Sounds to me the state is arguing that the district court doesn't have continuing jurisdiction due to the lack of finality of the appeal on the reintroduction of the third degree murder charge. It is a question of double jeopardy attaching once the jury is chosen.

The judge has pointed out that as a lesser included offense, that charge could be requested to be added during the stage of charging the jury..

State responds that they want to try the case on the third degree charge from the get-go and not wait until after voir dire is complete. Primarily because the appeal to the Supreme Court will not be final before the likely end of the trial.

Defense counsel is informing the court they are about to file the petition for review with the state Supreme Court within a day or two. Nelson asserts the court still has jurisdiction over the other two charges and can proceed to trial.

Cahill says he has authority to proceed with jury selection. He further says he'll grant a recess so the state can decide whether they want to file a writ of mandamus to the Court of Appeals based on Cahill's decision to proceed with jury selection.

State has said they intend to appeal his decision to go forward with jury selection immediately to the Court of Appeals. Cahill suggests they try to do that telephonically given that the prospective jurors are already in the courthouse and have been preliminarily instructed.

Cahill grants another recess until 10:00 AM to reassess where they are and if he'll send the prospective jurors home. (Sounds like he's inclined to kick them lose for today and try again tomorrow.)

So we'll have to wait and see how fast the Court of Appeals agrees to act.

Remember, the entire courthouse is empty except for this case.

So is the State already backpedaling on the Murder 1 charge? Isn't that huge news?

What's your take on this, ms. hawg? Just curious, as I haven't really followed this case much, and it just seems absurd to me. My take is this will be something like 50% scale OJ trial, but in reverse (races and facts).

There's no real doubt in my mind he is innocent of the charges (especially murder if common law is applied, which I know their statute is odd), yet the jury challenge/and much of the public (woke portion) wants a conviction, damn the torpedoes. The pro bono (or not, haven't seen that disclosed) high dollar attorneys trying to convict him to make a name for themselves also has me concerned.

Anyway, I haven't followed, but hope the sane view isn't that this guy is going to prison for life to make BLM folks feel better about their cause.

wbt5845 said:

---

So is the State already backpedaling on the Murder 1 charge? Isn't that huge news?

---

He was never charged with murder 1. Murder 2, manslaughter and murder 3. Last fall Judge Cahill threw out the murder 3 charge because Minnesota law is quirky in that it requires a "depraved mind" element. Meaning the person so charged acted so recklessly to endanger any and all people around him. Clearly, that didn't happen in this case.

However, in the meantime the Court of Appeals ruled in a separate case that another police office who shot a woman who had reported a sexual assault taking place when she approached the squad car (the Noor case) that the third degree murder charge was proper in that case. Judge Cahill believed (correctly in my view) that the Noor case was distinguishable upon its facts and was not binding precedent in the Chauvin case. State appealed that decision and last Friday the state court of appeals reversed and remanded it back to Judge Cahill's court.

Now because that ruling just came down, it is not a final decision because there is still time to appeal it to the state supreme court. And indeed defense counsel Nelson informed the court this morning he is filing such a petition imminently. So the leagl question right now is whether Cahill has the jurisdiction to continue with other matters outside the scope of the appeal on the third degree murder charge and can proceed with voir dire.

aggiehawg said:

---

wbt5845 said:

---

So is the State already backpedaling on the Murder 1 charge? Isn't that huge news?

---

He was never charged with murder 1. Murder 2, manslaughter and murder 3. Last fall Judge Cahill threw out the murder 3 charge because Minnesota law is quirky in that it requires a "depraved mind" element. Meaning the person so charged acted so recklessly to endanger any and all people around him. Clearly, that didn't happen in this case.

However, in the meantime the Court of Appeals ruled in a separate case that another police office who shot a woman who had reported a sexual assault taking place when she approached the squad car (the Noor case) that the third degree murder charge was proper in that case. Judge Cahill believed (correctly in my view) that the Noor case was distinguishable upon its facts and was not binding precedent in the Chauvin case. State appealed that decision and last Friday the state court of appeals reversed and remanded it back to Judge Cahill's court.

