In my limited personal experience with protests that become riots, and from what I've seen in the news, the police do the exact opposite of that. The police definitely tend to turn peaceful protests into riots.
Post edited by PJ_Soul on
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Four militia members in New Mexico arrested had 20 firearms between them. Yee yaw, ‘Murica. Boogaloo killed two law enforcement officers with a ghost gun and then tried to blend into a BLM protest crowd. Separate incidents spread over time but it would seem to me, the right has spawned some domestic terrorists. Team Trump Treason has the bikers.
mickeyrat
up my ass, like Chadwick was up his Posts: 35,687
edited March 2021
George Floyd-Officer Trial-Protests
This file photo provided by the Ramsey County, Minn., Sheriff's Office shows former Minneapolis police Officer Derek Chauvin, who was arrested Friday, May 29, 2020, in the Memorial Day death of George Floyd. Chauvin is charged with second-degree murder and manslaughter and jury selection in his trial begins Monday, March 8, 2021. (Ramsey County Sheriff's Office via AP, File)
MINNEAPOLIS (AP) — The judge overseeing the trial of a former Minneapolis police officer accused in the death of George Floyd on Monday paused jury selection for at least a day while an appeal proceeds over the possible reinstatement of a third-degree murder charge.
Judge Peter Cahill said he does not have jurisdiction to rule on whether the third-degree murder charge should be reinstated against Derek Chauvin while the issue is being appealed. But he said prosecutors' arguments that the whole case would be impacted was “tenuous.”
Cahill initially ruled that jury selection would begin as scheduled on Monday, but prosecutors said they would ask the Court of Appeals to intervene, which could put the case on hold, so the judge sent the potential jurors home for the day.
Chauvin is charged with second-degree murder and manslaughter in Floyd’s death. Legal experts say reinstating the third-degree murder charge would improve the odds of getting a conviction. Chauvin's attorney, Eric Nelson, said Monday he would ask the state Supreme Court to review a Court of Appeals decision that ordered Cahill to reconsider the charge.
Jury selection is expected to take at least three weeks, as prosecutors and defense attorneys try to weed out people who may be biased against them.
“You don’t want jurors who are completely blank slates, because that would mean they’re not in tune at all with the world,” Susan Gaertner, a former prosecutor, said. “But what you want is jurors who can set aside opinions that have formed prior to walking into the courtroom and give both sides a fair hearing.”
Floyd was declared dead May 25 after Chauvin, who is white, pressed his knee against the handcuffed Black man's neck for about nine minutes, holding his position even after Floyd went limp. Floyd’s death sparked sometimes violent protests in Minneapolis and beyond, and led to a nationwide reckoning on race.
Hundreds of people gathered outside the courthouse as proceedings began, many carrying signs that read, “Justice for George Floyd” and “Convict Killer Cops.”
One speaker took a microphone and decried the barricades — concrete barriers topped by chain-link fencing, barbed wire and razor wire— set up around the courthouse. He also ridiculed talk of the Chauvin trial as “the trial of the century,” saying all the jury needs to do is “do the right thing.”
Then he led the crowd in chants of “The whole world is watching!”
Inside the courtroom, Chauvin, in a blue suit and black mask, followed the proceedings attentively, making notes on a legal pad.
Nelson earlier argued that pretrial publicity of the case and the subsequent violent unrest in Minneapolis would make it impossible to find an impartial jury in Hennepin County. But Judge Peter Cahill said last year that moving the trial probably wouldn't cure the problem of a potentially tainted jury pool because “no corner of the State of Minnesota” has been shielded from pretrial publicity.
The potential jurors — who must be at least 18, U.S. citizens and residents of Hennepin County — were sent questionnaires to determine how much they have heard about the case and whether they’ve formed any opinions. Besides biographical and demographic information, jurors were asked about prior contacts with police, whether they have protested against police brutality and whether they believe the justice system is fair.
Some of the questions get specific, such as how often a potential juror has watched the bystander video of Floyd’s arrest, or whether they carried a sign at a protest and what that sign said.
Mike Brandt, a local defense attorney, said prosecutors will likely seek out jurors who have favorable opinions on the Black Lives Matter movement or might have more outrage over Floyd’s death, while Chauvin’s attorneys would likely favor jurors who support the police.
Unlike typical jury selection proceedings, potential jurors will be questioned individually rather than in a group. The judge, defense attorney and prosecutors will all get to ask questions. The defense can object to up to 15 potential jurors without giving a reason; prosecutors can block up to nine without providing a reason. Either side can object to these peremptory challenges if they believe the sole reason for disqualifying a juror is race or gender.
Both sides can also argue to dismiss an unlimited number of jurors “for cause,” meaning they must provide a reason why they believe that juror shouldn’t serve. Those situations can get into some detailed machinations, Brandt said, and it’s up to the judge to decide whether a juror stays or goes.
“Sometimes there is some tortured questioning,” Brandt said.
He said that even if a juror says they have had a negative interaction with the police, or a negative opinion about Black Lives Matter, the key will be trying to find out whether they can put those past experiences or opinions aside and be fair.
“We all walk into these with biases. The question is, can you put those biases aside and be fair in this case,” he said.
Jury selection will end after 14 people are picked — 12 jurors who will deliberate the case and two alternates who won’t be part of deliberations unless needed. The jurors will be escorted to the courthouse daily and sequestered during deliberations. Their names will be kept confidential until further order of the court.
The number of seats in the courtroom has been limited to maintain social distancing due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and seats for jurors have been spaced out. Like others in the courtroom, jurors will be required to wear masks.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Right now there's a motion to reinstate the 3rd degree murder charge, which was the initial charge. But when people threw a fit over 3rd degree being the charge, it was bumped up to 2nd degree. Now that emotions aren't as high, and the prosecutors are realizing that getting a 2nd degree conviction might not be as easy, they're trying to bring back 3rd degree.
Right now there's a motion to reinstate the 3rd degree murder charge, which was the initial charge. But when people threw a fit over 3rd degree being the charge, it was bumped up to 2nd degree. Now that emotions aren't as high, and the prosecutors are realizing that getting a 2nd degree conviction might not be as easy, they're trying to bring back 3rd degree.
at least as a charging option for the jury. fuck. these motherfuckers need to face consequences
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Right now there's a motion to reinstate the 3rd degree murder charge, which was the initial charge. But when people threw a fit over 3rd degree being the charge, it was bumped up to 2nd degree. Now that emotions aren't as high, and the prosecutors are realizing that getting a 2nd degree conviction might not be as easy, they're trying to bring back 3rd degree.
at least as a charging option for the jury. fuck. these motherfuckers need to face consequences
It's going to be an uphill slog considering that MPD allowed the type of tactics used by Chauvin in it's SOP. There's an obvious moral and social verdict to this case, but when it comes down to the legal definitions attached to the incident outcome, it's going to be a hard sell. People who don't follow court cases aren't going to understand how easy it is to get charges dismissed or reduced when intent can't be proven. The prosecution is really going to need to push hard to get the jury to convict on the legal definitions.
Based on the charges, I think they could push for the Manslaughter in the 2nd degree pretty hard and try to prove that Chauvin was improperly responding to Floyd's pleas no matter what training he had to use that move. Both murder charges are a stretch, especially 2nd degree, but 3rd they could try to use character witnesses and past excessive force complaints to build the case that he did not care about hurting others or causing injury to the point he murdered Floyd unintentionally.
609.205 MANSLAUGHTER IN THE SECOND DEGREE.
A person who causes the death of another by any of the following means is guilty of manslaughter in the second degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than ten years or to payment of a fine of not more than $20,000, or both:
(1) by the person's culpable negligence whereby the person creates an unreasonable risk, and consciously takes chances of causing death or great bodily harm to another; or
(2) by shooting another with a firearm or other dangerous weapon as a result of negligently believing the other to be a deer or other animal; or
(3) by setting a spring gun, pit fall, deadfall, snare, or other like dangerous weapon or device; or
(4) by negligently or intentionally permitting any animal, known by the person to have vicious propensities or to have caused great or substantial bodily harm in the past, to run uncontrolled off the owner's premises, or negligently failing to keep it properly confined; or
(5) by committing or attempting to commit a violation of section 609.378 (neglect or endangerment of a child), and murder in the first, second, or third degree is not committed thereby.
If proven by a preponderance of the evidence, it shall be an affirmative defense to criminal liability under clause (4) that the victim provoked the animal to cause the victim's death.
609.195 MURDER IN THE THIRD DEGREE.
(a) Whoever, without intent to effect the death of any person, causes the death of another by perpetrating an act eminently dangerous to others and evincing a depraved mind, without regard for human life, is guilty of murder in the third degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 25 years.
Whoever does either of the following is guilty of murder in the second degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 40 years:
(1) causes the death of a human being with intent to effect the death of that person or another, but without premeditation; or
(2) causes the death of a human being while committing or attempting to commit a drive-by shooting in violation of section 609.66, subdivision 1e, under circumstances other than those described in section 609.185, paragraph (a), clause (3).
Subd. 2.Unintentional murders.
