Discussion in 'Trials' started by Sillybilly, Apr 1, 2021.
That's my understanding as well.
Exactly. They don't need to KNOW that he is on drugs (watch COPS and other live stuff to see!) They do NARCAN through assessment as it doen't have bad effects if not needed. But heck, Chauvin didn't even assess breathing or pulse and react, much less assessment and looking at pupils etc.
RE NARCAN (aka Naloxone) Does naloxone reverse any overdose?
Naloxone only works on overdoses caused by opioids. This family of drugs includes prescription painkillers like OxyContin, fentanyl, methadone, and Vicodin, as well as street drugs like heroin. Naloxone will not reverse overdose resulting from non-opioid drugs, like cocaine, benzodiazepines (“benzos”), or alcohol. Given how safe naloxone is, a victim of a non-opioid overdose, or an overdose caused by a mixture of drugs will not be harmed by naloxone. In multiple drug overdoses (e.g., an opioid and a benzodiazepine) it is still worth administering naloxone as it will remove the effects of the opioid and may still reverse the overdose.
I find it significant that Chauvin has not even the one person allowed showing up to court for him. No one. Not a friend, a cousin, a neighbor, an old partner. No one.
But deadly force is limited to certain situations. There was no threat to anyone when a subject is handcuffed.
Does a handcuffed suspect resisting being placed in a police vehicle justify deadly force?
I'm trying to find police policy justification for the placement of a cuffed subject in a prone position-in any situation- and I can't find it.
no pdf links to anything at all...just local news here in Minneapolis...quite the dispute that it was policy at the time....and it has been changed. Maybe Chauvin did not do exactly what he should in that move? Not a clue I just heard local news and am trying to think of angles that defense can use because frankly no matter what the criteria will be was that force reasonable for the situation and so far it sure does not seem so.
I'm assuming for safety reasons everyone was advised not to.
Didn't even think of that, good point.
Here's a link to an article on this subject.
The policy was changed or removed in June 2020 - just days after this incident.
A chokehold, the manual states, is a "deadly force option," which the police department defines as "applying direct pressure on a person's trachea or airway." A neck restraint is a "non-deadly force option" defined as "compressing one or both sides of a person's neck with an arm or leg, without applying direct pressure to the trachea or airway."
The training manual, issued to all new officers, also features an image of how to execute the neck restraint. "Ok they are in handcuffs now what," the title above the image states. The department warns that "sudden cardiac arrest typically occurs immediately following a violent struggle." It also advises officers to "place the subject in the recovery position to alleviate positional asphyxia" and encourages officers to call emergency services once the suspect is in handcuffs.
The Minneapolis Police Department trained its officers to use the neck restraint that led to George Floyd's killing, according to court documents
Yeah, no matter what my relationship with him, I'd be done.
I almost had a moment of sympathy for him.
I'm behind today, but
They should have tried. I didn't know that Naloxone was safe for all of these drugs.
To poster Ranch in response: For your first question: MOO
Today, the CIC (Case in chief/prosecutor's turn) part of this trial was laser focused on showing/proving Chauvin's deadly force to GF - with their witness Richard Zimmerman.
That is why the prosecution brought it up today. To show the assualt part of the charge/to prove such deadly force = felony. MOO
For your second question as to admitting that the defense will also say he used deadly force: MOO We shall see how they dance on that.
The defense, they don't have to also "say" he had used deadly force to prove it.???.. Yet, why strategically would they need to buttress/want to bring up and say it is allowed? That just reinforces what the prosecution is saying. He used DEADLY FORCE.. which bumps up the charge for their client.
Are you saying they have a reason to buttress what the State appears to have just proven for a reason I'm totally missing??
IANAL, see above
from previous poster...
Frank: What level of force might that be?
Z: That would be the top tier, the deadly force.
Z: Because of the fact that if your knee is on a person's neck that can kill them.
Zimmerman testifies he has never been trained to "kneel on the neck of someone who is handcuffed behind the back" in his time with MPD.
Frank: What's your responsibility with regard to that person from that moment [handcuffed] on?
Zimmerman: That person is yours, is your responsibility.
His safety is your responsibility and his well being is your responsibility.
Zimmerman says "the threat level is just not there" once someone is handcuffed.
Zimmerman has been handcuffed as part of his training and says "it stretches the muscles back through your chest, and it makes it more difficult to breathe."
Does the autopsy not showing any neck injury create a problem for the prosecution? If the neck shows no signs of trauma then does that show that deadly force wasn’t used? I’m getting so nervous for the defence’s witnesses now because I feel this is where it’s going MOO
Question, on Day 2 when GH gave her first testimony, it was emphasized by the State, iirc, that her age is 27. Was it ever revealed why this is significant, did I miss this? Tia.
Did the State present evidence showing that every time a police officer has used the knee to neck restraint the suspect died?
Someone else can go down the rabbit hole of when they did the video in the ambulance when the ambulance guy asked Lane that EXACT question. If he was in a struggle prior. (I would like to have verbatim vs. my paraphrase). But when I heard what he responded, I was at my computer screen saying " NO!!!! That is not the full truth" MOO.
This is an excellent question. I have wondered the same. However with the testimony about difficulty breathing due to stretched chest muscles and why they should not be in the prone position while cuffed will be included.
I believe it was to make the jury aware of how the bystanders were all different age groups, races, genders etc but they all knew what they were seeing was wrong.
So if, in fact, the knee on the side of the neck is non- deadly, Nelson can argue that DC was acting in compliance with procedures in place at the time.
Where DC is culpable, IMO, is the excessive length of time he was on GF’s neck and in his failure to at least check on his charge’s condition and render aid.
Again IMO, with the autopsy showing NO damage to external or internal neck muscles/ tissue, it will be difficult to prove murder beyond reasonable doubt.
For me.... at this point in the trial.... 2nd degree manslaughter seems the mostly likely conviction. IMO, of course.
This guy is a real piece of work. If he is the person behind the counterfeit bills this essentially could have been avoided. He didn’t kill GF but he sure laid the groundwork for this nightmare. IMO
With friends like him who needs enemies? FPS!