Now because that ruling just came down, it is not a final decision because there is still time to appeal it to the state supreme court. And indeed defense counsel Nelson informed the court this morning he is filing such a petition imminently. So the leagl question right now is whether Cahill has the jurisdiction to continue with other matters outside the scope of the appeal on the third degree murder charge and can proceed with voir dire.

---

I would be very surprised because adding a new charge in a week before the trial basically forces a complete reevaluation of your case and defense strategy. If they allow that to go through, IMO he's getting railroaded.

nortex97 said:

---

What's your take on this, ms. hawg? Just curious, as I haven't really followed this case much, and it just seems absurd to me. My take is this will be something like 50% scale OJ trial, but in reverse (races and facts).

There's no real doubt in my mind he is innocent of the charges (especially murder if common law is applied, which I know their statute is odd), yet the jury challenge/and much of the public (woke portion) wants a conviction, damn the torpedoes. The pro bono (or not, haven't seen that disclosed) high dollar attorneys trying to convict him to make a name for themselves also has me concerned.

Anyway, I haven't followed, but hope the sane view isn't that this guy is going to prison for life to make BLM folks feel better about their cause.

---

My take is that the prosecution has an uphill battle nearing Sisyphus proportions. The medical testimony is muddled and unclear as to the manner of death. There are questions of excessive force, yet the police training manual in effect at the time allowed for that type of neck restraint. So there are questions of intent as well.

AG Ellision way overcharged Chauvin and didn't leave himself much wiggle room. That's why the prosecution is pushing so hard to get the murder 3 charge reinstated. They know giving the jury an exit ramp, that is to say not murder 2 nor even manslaughter would be proven beyond a reasonable doubt but the jury might find Chauvin had the "depraved mind" to have acted extremely recklessly and convict him of that.

Quote:

---

I would be very surprised because adding a new charge in a week before the trial basically forces a complete reevaluation of your case and defense strategy. If they allow that to go through, IMO he's getting railroaded.

---

Well, yes and no. It isn't like the defense was never aware there could be a possible murder 3 charge. And defense counsel told the court he was prepared to go forward with jury selection whichever way the ultimate decision on the murder 3 charge came down from the state supreme court.

IOW, he showed no signs of asking for a continuance on that basis. If he wanted to preserve error for appeal on that issue alone, he would have said so this morning, in my view.

Aggiehawg, please explain this to me like I am 5.

Good Poster said:

---

Aggiehawg, please explain this to me like I am 5.

---

Explain which part? What happened in court this morning?

aggiehawg said:

---

Good Poster said:

---

Aggiehawg, please explain this to me like I am 5.

---

Explain which part? What happened in court this morning?

---

Could you explain Twhat has happened thus far today and what we can expect to happen the rest of the day in simpleton's terms. TIA.

Good Poster said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Good Poster said:

---

Aggiehawg, please explain this to me like I am 5.

---

Explain which part? What happened in court this morning?

---

Could you explain Twhat has happened thus far today and what we can expect to happen the rest of the day in simpleton's terms. TIA.

---

The Judge had no other choice but to send the prospective jurors home today because of the actions of the prosecution. Procedural maneuvers stemming from the state's desire to reinstate the the third degree murder charge. Since that particular charge is still in limbo with no final judgment it will be appealed further.

Prosecution objected to Cahill's decision to proceed with jury selection and informed the court they are immediately filing an extraordinary writ of prohibition to the court of appeals staying Cahill's court from proceeding with jury selection.

There are still other matters before the court that can be addressed besides the actual jury selection process. Court is supposed to reconvene at 10:00 to discuss those matters.

But there will be no jury selection today. Depending on how the state court of appeals acts on the prosecutions writ, (deny or accept) there will be a delay until they rule. Of course the prosecution could also appeal to the state supreme court if the court of appeals denies the writ.

So, everything is on hold as to the jury. As a practical matter, if the delay continues for weeks or a month or so, that panel will likely be jettisoned and the entire process begins again.

While I was typing, Cahill came back in and then recessed until 1:30 PM. to hear back from the court of appeal as to whether they can proceed with jury selection.

