to prepare. And that, by the way, would apply to the other trial, as prosecutors also want to add charges relating to abetting third-degree murder against the other three defendants in their separate trial.

---

Quote:

---

In view of the atmosphere the court has submitted a 14-page questionnaire for completion by prospective jurors. The questionnaire is posted online here. It will play a substantial role in the process of jury selection.

On Friday the Minnesota Court of Appeals ruled that Judge Cahill had improperly failed to treat its decision in the Noor case as binding precedent. It all but ordered Judge Cahill to reinstate the third-degree murder charge against Chauvin. The Court of Appeals decision is posted online here.

I posted the Noor decision here. The Minnesota Supreme Court has agreed to review the Court of Appeals decision in the Noor case, but Noor's appeal won't even be heard by the Supreme Court until June. The Minnesota Supreme Court decision in the Noor case will be the last word on the applicability of the third-degree murder charge in these cases.

Judge Cahill must formally decide whether to reinstate the third-degree murder charge. If he does so, will he delay the trial? I think he is highly unlikely to do so. The critical questions of fact remain the same.

The court's daily trial schedule is set forth in the court order posted online here ("Order regarding discovery, expert witness deadlines, and trial continuance"). Judge Cahill has allowed at least three weeks for jury selection. Opening statements are scheduled no earlier than March 29. The arrangements for jury selection reflect the lynch mob atmosphere that pervades the case.

---

Quote:

---

George Parry is an attorney and former prosecutor who has written at some length on the case for the American Spectator and his own Knowledge is Good site. I asked George what he thought of the evidence the state will seek to introduce against Chauvin. George responded with the following comments that are posted here with George's kind permission:

Quote:

---

As described, the nurse's proffered testimony regarding how she purportedly could have intervened and saved Floyd and how prompt medical intervention would have saved him is highly speculative, and, to my mind, inadmissible. Even if the judge allows it, a competent cross examiner would have no difficulty blunting the impact of her opinion testimony and, quite possibly, turning her testimony to the advantage of the defense by taking her on cross step by step through the findings at autopsy and Floyd's toxicology report.

The psychiatrist's proffered testimony regarding Floyd's panic and anxiety would only serve to reinforce the basis for finding that he died from excited delirium. Moreover, although as a doctor she would likely be allowed to offer an opinion regarding the cause of death, I am unaware of any body of psychiatric research or expertise pertaining to excited delirium. This is a cause of death almost exclusively within the purview of emergency room physicians who deal with it on a regular basis and who have amassed a body of relevant research.

The "blood choke" testimony does not address what is shown by the video evidence. That kind of choke hold shuts down the flow of blood borne oxygen to the brain by applying direct, focused force to both carotid arteries. There are two carotid arteries, one on each side of the neck. By kneeling on the side of Floyd's neck, Chauvin might have blocked one carotid, but the other was on the flat pavement.

My old friend Dr. Michael Baden, who was retained by Floyd's family to examine the body, has opined that the knee on the neck blocked the flow of blood borne oxygen to the brain, but that will be a tough sell given that the carotid on the opposite side of Floyd's neck was on a flat surface and no focused, direct pressure was applied to it. Consequently, the proffered testimony of a martial arts expert about a choke hold that would apply direct, focused pressure to both carotids and that does not appear in the video would seem to be irrelevant.

As for the police procedure witnesses, Chauvin's deviation from procedure appears to have been his failure to place Floyd in the "recovery position" (on his side) once he was subdued. But to my knowledge no one has ever argued that Floyd's death was the result of positional asphyxiation which is the hazard that the recovery position is calculated to minimize.

And I don't see why police and fire witnesses should be allowed to testify regarding the possible impact of Floyd's proven massive fentanyl overdose. This is a matter for a toxicologist or, possibly, a forensic pathologist.

If I were defending Chauvin, even if the court allowed the foregoing testimony, in cross examination I would jam it down the prosecution's throat.

With the possible exception of the police procedure witnesses, the proffered testimony impresses me as a desperate scattershot effort to prove the cause of death. If the prosecution had clear cut, well-founded evidence proving that Chauvin's actions caused Floyd's death, it wouldn't be trying to present this kind of nonsense.

