Armstronglivs wrote:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/04/01/derek-chauvin-trial/
From the above;
Asked his “opinion” on whether that was an appropriate use of force, Pleoger told prosecutors, “When Mr. Floyd was no longer offering up any resistance to the officers, they could have ended the restraint.”
He confirmed that kneeling is a use of force, and that the restraint “should stop” once a subject “is handcuffed and no longer resisting.”
My emphasis in bold. These are not mandatory words. By not saying; our procedures say that you must or shall end the knee restraint under such and such a condition, you are tacitly agreeing that a) the neck restraint is ok in the first place (else how can you end it) and b) you dont have to end it.
i have already gone into the chronology of when a person 'stops resisting'. You often cant know when someone is going to stop resisting until afterwards. c.f. that foottball player toilet fight thread.
If there is negligence on the part of DC that it was surpassingly easy for him to check GFs pulse during the situation, then i am with that 100%. It is surely mindblowingly easy to continually monitor his pulse. Do the procedures say this? is, when the victim shows passive behaviour for sufficient time, suitable methods for checking his wellbeing shall be used, such as pulse and breathing. does it say that? why not if not? note my emphasis on mandatory language, althought the situation is vague.