Derek Chauvin Trial

[audidoody]

He had methamphetamine AND 11ng per ml of fentanyl in his blood according to the lab analysis, which is four times the level that could be fatal.

Hard to see how Chauvin can be convicted with that evidence. Only needs one juror to query the narrative,

[rscott]

audidoody said:

He had methamphetamine AND 11ng per ml of fentanyl in his blood according to the lab analysis, which is four times the level that could be fatal.

Hard to see how Chauvin can be convicted with that evidence. Only needs one juror to query the narrative,

Both autopsies said the drugs in his system weren't the cause of death though.

[rscott]

Thorodin said:

First, I'm not a doctor.

Second, as far as I can remember there are four carotid arteries, two on each side of the neck which carry blood and oxygen to the brain and to the facial muscles. None of these vessels carry oxygen to the lungs, it goes to the head. Blood going the other way does not carry oxygen or Co2. Ergo, no asphyxiation. Secondly, it's glaringly evident that the officer had one of his knees on one side of the neck with his weight on the other (his Right one) leg. The practice was a well-known restraint method widely used to effectively no ill effect.

Thirdly, the prisoner was struggling and shouting wildly and, if released, would have undoubtedly posed a significant danger to the officer.

Can't see the problem, if a cop grabs you, he means it so don't resist,

The two doctors who performed the autopsies disagree with you. Both put the cause of death as homicide, namely the actions of the officer.

[Biggus thingus]

https://youtu.be/XkEGGLu_fNU

Some timestamps:

05:46 Officer asks if GF if he's "on something" and mentions mouth foam a couple of seconds later.
06:23 GF starts resisting and claims to be claustrophobic.
08:16 GF says "Imma die here".
08:54 GF's first mention of breathing.
09:03 GF says "I'll get on the ground, anything."
09:43 GF's first mention of "I can't breathe".
09:54 GF pushes himslf out of the back seat and says "I wanna lay on the ground".
10:15 GF before being placed on the ground claims he can't breathe. Bystander tells him to "just get in the car".
10:50 GF placed on the ground.
11:16 GF asks for his "momma".
12:05 Officer says "EMS are on the way".
13:22 GF says "I'm about to die".
13:28 Officer says "He's got to be on something".
13:48 Officer mentions PCP and "shaking of the eyes".
14:10 GF asks for water.
15:26 Officer says "move him on his side?"
15:36 GF's last mention of "I can't breathe".
16:24 Officer says "I think he's passing out". GF appears unconscious from this point.
19:13 Officers talking to EMS.
20:23 GF placed on gurney.
22:35 Officers question the other occupants of GF's car.

Off his face and persistently resisting arrest. Who's to say if they had relaxed their grips on him he would'nt have jumped up, grabbed a gun and started shooting?

[Esceptico]

Biggus thingus said:

https://youtu.be/XkEGGLu_fNU

Some timestamps:

05:46 Officer asks if GF if he's "on something" and mentions mouth foam a couple of seconds later.
06:23 GF starts resisting and claims to be claustrophobic.
08:16 GF says "Imma die here".
08:54 GF's first mention of breathing.
09:03 GF says "I'll get on the ground, anything."
09:43 GF's first mention of "I can't breathe".
09:54 GF pushes himslf out of the back seat and says "I wanna lay on the ground".
10:15 GF before being placed on the ground claims he can't breathe. Bystander tells him to "just get in the car".
10:50 GF placed on the ground.
11:16 GF asks for his "momma".
12:05 Officer says "EMS are on the way".
13:22 GF says "I'm about to die".
13:28 Officer says "He's got to be on something".
13:48 Officer mentions PCP and "shaking of the eyes".
14:10 GF asks for water.
15:26 Officer says "move him on his side?"
15:36 GF's last mention of "I can't breathe".
16:24 Officer says "I think he's passing out". GF appears unconscious from this point.
19:13 Officers talking to EMS.
20:23 GF placed on gurney.
22:35 Officers question the other occupants of GF's car.

Off his face and persistently resisting arrest. Who's to say if they had relaxed their grips on him he would'nt have jumped up, grabbed a gun and started shooting?

Seriously? You have been watching too many James Bond films. Or feel free to demonstrate how with handcuffs on (with your hands behind your back) you think he could have stolen a gun and started shooting.

If he had jumped up there would have been some shooting but it wouldn’t have been him pulling the trigger.

Watching the start of the video it beggars belief that anyone could possibly argue that the cause of death was not the method of restraint.

He might have had lots of drugs in his system but he was obviously tolerating them very well as he was very much alive, alert, able to speak and move.