Whoever does either of the following is guilty of unintentional murder in the second degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 40 years:
(1) causes the death of a human being, without intent to effect the death of any person, while committing or attempting to commit a felony offense other than criminal sexual conduct in the first or second degree with force or violence or a drive-by shooting; or
(2) causes the death of a human being without intent to effect the death of any person, while intentionally inflicting or attempting to inflict bodily harm upon the victim, when the perpetrator is restrained under an order for protection and the victim is a person designated to receive protection under the order. As used in this clause, "order for protection" includes an order for protection issued under chapter 518B; a harassment restraining order issued under section 609.748; a court order setting conditions of pretrial release or conditions of a criminal sentence or juvenile court disposition; a restraining order issued in a marriage dissolution action; and any order issued by a court of another state or of the United States that is similar to any of these orders.
"There's an obvious moral and social verdict to this case, but when it comes down to the legal definitions attached to the incident outcome. it's going to be a hard sell. People who don't follow court cases aren't going to understand how easy it is to get charges dismissed or reduced when intent can't be proven."
The weird thing is that the opinion (or outcry) of these people that don't follow court cases is what caused the prosecutors to up it from 3rd degree to 2nd degree. From a legality standpoint, they should know better (which is why they charged him with 3rd degree to begin with). But it was a strange time in the days/weeks following Floyd's death. He's charged with 3rd degree, the public complains that's not enough (not knowing what it takes to get a conviction), so they up the charge.
Let's look again at these statutes you posted...
2nd degree murder (unintentional)...
1) causes the death of a human being, without intent to effect the death of any person, while committing or attempting to commit a felony offense other than criminal sexual conduct in the first or second degree with force or violence or a drive-by shooting; or
(2) causes the death of a human being without intent to effect the death of any person, while intentionally inflicting or attempting to inflict bodily harm upon the victim, when the perpetrator is restrained under an order for protection and the victim is a person designated to receive protection under the order. As used in this clause, "order for protection" includes an order for protection issued under chapter 518B; a harassment restraining order issued under section 609.748; a court order setting conditions of pretrial release or conditions of a criminal sentence or juvenile court disposition; a restraining order issued in a marriage dissolution action; and any order issued by a court of another state or of the United States that is similar to any of these orders.
Well there's no way to argue that Chauvin was committing a felony. He was doing a shitty job of policing. But legally, he's making an arrest, not committing any sort of felony.
3rd degree murder.... a) Whoever, without intent to effect the death of any person, causes the death of another by perpetrating an act eminently dangerous to others and evincing a depraved mind, without regard for human life, is guilty of murder in the third degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 25 years.
Obviously he wasn't intending to kill him. But he was acting dangerously without regard for Floyd's well-being. SO THIS SHOULD BE THE CHARGE. But will it be? Will they be able to reinstate the 3rd degree? They were stupid to get rid of it in the first place. They pacified the public at the time by upping the charge. But if they can't get the 3rd degree charge back, and he's acquitted on that 2nd degree charge (which he will be), wait and see the public's reaction. It will be worse than the 1992 L.A. Riots.
Trial for ex-cop charged in Floyd's death forges on, for now
By AMY FORLITI and STEVE KARNOWSKI
51 mins ago
MINNEAPOLIS (AP) — The trial of a former Minneapolis police officer charged in George Floyd's death is forging ahead with jury selection, even though a looming appellate ruling could halt the case and delay it for weeks or even months as the state tries to add a third-degree murder count.
Prosecutors are asking the Court of Appeals to put Derek Chauvin's trial on hold until the issue of adding the third-degree murder count is resolved. The appeals court did not immediately rule on that request, and Judge Peter Cahill said Monday that he intends to keep the trial on track until he's told to stop.
“Unless the Court of Appeals tells me otherwise, we’re going to keep moving,” he said. Jury selection is expected to begin Tuesday, a day later than scheduled.
Chauvin is charged with second-degree murder and manslaughter in Floyd’s death. The Court of Appeals last week ordered Cahill to consider reinstating a third-degree murder charge that he had dismissed. Legal experts say reinstating the charge would improve the odds of getting a conviction. Chauvin’s attorney, Eric Nelson, said Monday he would ask the state Supreme Court to review the issue.
On Monday, prosecutors and defense attorneys agreed to dismiss 16 of the first 50 jurors they reviewed “for cause,” based on their answers to a lengthy questionnaire. The dismissals weren’t debated in court, but such dismissals can be for a host of reasons, such as views that indicate a juror can’t be impartial.
Floyd was declared dead on May 25 after Chauvin, who is white, pressed his knee against the Black man’s neck for about nine minutes, holding his position even after Floyd went limp. Floyd’s death was captured on widely seen bystander video and sparked sometimes violent protests in Minneapolis and beyond, leading to a nationwide reckoning on race.
Hundreds of people gathered outside the courthouse as proceedings began Monday, many carrying signs that read, “Justice for George Floyd” and “Convict Killer Cops.”
One speaker, DJ Hooker, took a microphone and decried the “cage” of concrete barriers topped by chain-link fencing, barbed wire and razor wire up around the courthouse, part of at least $1 million that has been spent to fortify the downtown area during the trial.
Hooker went on to ridicule talk of the Chauvin trial as “the trial of the century,” saying the jury simply needs to “do the right thing.”
He led the crowd in chants of, “The whole world is watching!”
Inside the courtroom, Chauvin, in a blue suit and black mask, followed the proceedings attentively, making notes on a legal pad. No one attended to support him. Bridgett Floyd, George Floyd’s sister, sat in the seat allocated to Floyd’s family.
Afterward, Bridgett Floyd said the family was glad the trial had finally arrived and is “praying for justice.”
“I sat in the courthouse today and looked at the officer who took my brother’s life,” she said. “That officer took a great man, a great father, a great brother, a great uncle.”
The unintentional second-degree murder charge requires to prosecutors to prove that Chauvin’s conduct was a “substantial causal factor” in Floyd’s death, and that Chauvin was committing felony assault at the time. The third-degree murder charge would require them to prove that Chauvin caused Floyd’s death through a dangerous act without regard for human life.
Jury selection could take at least three weeks and will end when 14 jurors are picked — 12 who will deliberate and two alternates. The potential jurors — who must be at least 18, U.S. citizens and residents of Hennepin County — were sent questionnaires to determine how much they have heard about the case and whether they’ve formed any opinions. Besides biographical and demographic information, jurors were asked about prior contacts with police, whether they have protested against police brutality and whether they believe the justice system is fair.
Some of the questions get specific, such as how often a potential juror has watched the bystander video of Floyd’s arrest, or whether they carried a sign at a protest and what that sign said.
Jurors will be questioned individually. The judge, defense attorney and prosecutors can all ask questions. In addition to both sides being able to argue for an unlimited number of “for cause” dismissals, the defense can object to up to 15 potential jurors without giving a reason; prosecutors can block up to nine without providing a reason. Either side can object to these peremptory challenges if they believe the sole reason for disqualifying a juror is race or gender.
Even if a juror says they have had a negative interaction with the police or hold negative views about Black Lives Matter, the key will be trying to find out whether they can put those past experiences or opinions aside and be fair, said Mike Brandt, a local defense attorney.
“We all walk into these with biases. The question is, can you put those biases aside and be fair in this case,” he said.
___
Associated Press writer Mohamed Ibrahim contributed this report.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
"There's an obvious moral and social verdict to this case, but when it comes down to the legal definitions attached to the incident outcome. it's going to be a hard sell. People who don't follow court cases aren't going to understand how easy it is to get charges dismissed or reduced when intent can't be proven."
The weird thing is that the opinion (or outcry) of these people that don't follow court cases is what caused the prosecutors to up it from 3rd degree to 2nd degree. From a legality standpoint, they should know better (which is why they charged him with 3rd degree to begin with). But it was a strange time in the days/weeks following Floyd's death. He's charged with 3rd degree, the public complains that's not enough (not knowing what it takes to get a conviction), so they up the charge.
Let's look again at these statutes you posted...
2nd degree murder (unintentional)...
1) causes the death of a human being, without intent to effect the death of any person, while committing or attempting to commit a felony offense other than criminal sexual conduct in the first or second degree with force or violence or a drive-by shooting; or
(2) causes the death of a human being without intent to effect the death of any person, while intentionally inflicting or attempting to inflict bodily harm upon the victim, when the perpetrator is restrained under an order for protection and the victim is a person designated to receive protection under the order. As used in this clause, "order for protection" includes an order for protection issued under chapter 518B; a harassment restraining order issued under section 609.748; a court order setting conditions of pretrial release or conditions of a criminal sentence or juvenile court disposition; a restraining order issued in a marriage dissolution action; and any order issued by a court of another state or of the United States that is similar to any of these orders.
Well there's no way to argue that Chauvin was committing a felony. He was doing a shitty job of policing. But legally, he's making an arrest, not committing any sort of felony.
3rd degree murder.... a) Whoever, without intent to effect the death of any person, causes the death of another by perpetrating an act eminently dangerous to others and evincing a depraved mind, without regard for human life, is guilty of murder in the third degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 25 years.
Obviously he wasn't intending to kill him. But he was acting dangerously without regard for Floyd's well-being. SO THIS SHOULD BE THE CHARGE. But will it be? Will they be able to reinstate the 3rd degree? They were stupid to get rid of it in the first place. They pacified the public at the time by upping the charge. But if they can't get the 3rd degree charge back, and he's acquitted on that 2nd degree charge (which he will be), wait and see the public's reaction. It will be worse than the 1992 L.A. Riots.
