George Floyd / Chauvin trial starts monday

Just watching it now, at this time, Jerry Blackwell seems to have done some good digging into the past and is scoring some points.

But it really is hard without a transcript to keep track of, plus i am doing other things, lol.

Nice, Fowler just nailed the point about oxygen reserve - its in your bloodstream, not the eelv - that was the guy Tobin i didnt like. so glad to see a medical expert bring that one up.

Hypopharyx - no physiology journals. Now Jerry is measuring a volume eelv, in terms of mm of mercury. Dr Fowler has just admitted he would defer to a pulmonary physician. Dr Fowler has also now said that pressure on the soft side of the neck is not shown in the journals as causing restriction of the hypopharynx. It would be much better if Fowler knew this subject, so the defence need a pulmonary physician.

Fowler got eaten alive. He was basically a witness for the prosecution.

dude with a question wrote:

Fowler got eaten alive. He was basically a witness for the prosecution.

What are some examples that make you state this?

I heavily disagree. He stated the lack of bruising to the neck and back indicates Floyd wasn’t as oxygen deprived as toobin said.

David Fowler is cited in here (he wanted a published study on bias in forensic science retracted - bad for his business)

:

Not CNN wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

The police have no authority to use deadly force unless their lives are threatened - or those of others. Resisting arrest are not grounds for killing anyone.

The point is the cops were not acting as executioners, and no force would ever need to be used if people would follow simple commands an not resist. Why do you keep avoiding that actuality?

You seem to have trouble understanding the law, that the police are not entitled to kill people for not following instructions. Given your skills at comprehension it seems that you would be at considerable risk yourself.

yawn wrote:

I heavily disagree. He stated the lack of bruising to the neck and back indicates Floyd wasn’t as oxygen deprived as toobin said.

— also he didn’t properly calculate the weight

— he said that an examiner should be thorough, and then said he got his data from the defense

— he also said he didn’t know if the car was running and the oxygen deprivation could’ve also been in combination with the co2

— he was forced to admit that the white object could’ve been anything

Essentially, it’s he jurors will probably take everything he said with a grain of salt in his initial testimony

dude with a question wrote:

yawn wrote:

I heavily disagree. He stated the lack of bruising to the neck and back indicates Floyd wasn’t as oxygen deprived as toobin said.

— also he didn’t properly calculate the weight

— he said that an examiner should be thorough, and then said he got his data from the defense

— he also said he didn’t know if the car was running and the oxygen deprivation could’ve also been in combination with the co2

— he was forced to admit that the white object could’ve been anything

Essentially, it’s he jurors will probably take everything he said with a grain of salt in his initial testimony

He was about as credible as a "fake moon-landing" expert.

"I can breathe now"

LMAO

whats this about new lab test results that werent disclosed?

dude with a question wrote:

yawn wrote:

I heavily disagree. He stated the lack of bruising to the neck and back indicates Floyd wasn’t as oxygen deprived as toobin said.

— also he didn’t properly calculate the weight

— he said that an examiner should be thorough, and then said he got his data from the defense

— he also said he didn’t know if the car was running and the oxygen deprivation could’ve also been in combination with the co2

— he was forced to admit that the white object could’ve been anything

Essentially, it’s he jurors will probably take everything he said with a grain of salt in his initial testimony

Of course he couldn’t identify the pill, but the presence of the white object along with the pill residue in the squad car is enough to convince at least a few jurors it was a pill.

Even if his weight was off, his general point is still valid. A lot more valid then some quack who claims he saw into Floyd’s blood oxygen levels through a cell phone video.

"Mr. Floyd goes from making clear statements … and then there's a period of about forty-five seconds of silence but he's still moving … and there's a sudden relaxation" more consistent with cardiac arrest, he testified.

https://www.startribune.com/cardiac-arrest-and-drugs-not-low-oxygen-caused-floyd-s-death-defense-expert-says/600046038/

cranola. defense rests?

Have i missed something or is DC toast?

pupil3142 wrote:

whats this about new lab test results that werent disclosed?

Prosecution wanted to introduce lab tests they never provided to defense on the carbon monoxide issue. Cahill shut that down.

The defense made a mistake having Fowler ever mention carbon monoxide. It has nothing to do with anything and Fowler just threw it out there. It wasn't a major part of his opinions. But by mentioning it, the prosecution was able to deflect attention away from the key points Fowler made. The media, which all the jurors are watching, was able to play it up enormously last night as desperation move by the defense. Just a really bad tactical move, by Nelson (who really just sucks as an attorney) or by Fowler if he just said it unscripted.

carbon monoxide poisoning from a nearby exhaust pipe looks crazy

its interesting that i have just watched part of the bit where DC, Nelson and the judge talk about whether DC should testify. 5th amendment etc.

The old - the court / jury / judge etc cannot be influenced in any way, particularly negatively by your refusal to testify.

I would love to see that challenged.

i dont care about this case, in this instance, but i hypothesise;

if you dont testify, the jury think you are guilty and the judge hates you

human nature, i dont care how they couch it.

pupil3142 wrote:

its interesting that i have just watched part of the bit where DC, Nelson and the judge talk about whether DC should testify. 5th amendment etc.

The old - the court / jury / judge etc cannot be influenced in any way, particularly negatively by your refusal to testify.

I would love to see that challenged.

i dont care about this case, in this instance, but i hypothesise;

if you dont testify, the jury think you are guilty and the judge hates you

human nature, i dont care how they couch it.

I think people in the US have enough awareness of the 5th Amendment, and that defendants rarely testify, to not hold it against them. I think most people realize its a complicated decision, whether innocent or guilty.

That said, the talking heads will be all over the issue tonight.

as you say, i am sure that pretend lawyers will make a big deal about his not testifying.

having said that, i think Nelson has done a crap job, as evidenced by the background that the prosecution had done on the defense witnesses, whereas Nelson hardly questioned the prosecution witnesses.

My prediction now, (vs what i might have thought before)

second degree murder - 5% (0%)

third degree murder - 10% (5%)

second degree manslaughter - 60% (40%)

innocent of all charges - 25% (55%)

appeal - 100%

riots and looting - 100%

So i dont think the trial went well for the prosecution - i think Nelson gave them a free ride.

pupil3142 wrote:

as you say, i am sure that pretend lawyers will make a big deal about his not testifying.

having said that, i think Nelson has done a crap job, as evidenced by the background that the prosecution had done on the defense witnesses, whereas Nelson hardly questioned the prosecution witnesses.

My prediction now, (vs what i might have thought before)

second degree murder - 5% (0%)

third degree murder - 10% (5%)

second degree manslaughter - 60% (40%)

innocent of all charges - 25% (55%)

appeal - 100%

riots and looting - 100%

So i dont think the trial went well for the prosecution - i think Nelson gave them a free ride.

I agree with your last statement. It didn’t help Nelson though that it was basically him vs. the State of Minnesota.

I think chance of the manslaughter charge is closer to 75%.