Are people really arguing that had the police delayed the arrest by twenty minutes he would have been found dead in his car because of an OD? Bizarre.

[rscott]

Biggus thingus said:

https://youtu.be/XkEGGLu_fNU

Some timestamps:

05:46 Officer asks if GF if he's "on something" and mentions mouth foam a couple of seconds later.
06:23 GF starts resisting and claims to be claustrophobic.
08:16 GF says "Imma die here".
08:54 GF's first mention of breathing.
09:03 GF says "I'll get on the ground, anything."
09:43 GF's first mention of "I can't breathe".
09:54 GF pushes himslf out of the back seat and says "I wanna lay on the ground".
10:15 GF before being placed on the ground claims he can't breathe. Bystander tells him to "just get in the car".
10:50 GF placed on the ground.
11:16 GF asks for his "momma".
12:05 Officer says "EMS are on the way".
13:22 GF says "I'm about to die".
13:28 Officer says "He's got to be on something".
13:48 Officer mentions PCP and "shaking of the eyes".
14:10 GF asks for water.
15:26 Officer says "move him on his side?"
15:36 GF's last mention of "I can't breathe".
16:24 Officer says "I think he's passing out". GF appears unconscious from this point.
19:13 Officers talking to EMS.
20:23 GF placed on gurney.
22:35 Officers question the other occupants of GF's car.

Off his face and persistently resisting arrest. Who's to say if they had relaxed their grips on him he would'nt have jumped up, grabbed a gun and started shooting?

At what point in the timeline did Chauvin get off him? He remained kneeling on him for 3m 51s after being twice told Floyd had no pulse ( https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.usatoday.com/amp/... ).

Floyd was handcuffed, so unlikely to have been able to grab a gun off an experienced officer. What was Chauvin's aim in sitting on him for so long anyway? Was he hoping Floyd would give in or just lose consciousness and so could be moved?

[FazerBoy]

Biggus thingus said:

Off his face and persistently resisting arrest. Who's to say if they had relaxed their grips on him he would'nt have jumped up, grabbed a gun and started shooting?

He was handcuffed and lying on the floor with three officers holding him down, so I doubt he could have done any of those things.

The three officers could have held him down firmly without the risk of injury to themselves or him. There was no need for Derek Chauvin to have his knee grinding into George Floyd’s neck for that length of time.

He was fully under the control of the officers and the force used on him once they had him laying on the ground was excessive.

I don’t think his intention was to kill him but from the evidence I have seen so far I think Chauvin is guilty of manslaughter (or whatever the American equivalent is).

[anonymous-user]

Thorodin said:

Thirdly, the prisoner was struggling and shouting wildly and, if released, would have undoubtedly posed a significant danger to the officer.

You don't need to release him.

You can keep control without doing it in such a risky way.

It's not that difficult.

Esceptico said:

GF had a criminal record and may have committed a crime on the day he was killed (albeit a non-violent one). GF may have been a troubled individual with substance abuse issues (hardly unique in the US). Some on here seem to be arguing that that is sufficient excuse for him being killed by the police after taking him into custody. In civilised countries the police manage to arrest people without killing them.

Indeed.

The police need to deal with the circumstances in front of them and adapt when they change.

Biggus thingus said:

Off his face and persistently resisting arrest. Who's to say if they had relaxed their grips on him he would'nt have jumped up, grabbed a gun and started shooting?

He's laid on his side, pinned right next to a vehicle with handcuffs on behind his back with several officers available to safely restrain.

I think it's safe to say he wasn't going to be doing that.

[voyds9]

rscott said:

At what point in the timeline did Chauvin get off him? He remained kneeling on him for 3m 51s after being twice told Floyd had no pulse ( https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.usatoday.com/amp/... ).

Floyd was handcuffed, so unlikely to have been able to grab a gun off an experienced officer. What was Chauvin's aim in sitting on him for so long anyway? Was he hoping Floyd would give in or just lose consciousness and so could be moved?

Seems the officer wasn't trusting his life to your unlikely.

And as Chauvin and Floyd apparently had worked at the same club he was probably in a better position to judge what Floyd was capable of than either of us

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/derek-chauvin-nightcl...

[Stigproducts]

Electro1980 said:

Your ignorance does not make it true. Race is a major issue in the US. How you can dismiss clear attempts to disenfranchise vast numbers of black Americans as “tosh” I don’t know.

Race is a major issue for people who want to make it a major issue. I haven't noticed any racism. Everyone I know, of all colours, thinks all this race baiting nonsense fanned by evil self serving tts and gullible idiots, is exactly that.