Good stuff, thanks!

aggiehawg said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

What's your take on this, ms. hawg? Just curious, as I haven't really followed this case much, and it just seems absurd to me. My take is this will be something like 50% scale OJ trial, but in reverse (races and facts).

There's no real doubt in my mind he is innocent of the charges (especially murder if common law is applied, which I know their statute is odd), yet the jury challenge/and much of the public (woke portion) wants a conviction, damn the torpedoes. The pro bono (or not, haven't seen that disclosed) high dollar attorneys trying to convict him to make a name for themselves also has me concerned.

Anyway, I haven't followed, but hope the sane view isn't that this guy is going to prison for life to make BLM folks feel better about their cause.

---

My take is that the prosecution has an uphill battle nearing Sisyphus proportions. The medical testimony is muddled and unclear as to the manner of death. There are questions of excessive force, yet the police training manual in effect at the time allowed for that type of neck restraint. So there are questions of intent as well.

AG Ellision way overcharged Chauvin and didn't leave himself much wiggle room. That's why the prosecution is pushing so hard to get the murder 3 charge reinstated. They know giving the jury an exit ramp, that is to say not murder 2 nor even manslaughter would be proven beyond a reasonable doubt but the jury might find Chauvin had the "depraved mind" to have acted extremely recklessly and convict him of that.

---

Debatable, and exactly what the jury is determining. Again, the medical report states that George Floyd ruled the manner of death a homicide, not muddled. Chauvin did not use the restraint technique as taught to them and refused the recovery position described in the police training manual. If Chauvin did everything correctly or "by the book", then I would be right there with you guys but he didn't. (E: for links.)

The ME's opinions on the manner of death is just that, an opinion. That doesn't make it a fact. The jury can disregard it if they find the evidence does not otherwise support it.

While we were waiting for the court to come into session today, Court TV did a profile on the lead defense counsel, Eric Nelson. A 20 year pro at criminal defense, his colleagues described him as not a flamboyant trial attorney but quite and effective one in being able to hone in on weaknesses in the prosecution's case and ensuring the jury fully understands those weaknesses when weighed against the beyond a reasonable doubt standard.

From that description, I feel pretty confident Nelson will be able to handle the ME on cross to attack his credibility in this case.

2PacShakur said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

What's your take on this, ms. hawg? Just curious, as I haven't really followed this case much, and it just seems absurd to me. My take is this will be something like 50% scale OJ trial, but in reverse (races and facts).

There's no real doubt in my mind he is innocent of the charges (especially murder if common law is applied, which I know their statute is odd), yet the jury challenge/and much of the public (woke portion) wants a conviction, damn the torpedoes. The pro bono (or not, haven't seen that disclosed) high dollar attorneys trying to convict him to make a name for themselves also has me concerned.

Anyway, I haven't followed, but hope the sane view isn't that this guy is going to prison for life to make BLM folks feel better about their cause.

---

My take is that the prosecution has an uphill battle nearing Sisyphus proportions. The medical testimony is muddled and unclear as to the manner of death. There are questions of excessive force, yet the police training manual in effect at the time allowed for that type of neck restraint. So there are questions of intent as well.

AG Ellision way overcharged Chauvin and didn't leave himself much wiggle room. That's why the prosecution is pushing so hard to get the murder 3 charge reinstated. They know giving the jury an exit ramp, that is to say not murder 2 nor even manslaughter would be proven beyond a reasonable doubt but the jury might find Chauvin had the "depraved mind" to have acted extremely recklessly and convict him of that.

---

Debatable, and exactly what the jury is determining. Again, the medical report states that George Floyd ruled the manner of death a homicide, not muddled. Chauvin did not use the restraint technique as taught to them and refused the recovery position described in the police training manual. If Chauvin did everything correctly or "by the book", then I would be right there with you guys but he didn't. (E: for links.)

---

That is AN OPINION, not a fact.

For anyone interested Andrew Branca, noted expert in self-defense criminal law will be following the Floyd trial for Legal Insurrection blog. He gave running commentary throughout the George Zimmerman trial too.

https://lawofselfdefense.com/george-floyd-files/ That's his website on all things Floyd related. In real time he will be posting on Parler.

