Bad day for the Prosecution in Chauvin trial

[mrjurrs]

And what difference would it make if he said " ain't do no drugs"?That doesn't help the prosecution's case.

We know he did.

Because the defense wanted the jury to believe he said " I ate too many drugs".

 

[KLATTU]

Because the defense wanted the jury to believe he said " I ate too many drugs".

....And it's definitely plausible since he did.( 3 x the amount considered a lethal dose)
It doesn't help the prosecution or hurt the defense one bit if jurors concluded he didn't say that.

 

[Sand Castle]

If Floyd indeed said he ate too many drugs, then as trained, Chauvin was obligated to administer Narcan.

I believe a forensic expert on medications will blow the Fentanyl case up. Too much time elapsed from the supposed ingestion for respiratory arrest.

Anyways, ate too much, knee on neck, Floyd not responding, Narcan!

Absolutely no excuse for Chauvins negligence. Although, it is becoming clear, Chauvin purposely didn't provide first aid/ CPR, he purposely didn't allow help from EMT bystander and he delayed on duty medical help

 

[RaleBulgarian]

Or how hard I cried the day they strapped Ted Bundy into Old Sparky.

It was too bad that he didn’t get the Dahmer treatment.

 

[GDViking]

Or how hard I cried the day they strapped Ted Bundy into Old Sparky.

I hope they had the amps very low so he died slow.

But then again I've been told I can be not such a nice person so...

 

[lwf]

Even though one fellow officer says it was excessive force, he said he could of used MORE force to subdue him, a taser. A police officer has to make many decisions. Continue to restrain a suspect who previously resisted arrest, for fear of continued resistance if he releases hold. George Floyd was a bigger man and could still over power him if he stopped the restraint.

How? He was handcuffed and face down.

 

[bongsaway]

Common sense, my friend.

(De facto) President Harris has no doubt indirectly (in some ways that this nobody would not know) let the big boys (and girls) know that a "Not guilty" verdict would plunge the nation into rioting the likes of which would make last year's outrages look like child's play.

The judge, of course, does not want to be known as the judge who let the ex-cop go free. The jury, of course, are terrified of what would happen to them if they came back with "Not guilty."

Of course, the media would love rioting because (a) it would "sell papers" and (b) it would help to spread the mantra that certain folks are treated so badly in this country.

C'mon. We all know the verdict will be GUILTY! (And yet there will still be rioting -- out of joy, of course!)

Common sense is something some people are sorely lacking. Just like your post.

 

[Peter King]

Chauvin Trial Day 8 Wrap-Up: “I Ate Too Many Drugs” Video May Be Game-Changer

Once again the defense weaponizes prosecution 'expert' witnesses against the prosecution case.

legalinsurrection.com

Then Nelson scored what many may perceive to be an important point, albeit I’m rather ambivalent about this one. Nelson played a short piece of video in which Floyd is prone on the street, and speaking in his muttering fashion.

What’s Floyd saying there, asked Nelson? Is he saying “I ate too many drugs”? Stiger answers he can’t tell.

No worries, Nelson is happy to play it again for Stiger. And the jury.

Stiger is still unsure if that’s what Floyd was saying, and Nelson lets it go—but the jury has heard the suggestion.

Later in the day, with a different witness, BCA Special Agent Reyerson, whose testimony I won’t spend much time on because it was so boring, Nelson would play the same video, and ask the same question. This time, the witness will agree—yes, Reyerson answers, it sounds like “I ate too many drugs” to m


Ka. Boom.

So damaging was this Reyerson testimony for the state that they actually re-called Reyerson as a witness for the sole reason of having him listen again, and give a different answer. Oh, now, says Reyerson the second, now it sounds like “I didn’t take no drugs.”

Well, OK. As I said, I’m ambivalent about Floyd’s statement on the merits, because I sure can’t understand what he’s actually saying. Although it must be said Nelson’s version will certainly appear reasonable to a jury that’s been exposed to the toxicology report on Floyd.

But in terms of legal strategy by the defense, this was brilliant. Not only did Nelson plant that seed in the jury’s mind that Floyd had eaten too many drugs and knew it, he got to play the audio for Stiger not once, but twice.