Murder 2 does not include intent to kill either, just accidentally causing death while intending to cause injury. I agree murder 3 seems more fitting, but I could see how they could argue that pressing on his neck for 9 minutes there was an intent to cause injury. Especially while he was unconscious and not moving for some of that time.
0
Options
mickeyrat
up my ass, like Chadwick was up his Posts: 35,687
Judge OKs 3rd-degree murder charge for ex-cop in Floyd death
By STEVE KARNOWSKI and AMY FORLITI
46 mins ago
MINNEAPOLIS (AP) — A judge on Thursday granted prosecutors’ request to add a third-degree murder charge against a former Minneapolis police officer charged in George Floyd’s death, a move that offers jurors an additional option for conviction and finally resolves an issue that might have delayed his trial for months.
Hennepin County Judge Peter Cahill reinstated the charge after the former officer, Derek Chauvin, failed to get appellate courts to block it. Cahill had earlier rejected the charge as not warranted by the circumstances of Floyd’s death, but an appellate court ruling in an unrelated case established new grounds for it.
Chauvin already faced second-degree murder and manslaughter charges. Legal experts say the additional charge helps prosecutors by giving jurors one more option to convict Chauvin of murder.
The dispute over the third-degree murder charge revolved around wording in the law that references an act “eminently dangerous to others.” Cahill had earlier dismissed the charge as not appropriate for the case, where Chauvin’s conduct might be construed as not dangerous to anyone but Floyd.
But prosecutors sought to revive the charge after the state’s Court of Appeals recently upheld the third-degree murder conviction of another former Minneapolis police officer in the 2017 killing of an Australian woman. They argued that the ruling established precedent that a third-degree murder charge may be brought even in a case where only a single person is endangered.
Arguments over when precedent from former officer Mohamed Noor's case took effect went swiftly to the state’s Supreme Court, which on Wednesday said it would not consider Chauvin’s appeal of the matter. Cahill said Thursday he accepts that precedent is now clear.
“I feel bound by that and I feel it would be an abuse of discretion not to grant the motion," he said.
Floyd was declared dead on May 25 after Chauvin, who is white, pressed his knee against the Black man’s neck for about nine minutes. Floyd’s death sparked sometimes violent protests in Minneapolis and beyond, leading to a nationwide reckoning on race.
The ruling came ahead of resumption of jury selection Thursday. Five jurors have been seated after just two days of screening by attorneys and the judge, who has set aside at least three weeks to fill the panel.
Attorneys have given considerable attention to the jury pool's attitudes toward police in the first two days of questioning, trying to determine whether they’re more inclined to believe testimony from law enforcement over evidence from other witnesses to the fatal confrontation.
The first juror picked Wednesday, a man who works in sales management and grew up in a mostly white part of central Minnesota, acknowledged saying on his written questionnaire that he had a “very favorable” opinion of the Black Lives Matter movement and a “somewhat unfavorable” impression of the Blue Lives Matter countermovement in favor of police, yet “somewhat agreed” that police don’t get the respect they deserve. He said he agrees that there are bad police officers.
"Are there good ones? Yes. So I don’t think it’s right to completely blame the entire organization,” he told the court under questioning from prosecutor Steve Schleicher.
He also said he would be more inclined to believe an officer over the word of another witness. But he said he could set aside any ideas about the inherent honesty of an officer and evaluate each witness on their own.
The second, a man who works in information technology security, marked “strongly agree” on a question about whether he believes police in his community make him feel safe. His community wasn’t specified — jurors are being drawn from all over Hennepin County, which includes Minneapolis and many of its suburbs.
“In my community, I think when there is suspicious activity the police will stop by, they will ask a question,” he said. “I think that sense of community is all we want right? We want to live in a community where we feel safe regardless of race, color and gender.”
Schleicher noted that the man also stated in his questionnaire that he strongly disagreed with the concept of “defunding” the police, which has become a political flashpoint locally and across the country in the wake of Floyd’s death.
“While I necessarily might not agree with the police action in some situation, I believe that in order for police to make my community safe they have to have the money,” he replied.
The questionnaire explores potential jurors' familiarity with the case and their own contacts with police. Their answers have not been made public, and the jurors’ identities are being kept secret. Their racial backgrounds often aren’t disclosed in open court.
Chauvin and three other officers were fired. The others face an August trial on aiding and abetting charges. The defense hasn't said whether Chauvin will testify in his own defense.
Schleicher used a peremptory challenge Wednesday to remove from the panel a woman who has a nephew who’s a sheriff’s deputy in western Minnesota. She said she was dismayed by the violence that followed Floyd’s death.
“I personally didn’t see any usefulness to it,” she said. “I didn’t see anything accomplished by it, except I suppose bring attention to the frustrations of the people involved. But did I see anything useful coming out of the burning of Lake Street and that sort of thing? I did not.”
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Well, the city just decided to give the Floyd family 27 million for the civil suit during the jury selection process of the criminal case. That's going to fuck things up.
I know you can't put a price on a person's life, but wow, 27 million is a lot.
Well, the city just decided to give the Floyd family 27 million for the civil suit during the jury selection process of the criminal case. That's going to fuck things up.
I know you can't put a price on a person's life, but wow, 27 million is a lot.
I recall when Breyona Taylor's family won some sizeable sum and the social media chatter was "does it really feel right for them to take it and get rich off of their loved one's death?" My take is not only is it OK but I could argue they have a responsibility to take it. Right now, this is the only way that cities are really held responsible. Since the thread of prison isn't realistic for the individual officers, maybe there's a financial incentive for the police departments and city governments to do better. And maybe the citizens will actually be upset with teh PD over this poor use of public money.
1995 Milwaukee 1998 Alpine, Alpine 2003 Albany, Boston, Boston, Boston 2004 Boston, Boston 2006 Hartford, St. Paul (Petty), St. Paul (Petty) 2011 Alpine, Alpine 2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
Editor’s note: The video in this story contains graphic material.
MINNEAPOLIS — In a victory for the defense, the judge overseeing the murder trial of Derek Chauvin will allow the former police officer’s attorney to tell the jury about a 2019 encounter between George Floyd and Minneapolis police where they allege Floyd exhibited behavior similar to his actions in the 2020 incident in which he died.
Hennepin County District Court Judge Peter A. Cahill had previously barred Chauvin’s defense team from mentioning Floyd’s May 6, 2019, arrest — an incident for which Floyd was never formally charged — describing it as “irrelevant” to the criminal case in which Chauvin is charged in Floyd’s death.
[FAQ: What you need to know about the trial]
But days into jury selection for Chauvin’s trial, Cahill reversed himself after defense attorney Eric Nelson argued that Floyd’s documented drug use and behavior toward police in the 2019 incident are relevant to his central argument that it was Floyd’s health problems and the level of drugs in his system that killed him, not the pressure from Chauvin’s knee on his neck during the encounter on May 25, 2020.
Still, Cahill put strict limits on what the defense can say and show to the jury about the 2019 incident, which was captured on police body camera video. In a written ruling, the judge said he would allow Chauvin’s defense to talk only about Floyd’s physical condition at the scene and present a two-minute clip of video showing his arrest — a decision that prosecutors strongly opposed, saying it is an attempt to taint Floyd’s character in the minds of the jurors.
The previous encounter occurred after Minneapolis police, acting on an informant’s tip, stopped a car in which Floyd was riding. Body camera footage filed as evidence in the case last fall shows Floyd did not immediately comply with police requests to put his hands on the dashboard and that he appeared to be swallowing pills. The officers on the scene responded aggressively — one pointed a gun and another brandished a stun gun — as they tried to get Floyd out of the car, prompting Floyd to begin crying and begging officers not to shoot him.
Unlike in the 2020 incident — which ultimately ended with Floyd restrained on the ground — the 2019 arrest de-escalated quickly. Within moments, Floyd complied and was placed into a squad car without resistance. Later, while in custody, Floyd told officers he was addicted to painkillers and had swallowed as many as eight tablets of Percocet — a powerful prescription narcotic. Police called an ambulance, and emergency workers who arrived at the scene were so concerned about Floyd’s elevated blood pressure that they thought he was on the verge of having a heart attack, according to transcripts filed in evidence last fall.
Nelson has described the 2019 and 2020 incidents as “remarkably similar” and has argued that the previous arrest is relevant because of newly discovered evidence in the Chauvin case — including fragments of chewed-up pills containing methamphetamine and Floyd’s DNA that were discovered in a January search of the squad car into which Chauvin and the other three officers at the scene had attempted to put Floyd.
Chauvin’s attorney had sought to argue that Floyd’s similar emotional reaction to the police in the 2019 case showed he had a “modus operandi” when confronted by officers — but Cahill ruled that was not relevant. But he did agree with Nelson that the incident was relevant in that it offers proof of how Floyd’s body responded to drugs he admitted he had taken.
Last summer, Hennepin County Chief Medical Examiner Andrew Baker formally declared Floyd’s death a homicide, listing “cardiopulmonary arrest complicating law enforcement subdual, restraint, and neck compression” as the cause of death. Baker later told the FBI that Floyd’s heart and lungs stopped “due to the combined effects of his health problems as well as the exertion and restraint involved in Floyd’s interaction with police before being on the ground” — a finding the defense says it will vigorously challenge.