Quote:

---

For those interested in following that content, I'm on Parler using the handle @LawofSelfDefense.

---

aginlakeway said:

---

2PacShakur said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

What's your take on this, ms. hawg? Just curious, as I haven't really followed this case much, and it just seems absurd to me. My take is this will be something like 50% scale OJ trial, but in reverse (races and facts).

There's no real doubt in my mind he is innocent of the charges (especially murder if common law is applied, which I know their statute is odd), yet the jury challenge/and much of the public (woke portion) wants a conviction, damn the torpedoes. The pro bono (or not, haven't seen that disclosed) high dollar attorneys trying to convict him to make a name for themselves also has me concerned.

Anyway, I haven't followed, but hope the sane view isn't that this guy is going to prison for life to make BLM folks feel better about their cause.

---

My take is that the prosecution has an uphill battle nearing Sisyphus proportions. The medical testimony is muddled and unclear as to the manner of death. There are questions of excessive force, yet the police training manual in effect at the time allowed for that type of neck restraint. So there are questions of intent as well.

AG Ellision way overcharged Chauvin and didn't leave himself much wiggle room. That's why the prosecution is pushing so hard to get the murder 3 charge reinstated. They know giving the jury an exit ramp, that is to say not murder 2 nor even manslaughter would be proven beyond a reasonable doubt but the jury might find Chauvin had the "depraved mind" to have acted extremely recklessly and convict him of that.

---

Debatable, and exactly what the jury is determining. Again, the medical report states that George Floyd ruled the manner of death a homicide, not muddled. Chauvin did not use the restraint technique as taught to them and refused the recovery position described in the police training manual. If Chauvin did everything correctly or "by the book", then I would be right there with you guys but he didn't. (E: for links.)

---

That is AN OPINION, not a fact.

---

The ME based their decision on facts, their medical training, and/or their medical experience to add 2 and 2. They weren't sharing their opinion regarding pineapple on pizza, and the gravity of the two opinions are not the same.

Thanks for your insight. My lack of knowledge of Minnesota criminal law is only equaled by my lack of knowledge of all criminal law.

2PacShakur said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

What's your take on this, ms. hawg? Just curious, as I haven't really followed this case much, and it just seems absurd to me. My take is this will be something like 50% scale OJ trial, but in reverse (races and facts).

There's no real doubt in my mind he is innocent of the charges (especially murder if common law is applied, which I know their statute is odd), yet the jury challenge/and much of the public (woke portion) wants a conviction, damn the torpedoes. The pro bono (or not, haven't seen that disclosed) high dollar attorneys trying to convict him to make a name for themselves also has me concerned.

Anyway, I haven't followed, but hope the sane view isn't that this guy is going to prison for life to make BLM folks feel better about their cause.

---

My take is that the prosecution has an uphill battle nearing Sisyphus proportions. The medical testimony is muddled and unclear as to the manner of death. There are questions of excessive force, yet the police training manual in effect at the time allowed for that type of neck restraint. So there are questions of intent as well.

AG Ellision way overcharged Chauvin and didn't leave himself much wiggle room. That's why the prosecution is pushing so hard to get the murder 3 charge reinstated. They know giving the jury an exit ramp, that is to say not murder 2 nor even manslaughter would be proven beyond a reasonable doubt but the jury might find Chauvin had the "depraved mind" to have acted extremely recklessly and convict him of that.

---

Debatable, and exactly what the jury is determining. Again, the medical report states that George Floyd ruled the manner of death a homicide, not muddled. Chauvin did not use the restraint technique as taught to them and refused the recovery position described in the police training manual. If Chauvin did everything correctly or "by the book", then I would be right there with you guys but he didn't. (E: for links.)

---

Just to note, 2pac is referencing Press release the Hennepin ME put out on May 28 which labels it as homicide for the purposes of "vital statistics and public health."

What I think is more fascinating (and an indication that the general public is not looking in the right place) was the the FBI 302 report linked in the earlier part of this thread. On pages 2 and 3 they state that Andrew Baker (the Hennepin County Medical Examiner who performed the autopsy) "defined the mechanism of death as Floyd's heart and lungs stopping due to the combined effects of his health problems and as well as the exertion and restraint involved in Floyd's interaction with the police prior to being on the ground."