And then again a third time, for Reyerson.

And then the state itself played it for the jury a fourth time!

Amazing.

What is amazing is that people think that is more valuable than the sworn testimony from doctors that said the drugs he had in him did not cause his death and that the officers caused his death by depriving him from oxygen until he was unresponsive/dead. And then did not start CPR on him when they found out they had committed homicide on Floyd

 

[bongsaway]

It can be the 80% contributing factor. If it wasn't THE factor then they will not get a verdict that they are going to be happy with.

It was the factor. Floyd seemed alive and well before the cops arrived, not so much after they were done with him but let's blame anything but the cops.

 

[bongsaway]

And to that I say if there are two different takes on what George Floyd said, it should be ignored by the jury.

That particular phrase was never uttered until the defense put it into the heads of those listening.

 

[bongsaway]

Knee to the neck was a legitimate restraint under the police manual. Tasers are not a restraint technique. It to force compliance and/or to allow police to restrain the suspect after they tase them. Tasers are not what you would do instead of restraining a resisting suspect.

Is knee on the neck of a dead person in the police manual?

 

[Excast]

Is knee on the neck of a dead person in the police manual?

It's right between shooting fleeing suspects in the back and how to properly plant evidence after the fact.

 

[Razoo]

You conservatives believe murder and death by racists is cool ........... it is not cool. This is one racist cop that may bite the dust. Some of his colleagues are saying Chauvin fu-ked up ........ This would set a necessary precedent.

 

[Linuxcooldude]

How? He was handcuffed and face down.

Resisting arrest, prior to being handcuffed.

Actually, if resisting getting back of police car, even when handcuffed, may be applicable.

 

[Linuxcooldude]

Is knee on the neck of a dead person in the police manual?

That was after the fact, not putting a restraint hold on a man known to be dead. Your semantics set aside.

 

[bongsaway]

That was after the fact, not putting a restraint hold on a man known to be dead. Your semantics set aside.

After what fact?

 

[Linuxcooldude]

After what fact?

Restraint was applied when he was alive.

 

[Razoo]

Some of Chauvin colleagues are saying Chauvin fu-ked up ........ This would set a necessary precedent.

 

[KLATTU]

Some of Chauvin colleagues are saying Chauvin fu-ked up ........ This would set a necessary precedent.

Yes,but that won't stop the nitwits from burning shit down if Chauvin is acquitted.The nitwits don't want justice-they want a lynching.

 

[bongsaway]

Restraint was applied when he was alive.

And when he was dead.

 

[poweRob]

At least in theory, assuming the 'entire' jury is fair and impartial, and actually dispenses juris prudence, according the letter of the law.

No way Chauvin is acquitted. The best he can hope for at this point is a single juror who came in with their mind made up to protect the blue no matter what throwing it into a hung jury. Unlike the OP, I've been watching a lot of this trial and it is going horrificly bad for the defense. The witnesses are all destroying the defenses hopes of saying he died by drugs or heart condition or anything else.

 

[poweRob]

How long was Floyd dead before Chauvin quit 'restraining' him?

Almost 4 minutes of extra "restraint" after death.

 

[poweRob]

Or how hard I cried the day they strapped Ted Bundy into Old Sparky.

I lived a little over an hour away from Talahassee when bundy fried. Even where I lived people in solidarity turned off their lights so as to not sap electricity away from him riding the lightening.

 

[poweRob]

Knee to the neck was a legitimate restraint under the police manual. Tasers are not a restraint technique. It to force compliance and/or to allow police to restrain the suspect after they tase them. Tasers are not what you would do instead of restraining a resisting suspect.

Not according to that units' police trainer nor the police chief there. Their testimony said otherwise.

 

[lwf]

Resisting arrest, prior to being handcuffed.

Actually, if resisting getting back of police car, even when handcuffed, may be applicable.

But if he is face down, handcuffed, and saying he can't breathe, and then not moving, then he is not resisting arrest. To continue to exert pressure on his neck after he has lost consciousness, and to fail to provide life-saving measures and leaving him face down in the street shows malice on the part of Chauvin.