Editor’s note: The video in this story contains graphic material.
MINNEAPOLIS — In a victory for the defense, the judge overseeing the murder trial of Derek Chauvin will allow the former police officer’s attorney to tell the jury about a 2019 encounter between George Floyd and Minneapolis police where they allege Floyd exhibited behavior similar to his actions in the 2020 incident in which he died.
Hennepin County District Court Judge Peter A. Cahill had previously barred Chauvin’s defense team from mentioning Floyd’s May 6, 2019, arrest — an incident for which Floyd was never formally charged — describing it as “irrelevant” to the criminal case in which Chauvin is charged in Floyd’s death.
[FAQ: What you need to know about the trial]
But days into jury selection for Chauvin’s trial, Cahill reversed himself after defense attorney Eric Nelson argued that Floyd’s documented drug use and behavior toward police in the 2019 incident are relevant to his central argument that it was Floyd’s health problems and the level of drugs in his system that killed him, not the pressure from Chauvin’s knee on his neck during the encounter on May 25, 2020.
Still, Cahill put strict limits on what the defense can say and show to the jury about the 2019 incident, which was captured on police body camera video. In a written ruling, the judge said he would allow Chauvin’s defense to talk only about Floyd’s physical condition at the scene and present a two-minute clip of video showing his arrest — a decision that prosecutors strongly opposed, saying it is an attempt to taint Floyd’s character in the minds of the jurors.
The previous encounter occurred after Minneapolis police, acting on an informant’s tip, stopped a car in which Floyd was riding. Body camera footage filed as evidence in the case last fall shows Floyd did not immediately comply with police requests to put his hands on the dashboard and that he appeared to be swallowing pills. The officers on the scene responded aggressively — one pointed a gun and another brandished a stun gun — as they tried to get Floyd out of the car, prompting Floyd to begin crying and begging officers not to shoot him.
Unlike in the 2020 incident — which ultimately ended with Floyd restrained on the ground — the 2019 arrest de-escalated quickly. Within moments, Floyd complied and was placed into a squad car without resistance. Later, while in custody, Floyd told officers he was addicted to painkillers and had swallowed as many as eight tablets of Percocet — a powerful prescription narcotic. Police called an ambulance, and emergency workers who arrived at the scene were so concerned about Floyd’s elevated blood pressure that they thought he was on the verge of having a heart attack, according to transcripts filed in evidence last fall.
Nelson has described the 2019 and 2020 incidents as “remarkably similar” and has argued that the previous arrest is relevant because of newly discovered evidence in the Chauvin case — including fragments of chewed-up pills containing methamphetamine and Floyd’s DNA that were discovered in a January search of the squad car into which Chauvin and the other three officers at the scene had attempted to put Floyd.
Chauvin’s attorney had sought to argue that Floyd’s similar emotional reaction to the police in the 2019 case showed he had a “modus operandi” when confronted by officers — but Cahill ruled that was not relevant. But he did agree with Nelson that the incident was relevant in that it offers proof of how Floyd’s body responded to drugs he admitted he had taken.
Last summer, Hennepin County Chief Medical Examiner Andrew Baker formally declared Floyd’s death a homicide, listing “cardiopulmonary arrest complicating law enforcement subdual, restraint, and neck compression” as the cause of death. Baker later told the FBI that Floyd’s heart and lungs stopped “due to the combined effects of his health problems as well as the exertion and restraint involved in Floyd’s interaction with police before being on the ground” — a finding the defense says it will vigorously challenge.
He was saying he couldn't breathe long before they had him on the ground. That video didn't come to light till well after the initial video. I guess the prosecution will argue that him warning that he couldn't breathe should've caused the officers to exhibit more safety once they had him cuffed. The defense of course will focus on the fentanyl. The medical examiner says that while the fentanyl could not be identified as the cause of death, he had enough fentanyl in his system that would've justified an overdose verdict under different circumstances.
"In an updated report filed two months later, Baker confirmed he had found traces of fentanyl—an opioid used as recreational drug—in Floyd's system, but stated that could not be identified as the cause of death.
According to the documents, Floyd had 11 ng/mL of fentanyl in his blood, a dose that could have been justified an overdose verdict had his death occurred in different circumstances.
Floyd was also found to have a "heavy heart" and "at least one artery was approximately 75 percent blocked."
Chauvin's defense is likely to focus on both elements of the report.
Baker told investigators that: "If he [Floyd] were found dead at home alone and no other apparent causes, this could be acceptable to call an OD [overdose]. Deaths have been certified with levels of 3. [...] That is a fatal level of fentanyl under normal circumstances."
However, Baker also stated there was no proof the fentanyl had killed Floyd. "I am not saying this killed him," he added.
Editor’s note: The video in this story contains graphic material.
MINNEAPOLIS — In a victory for the defense, the judge overseeing the murder trial of Derek Chauvin will allow the former police officer’s attorney to tell the jury about a 2019 encounter between George Floyd and Minneapolis police where they allege Floyd exhibited behavior similar to his actions in the 2020 incident in which he died.
Hennepin County District Court Judge Peter A. Cahill had previously barred Chauvin’s defense team from mentioning Floyd’s May 6, 2019, arrest — an incident for which Floyd was never formally charged — describing it as “irrelevant” to the criminal case in which Chauvin is charged in Floyd’s death.
[FAQ: What you need to know about the trial]
But days into jury selection for Chauvin’s trial, Cahill reversed himself after defense attorney Eric Nelson argued that Floyd’s documented drug use and behavior toward police in the 2019 incident are relevant to his central argument that it was Floyd’s health problems and the level of drugs in his system that killed him, not the pressure from Chauvin’s knee on his neck during the encounter on May 25, 2020.
Still, Cahill put strict limits on what the defense can say and show to the jury about the 2019 incident, which was captured on police body camera video. In a written ruling, the judge said he would allow Chauvin’s defense to talk only about Floyd’s physical condition at the scene and present a two-minute clip of video showing his arrest — a decision that prosecutors strongly opposed, saying it is an attempt to taint Floyd’s character in the minds of the jurors.
The previous encounter occurred after Minneapolis police, acting on an informant’s tip, stopped a car in which Floyd was riding. Body camera footage filed as evidence in the case last fall shows Floyd did not immediately comply with police requests to put his hands on the dashboard and that he appeared to be swallowing pills. The officers on the scene responded aggressively — one pointed a gun and another brandished a stun gun — as they tried to get Floyd out of the car, prompting Floyd to begin crying and begging officers not to shoot him.
Unlike in the 2020 incident — which ultimately ended with Floyd restrained on the ground — the 2019 arrest de-escalated quickly. Within moments, Floyd complied and was placed into a squad car without resistance. Later, while in custody, Floyd told officers he was addicted to painkillers and had swallowed as many as eight tablets of Percocet — a powerful prescription narcotic. Police called an ambulance, and emergency workers who arrived at the scene were so concerned about Floyd’s elevated blood pressure that they thought he was on the verge of having a heart attack, according to transcripts filed in evidence last fall.
Nelson has described the 2019 and 2020 incidents as “remarkably similar” and has argued that the previous arrest is relevant because of newly discovered evidence in the Chauvin case — including fragments of chewed-up pills containing methamphetamine and Floyd’s DNA that were discovered in a January search of the squad car into which Chauvin and the other three officers at the scene had attempted to put Floyd.
Chauvin’s attorney had sought to argue that Floyd’s similar emotional reaction to the police in the 2019 case showed he had a “modus operandi” when confronted by officers — but Cahill ruled that was not relevant. But he did agree with Nelson that the incident was relevant in that it offers proof of how Floyd’s body responded to drugs he admitted he had taken.
Last summer, Hennepin County Chief Medical Examiner Andrew Baker formally declared Floyd’s death a homicide, listing “cardiopulmonary arrest complicating law enforcement subdual, restraint, and neck compression” as the cause of death. Baker later told the FBI that Floyd’s heart and lungs stopped “due to the combined effects of his health problems as well as the exertion and restraint involved in Floyd’s interaction with police before being on the ground” — a finding the defense says it will vigorously challenge.
He walks that city will burn down!
Not just that city. It’ll be last summer only worse. Multiple cities will burn.
Editor’s note: The video in this story contains graphic material.
MINNEAPOLIS — In a victory for the defense, the judge overseeing the murder trial of Derek Chauvin will allow the former police officer’s attorney to tell the jury about a 2019 encounter between George Floyd and Minneapolis police where they allege Floyd exhibited behavior similar to his actions in the 2020 incident in which he died.
Hennepin County District Court Judge Peter A. Cahill had previously barred Chauvin’s defense team from mentioning Floyd’s May 6, 2019, arrest — an incident for which Floyd was never formally charged — describing it as “irrelevant” to the criminal case in which Chauvin is charged in Floyd’s death.
[FAQ: What you need to know about the trial]
But days into jury selection for Chauvin’s trial, Cahill reversed himself after defense attorney Eric Nelson argued that Floyd’s documented drug use and behavior toward police in the 2019 incident are relevant to his central argument that it was Floyd’s health problems and the level of drugs in his system that killed him, not the pressure from Chauvin’s knee on his neck during the encounter on May 25, 2020.