If that quote is accurate, the question we should be asking is whether the way he wrestled with officers into and out of the squad car meets the criteria for the charges. The kneeling on the neck has all the focus, but if this is true then Floyd's death is caused before that occurs and this is all moot.

Edited for links

2PacShakur said:

---

aginlakeway said:

---

2PacShakur said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

What's your take on this, ms. hawg? Just curious, as I haven't really followed this case much, and it just seems absurd to me. My take is this will be something like 50% scale OJ trial, but in reverse (races and facts).

There's no real doubt in my mind he is innocent of the charges (especially murder if common law is applied, which I know their statute is odd), yet the jury challenge/and much of the public (woke portion) wants a conviction, damn the torpedoes. The pro bono (or not, haven't seen that disclosed) high dollar attorneys trying to convict him to make a name for themselves also has me concerned.

Anyway, I haven't followed, but hope the sane view isn't that this guy is going to prison for life to make BLM folks feel better about their cause.

---

My take is that the prosecution has an uphill battle nearing Sisyphus proportions. The medical testimony is muddled and unclear as to the manner of death. There are questions of excessive force, yet the police training manual in effect at the time allowed for that type of neck restraint. So there are questions of intent as well.

AG Ellision way overcharged Chauvin and didn't leave himself much wiggle room. That's why the prosecution is pushing so hard to get the murder 3 charge reinstated. They know giving the jury an exit ramp, that is to say not murder 2 nor even manslaughter would be proven beyond a reasonable doubt but the jury might find Chauvin had the "depraved mind" to have acted extremely recklessly and convict him of that.

---

Debatable, and exactly what the jury is determining. Again, the medical report states that George Floyd ruled the manner of death a homicide, not muddled. Chauvin did not use the restraint technique as taught to them and refused the recovery position described in the police training manual. If Chauvin did everything correctly or "by the book", then I would be right there with you guys but he didn't. (E: for links.)

---

That is AN OPINION, not a fact.

---

The ME based their decision on facts, their medical training, and/or their medical experience to add 2 and 2. They weren't sharing their opinion regarding pineapple on pizza, and the gravity of the two opinions are not the same.

---

I'll go with the attorney who posted this in reply to what you wrote ...

"The ME's opinions on the manner of death is just that, an opinion. That doesn't make it a fact. The jury can disregard it if they find the evidence does not otherwise support it."

Quote:

---

The ME based their decision on facts, their medical training, and/or their medical experience to add 2 and 2. They weren't sharing their opinion regarding pineapple on pizza, and the gravity of the two opinions are not the same.

---

Yeah, about "expert witnesses" you do know they come in all sizes and varying opinions. The jury gets to decide as the trier of fact which "expert" they find more credible in their opinion given all of the facts adduced at trial.

That will also apply to excessive force experts likely to be called as witnesses.

One other tidbit, Eric Nelson was the lawyer recommended by the Minneapolis Police Union to Chauvin. I'll assume they have high confidence in his abilities in criminal cases against their own officers.

Quote:

---

On pages 2 and 3 they state that Andrew Baker (the Hennepin County Medical Examiner who performed the autopsy) "defined the mechanism of death as Floyd's heart and lungs stopping due to the combined effects of his health problems and as well as the exertion and restraint involved in Floyd's interaction with the police prior to being on the ground."

---

Prior to being on the ground being the operative words there.

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

On pages 2 and 3 they state that Andrew Baker (the Hennepin County Medical Examiner who performed the autopsy) "defined the mechanism of death as Floyd's heart and lungs stopping due to the combined effects of his health problems and as well as the exertion and restraint involved in Floyd's interaction with the police prior to being on the ground."

---

Prior to being on the ground being the operative words there.

---

The ME is saying the physical interaction happened to him prior to being on the ground, not that the heart stopped prior to being on the ground. If it was math equation, he's saying (Floyd's general health) + (exertion & restraint in the interaction with the police prior to being on the ground) resulted in (=) Floyd's mechanism of death.