---

---

Quote:

---

This case is what's known in the prosecution biz as a charging nightmare. It has gotten more complicated due to the trial judge's lawless attempt to defy a flawed higher-court ruling that, in effect, forced the reinstatement of a controversial murder count a charge of "depraved-indifference" homicide, which the trial judge had thrown out in October. At this point, the Minnesota Supreme Court may need to sort it all out, which could delay matters for months. Or perhaps Chauvin's trial will proceed under a cloud of uncertainty.

---

Quote:

---

The case is a charging nightmare because it is atypical. Murder usually involves an intentional and illegitimate use of force that obviously could cause death. Here, the case centers on police who were permitted to use reasonable force and who did not intend to cause death.

---

Quote:

---

Floyd, who was validly suspected of passing a counterfeit $20 bill, resisted a legitimate arrest, at least "passively." That is, he does not appear to have assaulted or threatened the arresting officers, but he did refuse to comply with their lawful commands to submit to being restrained, including being detained in their squad car. Police are permitted to use reasonable force to place a suspect under arrest, and to subdue a suspect who resists arrest. The circumstances are further complicated by Floyd's size and condition: He was a big, strong man, for whom none of the officers was a physical match; and he was impaired, having ingested fentanyl and methamphetamine.

---

Quote:

---

The state of Minnesota, led by Attorney General Keith Ellison, has brought three charges against Chauvin. The main one is second-degree unintentional murder. It alleges that, while Chauvin did not intend to cause Floyd's death, he did cause it in the course of committing another felony offense criminal assault, which is the intentional, unjustifiable infliction of bodily harm.

Now, the encounter did not start out as a criminal assault. To repeat, police are allowed to cause bodily harm to the extent reasonably necessary to subdue a suspect who is resisting a legitimate arrest. So, the complex questions are (1) whether a permissible police use of force evolved into a criminal assault over time, and (2) whether Chauvin intended bodily harm in the criminal sense i.e., whether his use of force was so excessive under the circumstances that he understood the bodily harm he was intentionally causing was beyond what was reasonably necessary to restrain an uncooperative detainee.

---

Quote:

---

But it's no slam dunk. Police use of force is complex, intent is complex, the burden of proof is high, and the jury would have to be unanimous to convict.

Hence, the two other charges.
The Law and the Political Narrative
If there is a count on which the evidence seems overwhelming, it is the second-degree manslaughter charge. For that, the prosecutor must establish that Chauvin caused Floyd's death under circumstances where Chauvin was (1) culpably negligent in a way that created an unreasonable risk, and (2) conscious that this risk carried the potential of death or serious bodily harm. If the prosecutor's proffer of the evidence is accurate and the jury is rational, Chauvin is certain to be convicted of this charge.

---

Quote:

---

Third-Degree Murder: Depraved Indifference
Because of the political and cultural significance of Floyd's killing, Ellison is keen to convict him of murder, not manslaughter. That brings us to the third charge, which is third-degree unintentional murder, and the judicial infighting that has made matters even more fraught.
To understand the controversy, we need to quote the language of the relevant statute, and note my italics. Under Section 609.195(a) of the state penal code, a defendant is guilty of third-degree murder if:

Quote:

---

without intent to effect the death of any person, [the defendant] causes the death of another by perpetrating an act eminently dangerous to others and evincing a depraved mind, without regard for human life.

---

---

Quote:

---

Depraved-indifference murder is not supposed to be a sleight-of-hand that elevates manslaughter to murder, or that effectively turns an unintentional killing into an intentional murder by substituting depraved indifference for malice aforethought. It is meant to address the sociopath who, say, fires a gun into a crowd, not seeking to kill or wound anyone in particular, but who poses a lethal risk to everyone.

That is why I believe Judge Cahill was right to grant Chauvin's motion to dismiss the third-degree-murder charge, while rejecting his motion to dismiss the second-degree murder charge.

---

Quote:

---

Virtually all the 2,500 individuals who work in the courthouse when it is in full operation will be removed from the building for the duration of the trial. That includes the judges. All 58 of the judges not involved in the Chauvin trial will conduct trials and hearings from computer screens in their homes.

Access to the courtroom where Chauvin will be tried will be restricted to around 30 participants. The media, except for two reporters, will be limited to watching a live feed of the proceedings on a big screen television in a building across the street.