Still, Cahill put strict limits on what the defense can say and show to the jury about the 2019 incident, which was captured on police body camera video. In a written ruling, the judge said he would allow Chauvin’s defense to talk only about Floyd’s physical condition at the scene and present a two-minute clip of video showing his arrest — a decision that prosecutors strongly opposed, saying it is an attempt to taint Floyd’s character in the minds of the jurors.
The previous encounter occurred after Minneapolis police, acting on an informant’s tip, stopped a car in which Floyd was riding. Body camera footage filed as evidence in the case last fall shows Floyd did not immediately comply with police requests to put his hands on the dashboard and that he appeared to be swallowing pills. The officers on the scene responded aggressively — one pointed a gun and another brandished a stun gun — as they tried to get Floyd out of the car, prompting Floyd to begin crying and begging officers not to shoot him.
Unlike in the 2020 incident — which ultimately ended with Floyd restrained on the ground — the 2019 arrest de-escalated quickly. Within moments, Floyd complied and was placed into a squad car without resistance. Later, while in custody, Floyd told officers he was addicted to painkillers and had swallowed as many as eight tablets of Percocet — a powerful prescription narcotic. Police called an ambulance, and emergency workers who arrived at the scene were so concerned about Floyd’s elevated blood pressure that they thought he was on the verge of having a heart attack, according to transcripts filed in evidence last fall.
Nelson has described the 2019 and 2020 incidents as “remarkably similar” and has argued that the previous arrest is relevant because of newly discovered evidence in the Chauvin case — including fragments of chewed-up pills containing methamphetamine and Floyd’s DNA that were discovered in a January search of the squad car into which Chauvin and the other three officers at the scene had attempted to put Floyd.
Chauvin’s attorney had sought to argue that Floyd’s similar emotional reaction to the police in the 2019 case showed he had a “modus operandi” when confronted by officers — but Cahill ruled that was not relevant. But he did agree with Nelson that the incident was relevant in that it offers proof of how Floyd’s body responded to drugs he admitted he had taken.
Last summer, Hennepin County Chief Medical Examiner Andrew Baker formally declared Floyd’s death a homicide, listing “cardiopulmonary arrest complicating law enforcement subdual, restraint, and neck compression” as the cause of death. Baker later told the FBI that Floyd’s heart and lungs stopped “due to the combined effects of his health problems as well as the exertion and restraint involved in Floyd’s interaction with police before being on the ground” — a finding the defense says it will vigorously challenge.
He walks that city will burn down!
Not just that city. It’ll be last summer only worse. Multiple cities will burn.
Unfortunately I agree & the GOP will say we told you so !
Editor’s note: The video in this story contains graphic material.
MINNEAPOLIS — In a victory for the defense, the judge overseeing the murder trial of Derek Chauvin will allow the former police officer’s attorney to tell the jury about a 2019 encounter between George Floyd and Minneapolis police where they allege Floyd exhibited behavior similar to his actions in the 2020 incident in which he died.
Hennepin County District Court Judge Peter A. Cahill had previously barred Chauvin’s defense team from mentioning Floyd’s May 6, 2019, arrest — an incident for which Floyd was never formally charged — describing it as “irrelevant” to the criminal case in which Chauvin is charged in Floyd’s death.
[FAQ: What you need to know about the trial]
But days into jury selection for Chauvin’s trial, Cahill reversed himself after defense attorney Eric Nelson argued that Floyd’s documented drug use and behavior toward police in the 2019 incident are relevant to his central argument that it was Floyd’s health problems and the level of drugs in his system that killed him, not the pressure from Chauvin’s knee on his neck during the encounter on May 25, 2020.
Still, Cahill put strict limits on what the defense can say and show to the jury about the 2019 incident, which was captured on police body camera video. In a written ruling, the judge said he would allow Chauvin’s defense to talk only about Floyd’s physical condition at the scene and present a two-minute clip of video showing his arrest — a decision that prosecutors strongly opposed, saying it is an attempt to taint Floyd’s character in the minds of the jurors.
The previous encounter occurred after Minneapolis police, acting on an informant’s tip, stopped a car in which Floyd was riding. Body camera footage filed as evidence in the case last fall shows Floyd did not immediately comply with police requests to put his hands on the dashboard and that he appeared to be swallowing pills. The officers on the scene responded aggressively — one pointed a gun and another brandished a stun gun — as they tried to get Floyd out of the car, prompting Floyd to begin crying and begging officers not to shoot him.
Unlike in the 2020 incident — which ultimately ended with Floyd restrained on the ground — the 2019 arrest de-escalated quickly. Within moments, Floyd complied and was placed into a squad car without resistance. Later, while in custody, Floyd told officers he was addicted to painkillers and had swallowed as many as eight tablets of Percocet — a powerful prescription narcotic. Police called an ambulance, and emergency workers who arrived at the scene were so concerned about Floyd’s elevated blood pressure that they thought he was on the verge of having a heart attack, according to transcripts filed in evidence last fall.
Nelson has described the 2019 and 2020 incidents as “remarkably similar” and has argued that the previous arrest is relevant because of newly discovered evidence in the Chauvin case — including fragments of chewed-up pills containing methamphetamine and Floyd’s DNA that were discovered in a January search of the squad car into which Chauvin and the other three officers at the scene had attempted to put Floyd.
Chauvin’s attorney had sought to argue that Floyd’s similar emotional reaction to the police in the 2019 case showed he had a “modus operandi” when confronted by officers — but Cahill ruled that was not relevant. But he did agree with Nelson that the incident was relevant in that it offers proof of how Floyd’s body responded to drugs he admitted he had taken.
Last summer, Hennepin County Chief Medical Examiner Andrew Baker formally declared Floyd’s death a homicide, listing “cardiopulmonary arrest complicating law enforcement subdual, restraint, and neck compression” as the cause of death. Baker later told the FBI that Floyd’s heart and lungs stopped “due to the combined effects of his health problems as well as the exertion and restraint involved in Floyd’s interaction with police before being on the ground” — a finding the defense says it will vigorously challenge.
He walks that city will burn down!
Not just that city. It’ll be last summer only worse. Multiple cities will burn.
Unfortunately I agree & the GOP will say we told you so !
GOP could say whatever they want but it doesn’t take a genius to figure that out.
Editor’s note: The video in this story contains graphic material.
MINNEAPOLIS — In a victory for the defense, the judge overseeing the murder trial of Derek Chauvin will allow the former police officer’s attorney to tell the jury about a 2019 encounter between George Floyd and Minneapolis police where they allege Floyd exhibited behavior similar to his actions in the 2020 incident in which he died.
Hennepin County District Court Judge Peter A. Cahill had previously barred Chauvin’s defense team from mentioning Floyd’s May 6, 2019, arrest — an incident for which Floyd was never formally charged — describing it as “irrelevant” to the criminal case in which Chauvin is charged in Floyd’s death.
[FAQ: What you need to know about the trial]
But days into jury selection for Chauvin’s trial, Cahill reversed himself after defense attorney Eric Nelson argued that Floyd’s documented drug use and behavior toward police in the 2019 incident are relevant to his central argument that it was Floyd’s health problems and the level of drugs in his system that killed him, not the pressure from Chauvin’s knee on his neck during the encounter on May 25, 2020.
Still, Cahill put strict limits on what the defense can say and show to the jury about the 2019 incident, which was captured on police body camera video. In a written ruling, the judge said he would allow Chauvin’s defense to talk only about Floyd’s physical condition at the scene and present a two-minute clip of video showing his arrest — a decision that prosecutors strongly opposed, saying it is an attempt to taint Floyd’s character in the minds of the jurors.
The previous encounter occurred after Minneapolis police, acting on an informant’s tip, stopped a car in which Floyd was riding. Body camera footage filed as evidence in the case last fall shows Floyd did not immediately comply with police requests to put his hands on the dashboard and that he appeared to be swallowing pills. The officers on the scene responded aggressively — one pointed a gun and another brandished a stun gun — as they tried to get Floyd out of the car, prompting Floyd to begin crying and begging officers not to shoot him.
Unlike in the 2020 incident — which ultimately ended with Floyd restrained on the ground — the 2019 arrest de-escalated quickly. Within moments, Floyd complied and was placed into a squad car without resistance. Later, while in custody, Floyd told officers he was addicted to painkillers and had swallowed as many as eight tablets of Percocet — a powerful prescription narcotic. Police called an ambulance, and emergency workers who arrived at the scene were so concerned about Floyd’s elevated blood pressure that they thought he was on the verge of having a heart attack, according to transcripts filed in evidence last fall.
Nelson has described the 2019 and 2020 incidents as “remarkably similar” and has argued that the previous arrest is relevant because of newly discovered evidence in the Chauvin case — including fragments of chewed-up pills containing methamphetamine and Floyd’s DNA that were discovered in a January search of the squad car into which Chauvin and the other three officers at the scene had attempted to put Floyd.
Chauvin’s attorney had sought to argue that Floyd’s similar emotional reaction to the police in the 2019 case showed he had a “modus operandi” when confronted by officers — but Cahill ruled that was not relevant. But he did agree with Nelson that the incident was relevant in that it offers proof of how Floyd’s body responded to drugs he admitted he had taken.