Quote:

---

The ME is saying the physical interaction happened to him prior to being on the ground, not that the heart stopped prior to being on the ground. If it was math equation, he's saying (Floyd's general health) + (exertion & restraint in the interaction with the police prior to being on the ground) resulted in (=) Floyd's mechanism of death.

---

Meaning the knee to the neck was not the sole mechanism of injury. Indeed, there were no signs of injury to Floyd's neck or throat.

And has been pointed out repeatedly, it takes both carotid arteries to be compressed to deny blood borne oxygen and then unconsciousness happens in a matter of seconds, not eight minutes. Nor does the autopsy bear that theory out.

aggiehawg said:

---

Andy McCarthy weighs in.

Quote:

---

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.

---

---

Interesting McCarthy thinks the manslaughter charge is a slam dunk if the prosecutor's proffer is accurate and the jury is rational. Is it me, or is he wrong about as often as he is right?

bqce said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Andy McCarthy weighs in.

Quote:

---

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.

---

---

Interesting McCarthy thinks the manslaughter charge is a slam dunk if the prosecutor's proffer is accurate and the jury is rational. Is it me, or is he wrong about as often as he is right?

---

You missed his hedge on that.

Quote:

---

This is why the trial judge, Peter Cahill of the Fourth District Court in Minneapolis's Hennepin County, denied a motion to dismiss this second-degree murder count. It is never certain before trial that the state's evidence will unfold as the prosecutor predicts, and the defense could present proof that puts matters in a more exculpatory light. But on a pretrial dismissal motion, the court must assume the facts, and the rational inferences that flow from them, in the light most favorable to the prosecution. On that standard, a rational jury could find beyond a reasonable doubt that Chauvin's neck restraint did become an assault in which the former officer intended to cause Floyd bodily harm.

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.

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

The ME is saying the physical interaction happened to him prior to being on the ground, not that the heart stopped prior to being on the ground. If it was math equation, he's saying (Floyd's general health) + (exertion & restraint in the interaction with the police prior to being on the ground) resulted in (=) Floyd's mechanism of death.

---

Meaning the knee to the neck was not the sole mechanism of injury. Indeed, there were no signs of injury to Floyd's neck or throat.

And has been pointed out repeatedly, it takes both carotid arteries to be compressed to deny blood borne oxygen and then unconsciousness happens in a matter of seconds, not eight minutes. Nor does the autopsy bear that theory out.

---

I've said - repeatedly - you're pushing a standard that would require people to carry their complete medical records with them, documenting their arteriosclerosis, medical history, lab values, list their prescription (or recreational) medicines so the police could apply a matrix to determine the "appropriate" amount of force. Americans are not by guilty or at fault for being unhealthy (if they were, then there's probably a case for universal health care.)

As stated in the 302, Floyd was healthy enough to play basketball and move some furniture; (Floyd's health) + [(basketball) or (moving furniture)] didn't result in a death. So he wasn't ready to "pop" into the afterlife like people are making him out to be. In fact, they ask the ME where specifically Floyd appears to be critically ill in the videos. The ME states he didn't appear critically ill in two other situations in the videos but specifically states he's critically ill when Chauvin had the knee on him.

And again, as stated by the ME in the 302, airways, arteries, etc. does not have to be completely blocked in order to have adverse affects. And I agree with you, the fact that it required 8 minutes just goes to show how persistently negative and adverse Chauvin's action had to be in order to result in the outcome.

2PacShakur said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

The ME is saying the physical interaction happened to him prior to being on the ground, not that the heart stopped prior to being on the ground. If it was math equation, he's saying (Floyd's general health) + (exertion & restraint in the interaction with the police prior to being on the ground) resulted in (=) Floyd's mechanism of death.

---

Meaning the knee to the neck was not the sole mechanism of injury. Indeed, there were no signs of injury to Floyd's neck or throat.

And has been pointed out repeatedly, it takes both carotid arteries to be compressed to deny blood borne oxygen and then unconsciousness happens in a matter of seconds, not eight minutes. Nor does the autopsy bear that theory out.

