George Floyd / Chauvin trial starts monday

I agree with that. And again my first inclination from the brief video I saw was that the restraint must have contributed to his demise. Now I question that but given evidence in an organized manner feel I could contribute to jury and as objectively as possible draw a conclusion on guilt or lack thereof based on charges filed.

Whatley wrote:

I doubt anyone believes Floyd would be dead today if he had just drove away. He is dead because he had a knee on his neck for almost nine mintutes and that should be totally obvious.

Did the cop show up to kill anyone, of course not but once he put his knee on the neck a change came over him and he decided to put an end Floyd.

Floyd probably had a tolerance built up and knew what he could take and being a big guy, well....

Blood serum was about 3 times what can be a fatal dose (typically fatalities start at 3-4 ng/mL). In a study of OD deaths in CT, any blood serum over about 5 ng/mL was fatal (one person at 8 ng/mL was kept alive for a while, but eventually died in the hospital even after narcan was administered). Floyd's blood serum was at 11 ng/mL and had a bad heart. I'm not sure what the paramedics gave him when they arrived on site (whether it was a sedative or narcan). A sedative would have exacerbated the respiratory depression from the fentanyl. Serum levels take into account size (a larger person has a larger blood volume, but the concentration is independent of size for comparison purposes).

He may have driven off before he munched on the pills in an attempt to hide the evidence. Once he munched the pills, it is a crap shoot. You are talking about a big guy in an agitated state (producing cortisol) with a heart condition and enough sedatives to kill a horse. If you can say beyond a reasonable doubt that he would be alive today, either you are being disingenuous or you just don't believe the fact that fentanyl kills hundreds of times more in this country every year than the cops. Fentanyl is a dangerous drug, and it's role in his demise cannot be discounted.

The actual fentanyl level and its clinical correlation is going to be hard for the defense to disavow. The earlier audio of George Floyd already reporting being unable to breathe prior to restraint. It’s a difficult case but as the previous poster mentioned above the question will be be did the officers restraint technique contribute to his demise and if so what degree of criminality is or is not associated with it.

Sorry, prosecution not defense

The non-fatal ones don't get recorded because they don't die or seek medical assistance.

Phenom Man wrote:

comedyre1i3f 3 wrote:

Each day it is looking more and more like this guy simply OD'd on fentanyl by trying to consume a truckload of pills so that the cops couldn't charge him with possession. He did the same thing one year prior:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/ex-officer-on-trial-for-george-floyd-s-death-asks-to-show-jury-an-earlier-arrest/ar-BB1eE3JR?ocid=msedgdhp

Consuming a fatal dose of fentanyl will kill a person, regardless of whether there is a knee on their neck or not. All the cops should walk.

If I consume a lethal dose of fentanyl and then I am shot in the head, did the fentanyl kill me?

If you consume a lethal dose of fentanyl, have hypertensive heart disease, had COVID, and are showing symptoms of overdose (foaming at the mouth, difficulty breathing before being restrained, loss of emotional control, etc.) and someone scares you and you have a heart attack that in your state of respiratory depression causes you to die, are they a murderer? If you don't comply with a police order and have to be restrained, and the restraint causes you to have a heart attack and die, are they murderers? All of those other factors were large contributing factors in his death. to call this a murder requires ignoring everything else.

Didn't this confused person purport to be an expert on American criminal law? I think even a person with layman's knowledge of the American legal system could figure out the legal errors in that paragraph, not to mention the exaggerations.

Phenom Man wrote:

The non-fatal ones don't get recorded because they don't die or seek medical assistance.

Actually, in the study from CT, the non-fatal ones were recorded. A bunch of drug addicts got their hands on some white powder that they thought was cocaine, that actually turned out to be fentanyl. All of the people with a blood serum below 5 ng / mL lived, and everyone above died. So there was some of both populations in the study.

comedyre1i3f 3 wrote:

Phenom Man wrote:

The non-fatal ones don't get recorded because they don't die or seek medical assistance.

Actually, in the study from CT, the non-fatal ones were recorded. A bunch of drug addicts got their hands on some white powder that they thought was cocaine, that actually turned out to be fentanyl. All of the people with a blood serum below 5 ng / mL lived, and everyone above died. So there was some of both populations in the study.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/66/wr/pdfs/mm6604a4.pdf

Weak study. Small sample size, and patients were not regular users of fentanyl. They thought they were purchasing cocaine. Floyd likely had a much higher tolerance to the drug as an active user, and has a physical profile that probably doesn't match up well with any of the people studied given the ages listed and his unique body size. It doesn't prove what you are saying it proves.

If George Floyd was moments away from dying when the police arrived, and they touched him on his shoulder just before he collapsed and died, the police would hardly be guilty of homicide.

The M.E. seemed to think Floyd was going to die on that day regardless of whether he committed a crime and came in contact with the police.

My interest in these types of deaths are based on my once being a police officer and knowing arrest statistics prove that there is no systemic racism. 700,000 police officers made 10,000,000 arrests in 2019 and about two dozen of them involved shooting unarmed suspects. About half of those were African Americans. Of those, after thorough investigations were completed, one of those shootings was ruled as excessive force and the officer was charged with a crime and found guilty and sent to prison.

The biggest problem with police shootings, like Michael Brown, for instance, is that by the time the investigations are over and the facts show the shooting was justified, alarmists who protested with their "hands up, don't shoot" t-shirts have moved on to the next headline grabbing shooting to claim systemic racism and excessive force. They have no interest in the facts or of apologizing to those they libeled.

Not in my hood wrote:

douglas burke wrote:

Only if Biden allows them to.