Last summer, Hennepin County Chief Medical Examiner Andrew Baker formally declared Floyd’s death a homicide, listing “cardiopulmonary arrest complicating law enforcement subdual, restraint, and neck compression” as the cause of death. Baker later told the FBI that Floyd’s heart and lungs stopped “due to the combined effects of his health problems as well as the exertion and restraint involved in Floyd’s interaction with police before being on the ground” — a finding the defense says it will vigorously challenge.
He walks that city will burn down!
Not just that city. It’ll be last summer only worse. Multiple cities will burn.
Unfortunately I agree & the GOP will say we told you so !
GOP could say whatever they want but it doesn’t take a genius to figure that out.
Unfortunately, for the 75 million or so Americans influenced by the GOP's white supremacist rhetoric, nothing remotely resembling "genius" applies.
And if we continue to have a legal system that perpetuates white supremacy, then, yes, I would hope that those with a conscience and the wherewithal continue to attempt burn the whole fucking thing down!
Editor’s note: The video in this story contains graphic material.
MINNEAPOLIS — In a victory for the defense, the judge overseeing the murder trial of Derek Chauvin will allow the former police officer’s attorney to tell the jury about a 2019 encounter between George Floyd and Minneapolis police where they allege Floyd exhibited behavior similar to his actions in the 2020 incident in which he died.
Hennepin County District Court Judge Peter A. Cahill had previously barred Chauvin’s defense team from mentioning Floyd’s May 6, 2019, arrest — an incident for which Floyd was never formally charged — describing it as “irrelevant” to the criminal case in which Chauvin is charged in Floyd’s death.
[FAQ: What you need to know about the trial]
But days into jury selection for Chauvin’s trial, Cahill reversed himself after defense attorney Eric Nelson argued that Floyd’s documented drug use and behavior toward police in the 2019 incident are relevant to his central argument that it was Floyd’s health problems and the level of drugs in his system that killed him, not the pressure from Chauvin’s knee on his neck during the encounter on May 25, 2020.
Still, Cahill put strict limits on what the defense can say and show to the jury about the 2019 incident, which was captured on police body camera video. In a written ruling, the judge said he would allow Chauvin’s defense to talk only about Floyd’s physical condition at the scene and present a two-minute clip of video showing his arrest — a decision that prosecutors strongly opposed, saying it is an attempt to taint Floyd’s character in the minds of the jurors.
The previous encounter occurred after Minneapolis police, acting on an informant’s tip, stopped a car in which Floyd was riding. Body camera footage filed as evidence in the case last fall shows Floyd did not immediately comply with police requests to put his hands on the dashboard and that he appeared to be swallowing pills. The officers on the scene responded aggressively — one pointed a gun and another brandished a stun gun — as they tried to get Floyd out of the car, prompting Floyd to begin crying and begging officers not to shoot him.
Unlike in the 2020 incident — which ultimately ended with Floyd restrained on the ground — the 2019 arrest de-escalated quickly. Within moments, Floyd complied and was placed into a squad car without resistance. Later, while in custody, Floyd told officers he was addicted to painkillers and had swallowed as many as eight tablets of Percocet — a powerful prescription narcotic. Police called an ambulance, and emergency workers who arrived at the scene were so concerned about Floyd’s elevated blood pressure that they thought he was on the verge of having a heart attack, according to transcripts filed in evidence last fall.
Nelson has described the 2019 and 2020 incidents as “remarkably similar” and has argued that the previous arrest is relevant because of newly discovered evidence in the Chauvin case — including fragments of chewed-up pills containing methamphetamine and Floyd’s DNA that were discovered in a January search of the squad car into which Chauvin and the other three officers at the scene had attempted to put Floyd.
Chauvin’s attorney had sought to argue that Floyd’s similar emotional reaction to the police in the 2019 case showed he had a “modus operandi” when confronted by officers — but Cahill ruled that was not relevant. But he did agree with Nelson that the incident was relevant in that it offers proof of how Floyd’s body responded to drugs he admitted he had taken.
Last summer, Hennepin County Chief Medical Examiner Andrew Baker formally declared Floyd’s death a homicide, listing “cardiopulmonary arrest complicating law enforcement subdual, restraint, and neck compression” as the cause of death. Baker later told the FBI that Floyd’s heart and lungs stopped “due to the combined effects of his health problems as well as the exertion and restraint involved in Floyd’s interaction with police before being on the ground” — a finding the defense says it will vigorously challenge.
He walks that city will burn down!
Not just that city. It’ll be last summer only worse. Multiple cities will burn.
Unfortunately I agree & the GOP will say we told you so !
GOP could say whatever they want but it doesn’t take a genius to figure that out.
Unfortunately, for the 75 million or so Americans influenced by the GOP's white supremacist rhetoric, nothing remotely resembling "genius" applies.
And if we continue to have a legal system that perpetuates white supremacy, then, yes, I would hope that those with a conscience and the wherewithal continue to attempt burn the whole fucking thing down!
Are you literally saying burn it down? I just can’t understand that. I guess most here aren’t affected by the actual burning down and looting and rioting that follow these unfortunate situations.
Are you literally saying burn it down? I just can’t understand that. I guess most here aren’t affected by the actual burning down and looting and rioting that follow these unfortunate situations.
I would guess that most here aren’t affected by "these unfortunate situations" that can lead a person to burn down, loot, and riot.
Are you literally saying burn it down? I just can’t understand that. I guess most here aren’t affected by the actual burning down and looting and rioting that follow these unfortunate situations.
I would guess that most here aren’t affected by "these unfortunate situations" that can lead a person to burn down, loot, and riot.
Cool. That’s your opinion. I think it’s bullshit. 2 wrongs don’t make a right. I don’t think anyone has the right to destroy or steal property that doesn’t belong to them under any circumstances
Are you literally saying burn it down? I just can’t understand that. I guess most here aren’t affected by the actual burning down and looting and rioting that follow these unfortunate situations.
I would guess that most here aren’t affected by "these unfortunate situations" that can lead a person to burn down, loot, and riot.
Cool. That’s your opinion. I think it’s bullshit. 2 wrongs don’t make a right. I don’t think anyone has the right to destroy or steal property that doesn’t belong to them under any circumstances
Yeah, because peaceful protests are always work and it’s always the protestors that instigate the rioting.
Comments
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Same place
https://kisscincinnati.iheart.com/featured/josh-martinez/content/2020-06-15-video-men-in-bethel-oh-confront-intimidate-and-threaten-female-protestor/
George Floyd-Officer Trial-Protests
This file photo provided by the Ramsey County, Minn., Sheriff's Office shows former Minneapolis police Officer Derek Chauvin, who was arrested Friday, May 29, 2020, in the Memorial Day death of George Floyd. Chauvin is charged with second-degree murder and manslaughter and jury selection in his trial begins Monday, March 8, 2021. (Ramsey County Sheriff's Office via AP, File)MINNEAPOLIS (AP) — The judge overseeing the trial of a former Minneapolis police officer accused in the death of George Floyd on Monday paused jury selection for at least a day while an appeal proceeds over the possible reinstatement of a third-degree murder charge.
Judge Peter Cahill said he does not have jurisdiction to rule on whether the third-degree murder charge should be reinstated against Derek Chauvin while the issue is being appealed. But he said prosecutors' arguments that the whole case would be impacted was “tenuous.”
Cahill initially ruled that jury selection would begin as scheduled on Monday, but prosecutors said they would ask the Court of Appeals to intervene, which could put the case on hold, so the judge sent the potential jurors home for the day.
Chauvin is charged with second-degree murder and manslaughter in Floyd’s death. Legal experts say reinstating the third-degree murder charge would improve the odds of getting a conviction. Chauvin's attorney, Eric Nelson, said Monday he would ask the state Supreme Court to review a Court of Appeals decision that ordered Cahill to reconsider the charge.
Jury selection is expected to take at least three weeks, as prosecutors and defense attorneys try to weed out people who may be biased against them.
“You don’t want jurors who are completely blank slates, because that would mean they’re not in tune at all with the world,” Susan Gaertner, a former prosecutor, said. “But what you want is jurors who can set aside opinions that have formed prior to walking into the courtroom and give both sides a fair hearing.”
Floyd was declared dead May 25 after Chauvin, who is white, pressed his knee against the handcuffed Black man's neck for about nine minutes, holding his position even after Floyd went limp. Floyd’s death sparked sometimes violent protests in Minneapolis and beyond, and led to a nationwide reckoning on race.
Chauvin and three other officers were fired; the others face an August trial on aiding and abetting charges.
Hundreds of people gathered outside the courthouse as proceedings began, many carrying signs that read, “Justice for George Floyd” and “Convict Killer Cops.”
One speaker took a microphone and decried the barricades — concrete barriers topped by chain-link fencing, barbed wire and razor wire— set up around the courthouse. He also ridiculed talk of the Chauvin trial as “the trial of the century,” saying all the jury needs to do is “do the right thing.”
Then he led the crowd in chants of “The whole world is watching!”
Inside the courtroom, Chauvin, in a blue suit and black mask, followed the proceedings attentively, making notes on a legal pad.