---

I've said - repeatedly - you're pushing a standard that would require people to carry their complete medical records with them, documenting their arteriosclerosis, medical history, lab values, list their prescription (or recreational) medicines so the police could apply a matrix to determine the "appropriate" amount of force. Americans are not by guilty or at fault for being unhealthy (if they were, then there's probably a case for universal health care.)

As stated in the 302, Floyd was healthy enough to play basketball and move some furniture; (Floyd's health) + [(basketball) or (moving furniture)] didn't result in a death. So he wasn't ready to "pop" into the afterlife like people are making him out to be. In fact, they ask the ME where specifically Floyd appears to be critically ill in the videos. The ME states he didn't appear critically ill in two other situations in the videos but specifically states he's critically ill when Chauvin had the knee on him.

And again, as stated by the ME in the 302, airways, arteries, etc. does not have to be completely blocked in order to have adverse affects. And I agree with you, the fact that it required 8 minutes just goes to show how persistently negative and adverse Chauvin's action had to be in order to result in the outcome.

---

She didn't say that.

Quote:

---

I've said - repeatedly - you're pushing a standard that would require people to carry their complete medical records with them, documenting their arteriosclerosis, medical history, lab values, list their prescription (or recreational) medicines so the police could apply a matrix to determine the "appropriate" amount of force. Americans are not by guilty or at fault for being unhealthy (if they were, then there's probably a case for universal health care.)

---

That is Swiftian in its breadth of absurdity. I am not pushing any standard other than beyond a reasonable doubt. And that applies to every single element of the offenses as charged.

The fact that the ME was unable to answer the but/for question as to the manner of death introduces a lot of reasonable doubt. But/for Chauvin's knee, would Floyd have died? He can't answer that critical question.

Neither can Dr. Baden since he delivered his "findings" before receiving any of the tox or tissue sample reports. So his opinion is also subject to reasonable doubt.

I fully expect that Chauvin will be convicted of something just because of jury intimidation. But his conviction to be reversed upon appeal.

One other item, the Noor case. That officer discharged his firearm from within the squad car and across his own partner's body. There is nothing in the police training manual approving the discharge of his weapon under those circumstances. On those grounds alone it is my contention that Noor was not binding precedent upon Cahill's court in the Chauvin case and expect the Minnesota state supreme court to find such distinction as well. (And FTR: even Andy McCarthy has changed his mind on the murder three charge once he became more familiar the quirks in Minnesota law involving such a charge.)

2PacShakur said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

The ME is saying the physical interaction happened to him prior to being on the ground, not that the heart stopped prior to being on the ground. If it was math equation, he's saying (Floyd's general health) + (exertion & restraint in the interaction with the police prior to being on the ground) resulted in (=) Floyd's mechanism of death.

---

Meaning the knee to the neck was not the sole mechanism of injury. Indeed, there were no signs of injury to Floyd's neck or throat.

And has been pointed out repeatedly, it takes both carotid arteries to be compressed to deny blood borne oxygen and then unconsciousness happens in a matter of seconds, not eight minutes. Nor does the autopsy bear that theory out.

---

I've said - repeatedly - you're pushing a standard that would require people to carry their complete medical records with them, documenting their arteriosclerosis, medical history, lab values, list their prescription (or recreational) medicines so the police could apply a matrix to determine the "appropriate" amount of force. Americans are not by guilty or at fault for being unhealthy (if they were, then there's probably a case for universal health care.)

As stated in the 302, Floyd was healthy enough to play basketball and move some furniture; (Floyd's health) + [(basketball) or (moving furniture)] didn't result in a death. So he wasn't ready to "pop" into the afterlife like people are making him out to be. In fact, they ask the ME where specifically Floyd appears to be critically ill in the videos. The ME states he didn't appear critically ill in two other situations in the videos but specifically states he's critically ill when Chauvin had the knee on him.

And again, as stated by the ME in the 302, airways, arteries, etc. does not have to be completely blocked in order to have adverse affects. And I agree with you, the fact that it required 8 minutes just goes to show how persistently negative and adverse Chauvin's action had to be in order to result in the outcome.