Explain to me how requiring ID to vote and not being able to bribe voters disenfranchises black voters and is worse than the voting fraud it aims to stop? It's not a "clear attempt" from what I can see. Bonus points for a comprehensive and objective explanation of why Stacey Abrhams had the election "stolen" from her and extra credit for exlaining how your rationale didn't apply to Trump.

Edited by Stigproducts on Wednesday 31st March 04:21

[rscott]

Stigproducts said:

Electro1980 said:

Your ignorance does not make it true. Race is a major issue in the US. How you can dismiss clear attempts to disenfranchise vast numbers of black Americans as “tosh” I don’t know.

Race is a major issue for people who want to make it a major issue. I haven't noticed any racism. Everyone I know, of all colours, thinks all this race baiting nonsense fanned by evil self serving tts and gullible idiots, is exactly that.

Explain to me how requiring ID to vote and not being able to bribe voters disenfranchises black voters and is worse than the vooting fraud it aims to stop? It's not a "clear attempt" from what I can see. Bonus points for a comprehensive and objective explanation of why Stacey Abrhams had the election "stolen" from her and extra credit for exlaining how your rationale didn't apply to Trump.

Georgia officials haven't been able to provide proof of any voter fraud which mandatory ID would have stopped. Minorities (which tend to vote Democrat) have been proven to be less likely to hold the appropriate ID and aren't always able to obtain it easily. There have been incidents in Georgia and other states where the DMV have closed regional offices in poorer areas, making it much more difficult for residents to get the right ID.

As for your bribe claim - you really think giving a bottle of water to someone who has been queuing for 4 hours is likely to affect how they vote?
And yes, it can take that long to vote there - my colleagues in our Atlanta office took between 3 and 6 hours to vote last year, because they had reduced the number of voting terminals in areas with mainly black populations.
I was out there for the 2008 and 2016 elections - temperature was mid/upper 20s on both days if I remember rightly, so most people would want a drink after several hours queuing.

Bigger concern is the change which allows the state to replace elected officials if they don't like how they're operating.
It halves the time available to request an absentee ballot.
Places limits on when secure drop boxes can be used (was 24/7 last election, now it's the specified operating hours of the site).
Bans the mobile polling stations used in Fulton County (a Democrat area) last election.
Adds extra Saturday voting, but makes Sunday voting optional - many churches have vote drives where the congregation goes to vote after the service. Of course, these just happen to be mainly black (and Democrat) churches.
Shortens the time period for voting in runoffs, potentially removing any weekend voting.. which happens to be done by more Democrats than Republicans.

There's zero evidence of any election fraud in Georgia and none of these rules are backed by any proof that the changes are necessary to make sure the elections are fair.

[timmybob]

Stigproducts said:

Race is a major issue for people who want to make it a major issue. I haven't noticed any racism. Everyone I know, of all colours, thinks all this race baiting nonsense fanned by evil self serving tts and gullible idiots, is exactly that.

Explain to me how requiring ID to vote and not being able to bribe voters disenfranchises black voters and is worse than the voting fraud it aims to stop? It's not a "clear attempt" from what I can see. Bonus points for a comprehensive and objective explanation of why Stacey Abrhams had the election "stolen" from her and extra credit for exlaining how your rationale didn't apply to Trump.

There is no voter fraud to stop. So then the question is what is the point of the legislation? How do you justify the criminalisation of handing out water?
Who was in charge of the election for governor in Georgia when Kemp won? For the rationale to be the same for Trump, Biden would need to have been in charge of the presidential election.
Unless you live here, you are in no position to comment about how pervasive racism is in this country.

[Mortarboard]

voyds9 said:

Seems the officer wasn't trusting his life to your unlikely.

And as Chauvin and Floyd apparently had worked at the same club he was probably in a better position to judge what Floyd was capable of than either of us

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/derek-chauvin-nightcl...

Chauvin was that worried for his own well being he had his hands in his pockets in terror.....

M.

[arguti]

Thorodin said:

First, I'm not a doctor.

Second, as far as I can remember there are four carotid arteries, two on each side of the neck which carry blood and oxygen to the brain and to the facial muscles. None of these vessels carry oxygen to the lungs, it goes to the head. Blood going the other way does not carry oxygen or Co2. Ergo, no asphyxiation. Secondly, it's glaringly evident that the officer had one of his knees on one side of the neck with his weight on the other (his Right one) leg. The practice was a well-known restraint method widely used to effectively no ill effect.

Thirdly, the prisoner was struggling and shouting wildly and, if released, would have undoubtedly posed a significant danger to the officer.

Can't see the problem, if a cop grabs you, he means it so don't resist,

You are definitely not a doctor.

Single carotid artery either side of neck carry oxygenated blood from lungs to brain via the heart.