Nelson earlier argued that pretrial publicity of the case and the subsequent violent unrest in Minneapolis would make it impossible to find an impartial jury in Hennepin County. But Judge Peter Cahill said last year that moving the trial probably wouldn't cure the problem of a potentially tainted jury pool because “no corner of the State of Minnesota” has been shielded from pretrial publicity.
The potential jurors — who must be at least 18, U.S. citizens and residents of Hennepin County — were sent questionnaires to determine how much they have heard about the case and whether they’ve formed any opinions. Besides biographical and demographic information, jurors were asked about prior contacts with police, whether they have protested against police brutality and whether they believe the justice system is fair.
Some of the questions get specific, such as how often a potential juror has watched the bystander video of Floyd’s arrest, or whether they carried a sign at a protest and what that sign said.
Mike Brandt, a local defense attorney, said prosecutors will likely seek out jurors who have favorable opinions on the Black Lives Matter movement or might have more outrage over Floyd’s death, while Chauvin’s attorneys would likely favor jurors who support the police.
Unlike typical jury selection proceedings, potential jurors will be questioned individually rather than in a group. The judge, defense attorney and prosecutors will all get to ask questions. The defense can object to up to 15 potential jurors without giving a reason; prosecutors can block up to nine without providing a reason. Either side can object to these peremptory challenges if they believe the sole reason for disqualifying a juror is race or gender.
Both sides can also argue to dismiss an unlimited number of jurors “for cause,” meaning they must provide a reason why they believe that juror shouldn’t serve. Those situations can get into some detailed machinations, Brandt said, and it’s up to the judge to decide whether a juror stays or goes.
“Sometimes there is some tortured questioning,” Brandt said.
He said that even if a juror says they have had a negative interaction with the police, or a negative opinion about Black Lives Matter, the key will be trying to find out whether they can put those past experiences or opinions aside and be fair.
“We all walk into these with biases. The question is, can you put those biases aside and be fair in this case,” he said.
Jury selection will end after 14 people are picked — 12 jurors who will deliberate the case and two alternates who won’t be part of deliberations unless needed. The jurors will be escorted to the courthouse daily and sequestered during deliberations. Their names will be kept confidential until further order of the court.
The number of seats in the courtroom has been limited to maintain social distancing due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and seats for jurors have been spaced out. Like others in the courtroom, jurors will be required to wear masks.
The earliest opening statements will begin is March 29.
___
Associated Press writer Mohamed Ibrahim contributed this report.
___
Find AP’s full coverage of the death of George Floyd: https://apnews.com/hub/death-of-george-floyd
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
at least as a charging option for the jury. fuck. these motherfuckers need to face consequences
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Based on the charges, I think they could push for the Manslaughter in the 2nd degree pretty hard and try to prove that Chauvin was improperly responding to Floyd's pleas no matter what training he had to use that move. Both murder charges are a stretch, especially 2nd degree, but 3rd they could try to use character witnesses and past excessive force complaints to build the case that he did not care about hurting others or causing injury to the point he murdered Floyd unintentionally.
609.205 MANSLAUGHTER IN THE SECOND DEGREE.
A person who causes the death of another by any of the following means is guilty of manslaughter in the second degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than ten years or to payment of a fine of not more than $20,000, or both:
(1) by the person's culpable negligence whereby the person creates an unreasonable risk, and consciously takes chances of causing death or great bodily harm to another; or
(2) by shooting another with a firearm or other dangerous weapon as a result of negligently believing the other to be a deer or other animal; or
(3) by setting a spring gun, pit fall, deadfall, snare, or other like dangerous weapon or device; or
(4) by negligently or intentionally permitting any animal, known by the person to have vicious propensities or to have caused great or substantial bodily harm in the past, to run uncontrolled off the owner's premises, or negligently failing to keep it properly confined; or
(5) by committing or attempting to commit a violation of section 609.378 (neglect or endangerment of a child), and murder in the first, second, or third degree is not committed thereby.
If proven by a preponderance of the evidence, it shall be an affirmative defense to criminal liability under clause (4) that the victim provoked the animal to cause the victim's death.
609.195 MURDER IN THE THIRD DEGREE.
(a) Whoever, without intent to effect the death of any person, causes the death of another by perpetrating an act eminently dangerous to others and evincing a depraved mind, without regard for human life, is guilty of murder in the third degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 25 years.
609.19 MURDER IN THE SECOND DEGREE.
Subdivision 1.Intentional murder; drive-by shootings.
Whoever does either of the following is guilty of murder in the second degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 40 years:
(1) causes the death of a human being with intent to effect the death of that person or another, but without premeditation; or
(2) causes the death of a human being while committing or attempting to commit a drive-by shooting in violation of section 609.66, subdivision 1e, under circumstances other than those described in section 609.185, paragraph (a), clause (3).
Subd. 2.Unintentional murders.
Whoever does either of the following is guilty of unintentional murder in the second degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 40 years:
(1) causes the death of a human being, without intent to effect the death of any person, while committing or attempting to commit a felony offense other than criminal sexual conduct in the first or second degree with force or violence or a drive-by shooting; or
(2) causes the death of a human being without intent to effect the death of any person, while intentionally inflicting or attempting to inflict bodily harm upon the victim, when the perpetrator is restrained under an order for protection and the victim is a person designated to receive protection under the order. As used in this clause, "order for protection" includes an order for protection issued under chapter 518B; a harassment restraining order issued under section 609.748; a court order setting conditions of pretrial release or conditions of a criminal sentence or juvenile court disposition; a restraining order issued in a marriage dissolution action; and any order issued by a court of another state or of the United States that is similar to any of these orders.
"There's an obvious moral and social verdict to this case, but when it comes down to the legal definitions attached to the incident outcome. it's going to be a hard sell. People who don't follow court cases aren't going to understand how easy it is to get charges dismissed or reduced when intent can't be proven."
The weird thing is that the opinion (or outcry) of these people that don't follow court cases is what caused the prosecutors to up it from 3rd degree to 2nd degree. From a legality standpoint, they should know better (which is why they charged him with 3rd degree to begin with). But it was a strange time in the days/weeks following Floyd's death. He's charged with 3rd degree, the public complains that's not enough (not knowing what it takes to get a conviction), so they up the charge.
Let's look again at these statutes you posted...
2nd degree murder (unintentional)...
1) causes the death of a human being, without intent to effect the death of any person, while committing or attempting to commit a felony offense other than criminal sexual conduct in the first or second degree with force or violence or a drive-by shooting; or
(2) causes the death of a human being without intent to effect the death of any person, while intentionally inflicting or attempting to inflict bodily harm upon the victim, when the perpetrator is restrained under an order for protection and the victim is a person designated to receive protection under the order. As used in this clause, "order for protection" includes an order for protection issued under chapter 518B; a harassment restraining order issued under section 609.748; a court order setting conditions of pretrial release or conditions of a criminal sentence or juvenile court disposition; a restraining order issued in a marriage dissolution action; and any order issued by a court of another state or of the United States that is similar to any of these orders.
Well there's no way to argue that Chauvin was committing a felony. He was doing a shitty job of policing. But legally, he's making an arrest, not committing any sort of felony.
3rd degree murder....
a) Whoever, without intent to effect the death of any person, causes the death of another by perpetrating an act eminently dangerous to others and evincing a depraved mind, without regard for human life, is guilty of murder in the third degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 25 years.
Obviously he wasn't intending to kill him. But he was acting dangerously without regard for Floyd's well-being. SO THIS SHOULD BE THE CHARGE. But will it be? Will they be able to reinstate the 3rd degree? They were stupid to get rid of it in the first place. They pacified the public at the time by upping the charge. But if they can't get the 3rd degree charge back, and he's acquitted on that 2nd degree charge (which he will be), wait and see the public's reaction. It will be worse than the 1992 L.A. Riots.
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
MINNEAPOLIS (AP) — The trial of a former Minneapolis police officer charged in George Floyd's death is forging ahead with jury selection, even though a looming appellate ruling could halt the case and delay it for weeks or even months as the state tries to add a third-degree murder count.
Prosecutors are asking the Court of Appeals to put Derek Chauvin's trial on hold until the issue of adding the third-degree murder count is resolved. The appeals court did not immediately rule on that request, and Judge Peter Cahill said Monday that he intends to keep the trial on track until he's told to stop.
“Unless the Court of Appeals tells me otherwise, we’re going to keep moving,” he said. Jury selection is expected to begin Tuesday, a day later than scheduled.
Chauvin is charged with second-degree murder and manslaughter in Floyd’s death. The Court of Appeals last week ordered Cahill to consider reinstating a third-degree murder charge that he had dismissed. Legal experts say reinstating the charge would improve the odds of getting a conviction. Chauvin’s attorney, Eric Nelson, said Monday he would ask the state Supreme Court to review the issue.
On Monday, prosecutors and defense attorneys agreed to dismiss 16 of the first 50 jurors they reviewed “for cause,” based on their answers to a lengthy questionnaire. The dismissals weren’t debated in court, but such dismissals can be for a host of reasons, such as views that indicate a juror can’t be impartial.