---

Just an opinion (albeit a somewhat educated one) - I sincerely doubt that you could take a person of Chauvin's weight and position them on the back of the neck of a man the size of Floyd and kill them. Throw in fentanyl at about an LD 50 level (will kill about 50% of people), add in meth and marijuana and atherosclerotic disease, I'd say MAYBE. MAYBE.

I say this as someone who has examined patients' airways and watched their 02 saturations under varying degrees of anaesthesia (controlled intoxication). And I've studied patients regarding their suitability for complete carotid artery resection for head and neck surgery.

This case is going to come down to the police training manual and the expert witnesses. And what AggiwHawg recently put out re: statements from the 302 certainly gives the prosecution an uphill battle if they want to get a unanimous verdict.

Edit: Hawg, could the defense stage such an event in court, wherein they had a man of Chauvin's weight kneel on the back of the neck of a man of Floyd's weight for the same amount of time as happened here, then watch the Floyd surrogate get up and walk out of the virtual courtroom?

Quote:

---

Edit: Hawg, could the defense stage such an event in court, wherein they had a man of Chauvin's weight kneel on the back of the neck of a man of Floyd's weight for the same amount of time as happened here, then watch the Floyd surrogate get up and walk out of the virtual courtroom?

---

Sure, if the judge approves it. Need the judge's permission.

ETA: Don't think this judge would approve it over the prosecution's objections, unless the prosecution also wants to do some type of reenactment.

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

I've said - repeatedly - you're pushing a standard that would require people to carry their complete medical records with them, documenting their arteriosclerosis, medical history, lab values, list their prescription (or recreational) medicines so the police could apply a matrix to determine the "appropriate" amount of force. Americans are not by guilty or at fault for being unhealthy (if they were, then there's probably a case for universal health care.)

---

That is Swiftian in its breadth of absurdity. I am not pushing any standard other than beyond a reasonable doubt. And that applies to every single element of the offenses as charged.

The fact that the ME was unable to answer the but/for question as to the manner of death introduces a lot of reasonable doubt. But/for Chauvin's knee, would Floyd have died? He can't answer that critical question.

Neither can Dr. Baden since he delivered his "findings" before receiving any of the tox or tissue sample reports. So his opinion is also subject to reasonable doubt.

I fully expect that Chauvin will be convicted of something just because of jury intimidation. But his conviction to be reversed upon appeal.

One other item, the Noor case. That officer discharged his firearm from within the squad car and across his own partner's body. There is nothing in the police training manual approving the discharge of his weapon under those circumstances. On those grounds alone it is my contention that Noor was not binding precedent upon Cahill's court in the Chauvin case and expect the Minnesota state supreme court to find such distinction as well. (And FTR: even Andy McCarthy has changed his mind on the murder three charge once he became more familiar the quirks in Minnesota law involving such a charge.)

---

The reason why the ME couldn't answer the but/for question, I stated earlier from the 302:

Quote:

---

Quote:
Baker could not provide an answer on a "but for" cause, Baker did not know when someone's heart disease would become lethal. The added stress and exertion that occurred between Floyd and the officers is not something one would want to see in someone with heart disease as significant as Floyd's. Playing basketball and moving furniture may not have had an effect at all. Baker did not believe you could know which activity would cause a disease to exert it's lethal effects.

---

Additionally, Dr. Baden ruled Floyd a homicide too, but I haven't really touched or used his report seeing how it's a private autopsy from the family and from what I understand, private autopsies don't always have the full body and other materials.

Regarding Noor, I can see why they are trying to connect it to Floyd. (TBH, I enjoy some of your legal interpretations as I respect law as - generally speaking - the rules we define how we live and interact with each other. I may not agree with your logic and/or how you came to your conclusion but enjoy your interpretation nonetheless.) Justine Damond was specifically told by the 911 operators to remain in her house and not to "help" the police. I believe dispatch told the officers that the Damond was instructed to remain in the house. So when Noor fired his shot after a loud noise (loud noise as testified by his partner) followed by the approach of a stranger (Justine Damond), he fired a shot because he thought he was under some kind of duress. He was convicted because the jury thought Noor is ultimately responsible for the bullet he released. Similarly, Chauvin should have known his knee would have adverse consequences too for being applied (/ discharged, in a way) for over 8 minutes.