One Jugular vein on either side of neck returns deoxygenated blood back to lungs via the heart.

Compression of both carotids simultaneously for long enough will effectively deprive brain of oxygen and result in loss of consciousness, then brain damage then death if sustained.

[Stigproducts]

timmybob said:

Stigproducts said:

Race is a major issue for people who want to make it a major issue. I haven't noticed any racism. Everyone I know, of all colours, thinks all this race baiting nonsense fanned by evil self serving tts and gullible idiots, is exactly that.

Explain to me how requiring ID to vote and not being able to bribe voters disenfranchises black voters and is worse than the voting fraud it aims to stop? It's not a "clear attempt" from what I can see. Bonus points for a comprehensive and objective explanation of why Stacey Abrhams had the election "stolen" from her and extra credit for exlaining how your rationale didn't apply to Trump.

There is no voter fraud to stop. So then the question is what is the point of the legislation? How do you justify the criminalisation of handing out water?
Who was in charge of the election for governor in Georgia when Kemp won? For the rationale to be the same for Trump, Biden would need to have been in charge of the presidential election.
Unless you live here, you are in no position to comment about how pervasive racism is in this country.

I do and I'm also black. I cringe at guilt ridden middle class white people trying to save me, its pathetic.

[Stigproducts]

timmybob said:

Stigproducts said:

Race is a major issue for people who want to make it a major issue. I haven't noticed any racism. Everyone I know, of all colours, thinks all this race baiting nonsense fanned by evil self serving tts and gullible idiots, is exactly that.

Explain to me how requiring ID to vote and not being able to bribe voters disenfranchises black voters and is worse than the voting fraud it aims to stop? It's not a "clear attempt" from what I can see. Bonus points for a comprehensive and objective explanation of why Stacey Abrhams had the election "stolen" from her and extra credit for exlaining how your rationale didn't apply to Trump.

There is no voter fraud to stop. So then the question is what is the point of the legislation? How do you justify the criminalisation of handing out water?
Who was in charge of the election for governor in Georgia when Kemp won? For the rationale to be the same for Trump, Biden would need to have been in charge of the presidential election.
Unless you live here, you are in no position to comment about how pervasive racism is in this country.

How do you know there was no voter fraud to stop? people weren't asked to show ID, so it's an unknown.

Handing out water? What a nice thing to do. What about donuts? What about a Big Mac meal? Where do you draw the line? It's not the place of political parties or their supporters to give out drinks and snacks. if there truly are long lines, with hot weather then take some water yourself., it's not hard. I'd love to see a law that specifies the free stuff "political parties can hand out water, but not coke, and not beer". Rather more practical to stop them giving out anything isn't it. Secondly, I'm pretty sure there are some white people in Georgia who won't get water in line anymore.
Why is any of this "racist". the law isn't "NO water for black people". It's "no free stuff for anyone". None of this is racist if it applies to everyone.
You are desperate to find a reason to find race in this. Stacey Abrams lost by 55k votes- deal with it. Donald trump lost - he couldn't find evidence he didn't. Not having to show ID to vote is something that can be taken advantage of. Giving out freebies is something that can be taken advantage of.

[JagLover]

audidoody said:

He had methamphetamine AND 11ng per ml of fentanyl in his blood according to the lab analysis, which is four times the level that could be fatal.

Hard to see how Chauvin can be convicted with that evidence. Only needs one juror to query the narrative,

According to google the lethal level starts at at 2ng per ml

Overdoses of synthetic opiates killed 31,000 Americans in 2018 alone and that was probably a fairly typical year for the latter part of this decade.

[Byker28i]

rscott said:

Biggus thingus said:

https://youtu.be/XkEGGLu_fNU

Some timestamps:

05:46 Officer asks if GF if he's "on something" and mentions mouth foam a couple of seconds later.
06:23 GF starts resisting and claims to be claustrophobic.
08:16 GF says "Imma die here".
08:54 GF's first mention of breathing.
09:03 GF says "I'll get on the ground, anything."
09:43 GF's first mention of "I can't breathe".
09:54 GF pushes himslf out of the back seat and says "I wanna lay on the ground".
10:15 GF before being placed on the ground claims he can't breathe. Bystander tells him to "just get in the car".
10:50 GF placed on the ground.
11:16 GF asks for his "momma".
12:05 Officer says "EMS are on the way".
13:22 GF says "I'm about to die".
13:28 Officer says "He's got to be on something".
13:48 Officer mentions PCP and "shaking of the eyes".
14:10 GF asks for water.
15:26 Officer says "move him on his side?"
15:36 GF's last mention of "I can't breathe".
16:24 Officer says "I think he's passing out". GF appears unconscious from this point.
19:13 Officers talking to EMS.
20:23 GF placed on gurney.
22:35 Officers question the other occupants of GF's car.