Floyd was declared dead on May 25 after Chauvin, who is white, pressed his knee against the Black man’s neck for about nine minutes, holding his position even after Floyd went limp. Floyd’s death was captured on widely seen bystander video and sparked sometimes violent protests in Minneapolis and beyond, leading to a nationwide reckoning on race.
Chauvin and three other officers were fired; the others face an August trial on aiding and abetting charges.
Hundreds of people gathered outside the courthouse as proceedings began Monday, many carrying signs that read, “Justice for George Floyd” and “Convict Killer Cops.”
One speaker, DJ Hooker, took a microphone and decried the “cage” of concrete barriers topped by chain-link fencing, barbed wire and razor wire up around the courthouse, part of at least $1 million that has been spent to fortify the downtown area during the trial.
Hooker went on to ridicule talk of the Chauvin trial as “the trial of the century,” saying the jury simply needs to “do the right thing.”
He led the crowd in chants of, “The whole world is watching!”
Inside the courtroom, Chauvin, in a blue suit and black mask, followed the proceedings attentively, making notes on a legal pad. No one attended to support him. Bridgett Floyd, George Floyd’s sister, sat in the seat allocated to Floyd’s family.
Afterward, Bridgett Floyd said the family was glad the trial had finally arrived and is “praying for justice.”
“I sat in the courthouse today and looked at the officer who took my brother’s life,” she said. “That officer took a great man, a great father, a great brother, a great uncle.”
The unintentional second-degree murder charge requires to prosecutors to prove that Chauvin’s conduct was a “substantial causal factor” in Floyd’s death, and that Chauvin was committing felony assault at the time. The third-degree murder charge would require them to prove that Chauvin caused Floyd’s death through a dangerous act without regard for human life.
Jury selection could take at least three weeks and will end when 14 jurors are picked — 12 who will deliberate and two alternates. The potential jurors — who must be at least 18, U.S. citizens and residents of Hennepin County — were sent questionnaires to determine how much they have heard about the case and whether they’ve formed any opinions. Besides biographical and demographic information, jurors were asked about prior contacts with police, whether they have protested against police brutality and whether they believe the justice system is fair.
Some of the questions get specific, such as how often a potential juror has watched the bystander video of Floyd’s arrest, or whether they carried a sign at a protest and what that sign said.
Jurors will be questioned individually. The judge, defense attorney and prosecutors can all ask questions. In addition to both sides being able to argue for an unlimited number of “for cause” dismissals, the defense can object to up to 15 potential jurors without giving a reason; prosecutors can block up to nine without providing a reason. Either side can object to these peremptory challenges if they believe the sole reason for disqualifying a juror is race or gender.
Even if a juror says they have had a negative interaction with the police or hold negative views about Black Lives Matter, the key will be trying to find out whether they can put those past experiences or opinions aside and be fair, said Mike Brandt, a local defense attorney.
“We all walk into these with biases. The question is, can you put those biases aside and be fair in this case,” he said.
___
Associated Press writer Mohamed Ibrahim contributed this report.
___
Find AP’s full coverage of the death of George Floyd: https://apnews.com/hub/death-of-george-floyd
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
MINNEAPOLIS (AP) — A judge on Thursday granted prosecutors’ request to add a third-degree murder charge against a former Minneapolis police officer charged in George Floyd’s death, a move that offers jurors an additional option for conviction and finally resolves an issue that might have delayed his trial for months.
Hennepin County Judge Peter Cahill reinstated the charge after the former officer, Derek Chauvin, failed to get appellate courts to block it. Cahill had earlier rejected the charge as not warranted by the circumstances of Floyd’s death, but an appellate court ruling in an unrelated case established new grounds for it.
Chauvin already faced second-degree murder and manslaughter charges. Legal experts say the additional charge helps prosecutors by giving jurors one more option to convict Chauvin of murder.
The dispute over the third-degree murder charge revolved around wording in the law that references an act “eminently dangerous to others.” Cahill had earlier dismissed the charge as not appropriate for the case, where Chauvin’s conduct might be construed as not dangerous to anyone but Floyd.
But prosecutors sought to revive the charge after the state’s Court of Appeals recently upheld the third-degree murder conviction of another former Minneapolis police officer in the 2017 killing of an Australian woman. They argued that the ruling established precedent that a third-degree murder charge may be brought even in a case where only a single person is endangered.
Arguments over when precedent from former officer Mohamed Noor's case took effect went swiftly to the state’s Supreme Court, which on Wednesday said it would not consider Chauvin’s appeal of the matter. Cahill said Thursday he accepts that precedent is now clear.
“I feel bound by that and I feel it would be an abuse of discretion not to grant the motion," he said.
Floyd was declared dead on May 25 after Chauvin, who is white, pressed his knee against the Black man’s neck for about nine minutes. Floyd’s death sparked sometimes violent protests in Minneapolis and beyond, leading to a nationwide reckoning on race.
The ruling came ahead of resumption of jury selection Thursday. Five jurors have been seated after just two days of screening by attorneys and the judge, who has set aside at least three weeks to fill the panel.
Attorneys have given considerable attention to the jury pool's attitudes toward police in the first two days of questioning, trying to determine whether they’re more inclined to believe testimony from law enforcement over evidence from other witnesses to the fatal confrontation.
The first juror picked Wednesday, a man who works in sales management and grew up in a mostly white part of central Minnesota, acknowledged saying on his written questionnaire that he had a “very favorable” opinion of the Black Lives Matter movement and a “somewhat unfavorable” impression of the Blue Lives Matter countermovement in favor of police, yet “somewhat agreed” that police don’t get the respect they deserve. He said he agrees that there are bad police officers.
"Are there good ones? Yes. So I don’t think it’s right to completely blame the entire organization,” he told the court under questioning from prosecutor Steve Schleicher.
He also said he would be more inclined to believe an officer over the word of another witness. But he said he could set aside any ideas about the inherent honesty of an officer and evaluate each witness on their own.
The second, a man who works in information technology security, marked “strongly agree” on a question about whether he believes police in his community make him feel safe. His community wasn’t specified — jurors are being drawn from all over Hennepin County, which includes Minneapolis and many of its suburbs.
“In my community, I think when there is suspicious activity the police will stop by, they will ask a question,” he said. “I think that sense of community is all we want right? We want to live in a community where we feel safe regardless of race, color and gender.”
Schleicher noted that the man also stated in his questionnaire that he strongly disagreed with the concept of “defunding” the police, which has become a political flashpoint locally and across the country in the wake of Floyd’s death.
“While I necessarily might not agree with the police action in some situation, I believe that in order for police to make my community safe they have to have the money,” he replied.
The questionnaire explores potential jurors' familiarity with the case and their own contacts with police. Their answers have not been made public, and the jurors’ identities are being kept secret. Their racial backgrounds often aren’t disclosed in open court.
Chauvin and three other officers were fired. The others face an August trial on aiding and abetting charges. The defense hasn't said whether Chauvin will testify in his own defense.
Schleicher used a peremptory challenge Wednesday to remove from the panel a woman who has a nephew who’s a sheriff’s deputy in western Minnesota. She said she was dismayed by the violence that followed Floyd’s death.
“I personally didn’t see any usefulness to it,” she said. “I didn’t see anything accomplished by it, except I suppose bring attention to the frustrations of the people involved. But did I see anything useful coming out of the burning of Lake Street and that sort of thing? I did not.”
___
Find AP’s full coverage of the death of George Floyd: https://apnews.com/hub/death-of-george-floyd
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
I know you can't put a price on a person's life, but wow, 27 million is a lot.
I recall when Breyona Taylor's family won some sizeable sum and the social media chatter was "does it really feel right for them to take it and get rich off of their loved one's death?" My take is not only is it OK but I could argue they have a responsibility to take it. Right now, this is the only way that cities are really held responsible. Since the thread of prison isn't realistic for the individual officers, maybe there's a financial incentive for the police departments and city governments to do better. And maybe the citizens will actually be upset with teh PD over this poor use of public money.
2013 Wrigley 2014 St. Paul 2016 Fenway, Fenway, Wrigley, Wrigley 2018 Missoula, Wrigley, Wrigley 2021 Asbury Park 2022 St Louis 2023 Austin, Austin
Editor’s note: The video in this story contains graphic material.
What Did George Floyd's Autopsy Report Reveal About His Cause of Death? (newsweek.com)
"In an updated report filed two months later, Baker confirmed he had found traces of fentanyl—an opioid used as recreational drug—in Floyd's system, but stated that could not be identified as the cause of death.
According to the documents, Floyd had 11 ng/mL of fentanyl in his blood, a dose that could have been justified an overdose verdict had his death occurred in different circumstances.
Floyd was also found to have a "heavy heart" and "at least one artery was approximately 75 percent blocked."
Chauvin's defense is likely to focus on both elements of the report.
Baker told investigators that: "If he [Floyd] were found dead at home alone and no other apparent causes, this could be acceptable to call an OD [overdose]. Deaths have been certified with levels of 3. [...] That is a fatal level of fentanyl under normal circumstances."
However, Baker also stated there was no proof the fentanyl had killed Floyd. "I am not saying this killed him," he added.
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
And if we continue to have a legal system that perpetuates white supremacy, then, yes, I would hope that those with a conscience and the wherewithal continue to attempt burn the whole fucking thing down!
There are no kings inside the gates of eden
And that's why you/they can't understand.