---

Quote:

---

The organization on the part of those who wrecked the city once and are prepared to do it again is just as intense. Multiple events are already scheduled downtown in the vicinity of the courthouse for the first day of proceedings. High school students are being instructed to refuse to attend school and to instead rally downtown as well.



At George Floyd Square, the new name for the intersection at which Floyd died, the crowds and handfuls of individuals in stereotypical Antifa Black Bloc attire are already milling around. Left wing extremist groups consider the "square" an autonomous zone outside of the jurisdiction of the city. Police promises to "retake" the "square" have been met with threats of violence by local organizers. When a man was killed at the square recently responding police were met with resistance and told they had no jurisdiction in the area.

Left wing extremist groups are tracking what they identify as FBI and local law enforcement aircraft conducting surveillance over Minneapolis in the run up to the trial. Followers of the groups in question are being given the call signs in use by the aircraft, the frequencies on which they are operating and the tail numbers of the aircraft in question. That information is being passed along not only for general awareness but so that organizers of the inevitable violence can take steps to hide their activities from observation.

---

Quote:

---

Groups organizing in the runup to the trial are providing information to their members on the tactics the police will use to attempt to control riots and how to defeat those tactics and overcome law enforcement. Maps posted to the internet identify the security measures in place and the areas to which police will attempt to confine crowds. The group posting the maps provided this background and context.

Quote:

---

"It shows the state of current security fences/infrastructure based on our own observations and news reports, plus our own assessment of high- and medium-risk areas of kettling (entrapment by state security forces). The authors are local abolitionist residents who want to end the 200+ year military/police occupation of this land. We only represent ourselves and not any organization or group. We are not event organizers. Information shown here may not be up to date. Date and time stamps are used whenever possible. Do not rely on this map alone to make decisions for yourself or your group. Act thoughtfully and remember you don't need to be in the belly of the beast in order to slay it.

---

---

DallasAg 94 said:

---

Liberals have been building up the explosives for months. At the specified time, they will light it and it will ALL burn.

And then we'll hear they need Fed money to rebuild.

---

Quote:

---

The courthouse where the trial will take place has been fortified. It is surrounded by barricades, fencing and concrete barriers. The space between the layers of fencing has been filled with razor wire. Surrounding buildings and storefronts are boarded up. The same kinds of preparations are being made at five police precincts in the surrounding area.

To supplement its own law enforcement resources, Minneapolis has brought in over 1,000 additional police officers from surrounding jurisdictions. Two thousand National Guardsmen have been deployed. The city has already laid on additional grief counselors and trauma counselors as well. The State of Minnesota has set aside $35 million for security during the trial.

---

Quote:

---

Virtually all the 2,500 individuals who work in the courthouse when it is in full operation will be removed from the building for the duration of the trial. That includes the judges. All 58 of the judges not involved in the Chauvin trial will conduct trials and hearings from computer screens in their homes.

---

DallasAg 94 said:

---

They are only insane if you ignore the racially charged rhetoric they've been fomenting.

It is like getting Mike Tyson ready for a fight... you vmcan charge him up and hold him back only for a time. Release him and disaster ensues.

Minnesota is going to burn. The riots, looting, and burning for 2021 will exceed 2020.

---

MookieBlaylock said:

---

They have to change venue
In no way can Chauvin get a fair trial with that b.s. going on

---

Quote:

---

(F. Lee) Bailey appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, which agreed to hear the case in Sheppard v. Maxwell. On June 6, 1966, the Supreme Court, by an 8-to-1 vote, struck down the murder conviction. The decision noted, among other factors, that a "carnival atmosphere" had permeated the trial, and that the trial judge, Edward J. Blythin, who had died in 1958, was biased against Sheppard because Judge Blythin had refused to sequester the jury, did not order the jury to ignore and disregard media reports of the case, and when speaking to newspaper columnist Dorothy Kilgallen shortly before the trial started said, "Well, he's guilty as hell. There's no question about it."

---

30wedge said:

---

Hold the trial out in the desert. Have towers with machine guns to take care of riots. Can't burn or do much damage to sand and the normal courthouse activities can go on uninterrupted.

---