The Dems did nothing last summer, why would it change?

Biden may want to show he can get things under control fast and keep the people and their businesses, property, safe so he can use how he handled this situation in his 2024 reelection campaign. Biden could say Trump let the Riots go on for months whereas Biden could say he got things under control in a day or 2, Biden could have Special Forces and Military in place before the Verdict is announced and give orders to prioritize the innocent and protect life and property with overwhelming and if necessary lethal force. When the Rioters/Looters see 50-100 or more of them killed in a few seconds, the rest will say I better not. Note Biden has a History as a Law and Order Democrat his 1994 Crime Bill greatly reduced Murders and had the jails full, and Biden did not have The Military under his total control back then.

Muldoon wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

The issue before the court is not what might have killed Floyd if he had not had any encounter with the police (and the suggestion of a possible drug overdose remains highly speculative); the question is what caused his death at the moment when it occurred - and if Chauvin applying his knee to Floyd's death cannot be ruled out as a cause then he is guilty of homicide, regardless of whether that was his intent.

Didn't this confused person purport to be an expert on American criminal law? I think even a person with layman's knowledge of the American legal system could figure out the legal errors in that paragraph, not to mention the exaggerations.

Did you spot this confused person also came up with this blinder;

The defence doesn't "just" need a reasonable doubt; it has to produce evidence - facts - that can show Chauvin didn't cause Floyd's death, or there is no "reasonable doubt". Speculation isn't facts or evidence and there will be more medical experts than otherwise who will be able to testify Floyd's death wasn't an overdose.

I remember yesterday, probably as part of his standard template in interviewing jurors, that the defense clearly said; 'we dont actually need to prove anything or produce any evidence.'

The onus is on the prosecution to prove beyond reasonable doubt.

This is one of the most fundamental mistakes people make of the legal process, and proves you are not a lawyer. Nor am i, but i dont lie about it.

As for the following;

The verdict is going to be quite a disappointment to you - invested as you are in wanting to see a white cop get off from killing a black man like a bug under his foot (sorry, his knee)

I am not invested in either side - i am interested in the deranged views of both sides, and how they are held so passionately.

pupil3142 wrote:

I am not invested in either side - i am interested in the deranged views of both sides, and how they are held so passionately.

also pupil3142 wrote:

Police officers have a right to be safe at work, up to and including kneeling on unconscious suspects' necks.

Right, not invested in either side at all.

baa baa wool wrote:

pupil3142 wrote:

I am not invested in either side - i am interested in the deranged views of both sides, and how they are held so passionately.

also pupil3142 wrote:

Police officers have a right to be safe at work, up to and including kneeling on unconscious suspects' necks.

Right, not invested in either side at all.

I am not invested in one side above another, but i am interested in elements of either side. In this case it happens that one side has a shorter immediate narrative, and there are many areas to explore that are being ignored. That is one of them. Yes i believe in health and safety at work, and procedures for subduing people actually exist for the benefit of both parties. In this case, as i remember, kneeling on a subjects neck is in the procedures.

Thank you for allowing me to explain.

Armstronglivs wrote:

There is no end to the effort that many make here to exonerate a white police officer who has killed a black man - even when the act of killing can be observed occurring over 8 excruciating minutes. It speaks volumes about the attitudes that lead to acts like this. Slavery may have ended over 150 years ago and Jim Crow nearly 60 years ago but some things still haven't changed much in America.

How about the black police officer and Hispanic officer that were involved in this case?

Not in my hood wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

There is no end to the effort that many make here to exonerate a white police officer who has killed a black man - even when the act of killing can be observed occurring over 8 excruciating minutes. It speaks volumes about the attitudes that lead to acts like this. Slavery may have ended over 150 years ago and Jim Crow nearly 60 years ago but some things still haven't changed much in America.

How about the black police officer and Hispanic officer that were involved in this case?

Murder is wrong regardless of ones race, ethnicity etc, God said THOU SHALT NOT KILL, he did not say except for.

Whatley wrote:

I doubt anyone believes Floyd would be dead today if he had just drove away. He is dead because he had a knee on his neck for almost nine mintutes and that should be totally obvious.

Did the cop show up to kill anyone, of course not but once he put his knee on the neck a change came over him and he decided to put an end Floyd.

Floyd probably had a tolerance built up and knew what he could take and being a big guy, well....

Yeah, had he drove away he might still be alive in jail while the family he plowed into while driving on drugs all died. Great!

douglas burke wrote:

Not in my hood wrote:

How about the black police officer and Hispanic officer that were involved in this case?

Murder is wrong regardless of ones race, ethnicity etc, God said THOU SHALT NOT KILL, he did not say except for.

and that is why you are having a trial. so its a good thing, yes? except, obv for the people who wont accept the verdict, or who think it is clear before all the facts are laid out in curt.

Ya know those height/weight charts, if you check out 5-6 200 pounds you will read .....obese. Franco Colombo a former Mr. Oympia wa 5-6 200 pounds of solid muscle. So much for charts.

I started drinking whiskey back in high school, yep would cowboy it, a shot class and.....gone. At first a half pint gave me a buzz, now it's a pint a half pint has no effect at all. I'm pretty sure Floyd had built up a tolerance for all the drugs he was talking and his size was a factor

We have no way of knowing beyond a shadow of a doubt that Floyd was a dead man regardless of what the police did or didn't do, what can be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt a grown man had a knee in the neck until he passed out.

Two cowboys meet out in the street in a classic quick draw, Tex kills Red. Tex is a killer, oh wait a minute Red had left a note, he actually commited suicide. What do we do with Tex?