Off his face and persistently resisting arrest. Who's to say if they had relaxed their grips on him he would'nt have jumped up, grabbed a gun and started shooting?

At what point in the timeline did Chauvin get off him? He remained kneeling on him for 3m 51s after being twice told Floyd had no pulse ( https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.usatoday.com/amp/... ).

Floyd was handcuffed, so unlikely to have been able to grab a gun off an experienced officer. What was Chauvin's aim in sitting on him for so long anyway? Was he hoping Floyd would give in or just lose consciousness and so could be moved?

Biggus should at least mention his source: Cut and paste from overclockers
https://www.overclockers.co.uk/forums/threads/dere...



NY Times reconstructed it with the videos
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/31/us/george-floyd...


Shortly after the call, at around 20:08, two police officers arrived. Mr Floyd was sitting with two other people in a car parked around the corner.

After approaching the car, one of the officers, Thomas Lane, pulled out his gun and ordered Mr Floyd to show his hands. In an account of the incident, prosecutors do not explain why Mr Lane thought it necessary to draw his gun.

Mr Lane, prosecutors said, "put his hands on Mr Floyd, and pulled him out of the car". Then Mr Floyd "actively resisted being handcuffed".

Once handcuffed, though, Mr Floyd became compliant while Mr Lane explained he was being arrested for "passing counterfeit currency".
Court transcripts from police body cameras show Mr Floyd appears co-operative at the beginning of the arrest, repeatedly apologising to the officers after they approach his parked car.

Mr Lane asks Mr Floyd to show his hands at least 10 times before ordering him to get out of the vehicle.

At about 20:14, Mr Floyd "stiffened up, fell to the ground, and told the officers he was claustrophobic", according to the report.

Mr Chauvin arrived at the scene. He and other officers were involved in a further attempt to put Mr Floyd in the police car.

During this attempt, at 20:19, Mr Chauvin pulled Mr Floyd away from the passenger side, causing him to fall to the ground, the report said.

He lay there, face down, still in handcuffs.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-5286172...


Floyd was a regular at Cup Foods. He was a friendly face, a pleasant customer who never caused any trouble according to the store owner
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/owner-minneap...


You know we have the transcripts from the police body cameras
https://int.nyt.com/data/documenthelper/7070-exhib...

Worth a read Biggus... the previous 10 minutes before Chauvin arrived and after. All the evidence, not just some post on a forum.

Edited by Byker28i on Wednesday 31st March 07:13

[Ian Geary]

Feel the thread is getting diverted off into election nonsense again.

But every now and then something comes up on PH and makes you think "did someone actually type that?"

Today's nomination is this:

Stigproducts said:

Race is a major issue for people who want to make it a major issue. I haven't noticed any racism. Everyone I know, of all colours, thinks all this race baiting nonsense fanned by evil self serving tts and gullible idiots, is exactly that.

Edited by Stigproducts on Wednesday 31st March 04:21

Not sure if you didn't "notice" racism specific to circumstances of GF's death, or just haven't noticed racism in any context?

Maybe you're just not very good at noticing things?

[Byker28i]

RB Will said:

Byker28i said:

So had I and it was old convictions, as above. You were trying to make out he was a frequent, active criminal...

Edited by Byker28i on Tuesday 30th March 20:43

He may not have had recent CONVICTIONS but he does still seem to be up to illegal/ criminal activity, someone said an arrest in 2019 where he was seen with drugs? Then 2020 allegedly using counterfeit money (was this ever investigated or confirmed), and possession and use of a decent quantity of illegal drugs by the sound of it. And if they are arguing the 4 times an overdose amount found in his system wasn’t enough to kill him it suggests he must be a serious habitual user

I have no issue with his convictions being brought up. It paints a portrait of the person, but if old convictions count, then surely the charges and complaints about Chauvin previous behaviour towards black people should also be taken into account.
Or do you believe that both may have changed their behaviour if there were no further charges?

The issue I had was with gary13 saying "It was the life he lived. If it wasn't over a fake $20 bill it would be during a mugging, car theft, home invasion etc." whilst actually it looked like he might have turned his life around, was working as a bouncer until he lost his job with the pandemic. Who knows where he got the $20 bill from, but it would have been a lot to someone in that position in the US.


and again, at the moment it's all prosecution evidence so will look bad for Chauvin. I've no doubt much will be made of the drugs in floyds body when the defence presents, which will swing opinion the other way.