George Floyd death / Derek Chauvin trial - Sidebar week 3

Status
Not open for further replies.

Gibbo214

Former Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2020
Messages
1,744
Reaction score
15,210
You only have to respond a few times to incidents of breathing difficulties....the 4 year old completely choking on a hot dog slice with seconds to reverse it...the asthmatic teen completely hunched over not able to take a breath in...the victim asphixiating on his own vomit...to dread the calls of "I can't breathe". You recognize "I can't breathe" statements can go south so very quickly and you immediately have to help. Not a second is invaluable. That is always a scary statement to hear.
My younger daughter has a serious allergy to yellow food coloring and my mother in law, not thinking that the coloring would be in packaged chicken noodle soup gave her some. She had a laryngeal spasm and could not breathe. I was driving her to the hospital and the ambulance me on the road. I will never forget the terrified look in her eyes.
 

Wild Rose

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2017
Messages
1,148
Reaction score
7,829
My younger daughter has a serious allergy to yellow food coloring and my mother in law, not thinking that the coloring would be in packaged chicken noodle soup gave her some. She had a laryngeal spasm and could not breathe. I was driving her to the hospital and the ambulance me on the road. I will never forget the terrified look in her eyes.
That's it exactly. The terror. You can help someone with broken bones, dislocations, cardiac arrythmias, burn victims and so on, but it is that terror in the eyes you never forget with someone who cannot get their breath in.
 

MsBetsy

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2018
Messages
18,817
Reaction score
165,328
Okay. It's my understanding that cops have to operate in choatic situations, some much more so than this one. I believe someone pointed out on the stand that there wasn't even a gathering of people for about 3 minutes into the neck restraint, and GF was almost dead by then, wasn't he? I don't know the exact times when the person testified there wasn't much of a gathering, but I think that what actually happened needs to be taken into consideration, not what could happen.

The officers were not so worried about any gather of bystanders that they didn't shield their backsides or call for backup. TT tasked himself with handling the bystanders, which had gathered from what we see, only on one side of the car. I don't recall Lang being interrupted on his bodycam by anyone trying to approach him at GF's feet. I don't recall anyone walking up behind the 3 officers on GF except the firefighter and then the EMS.

I just don't see how a gathering that size was a challenge to 5 officers. The park officer didn't even see the need to cuff the other two and come over to assist. Nor did he try to call for backup. He never, on his cam, seems to worry about the gathering either.

I don't know what else DC's attention was on but GF. I'm not arguing, just stating what I see. we can agree to disagree.
Yes, in the beginning there were only three or four people there, including the older man and the nine year old girl. It was after about four minutes, when Floyd was obviously in distress, when Williams and the first responder got there. By the end there were about ten people standing around, which was the "gathering crowd" Nelson was referring to. Imo
 

wasnt_me

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2010
Messages
5,048
Reaction score
6,249
It's really common knowledge that police officers keep people a safe distance from a person they have detained. They have a duty to protect the public from a person they have arrested. This goes without saying. I don't expect the deal with the firefighter to be a big factor in regards to the Jury. IMO

The question was posed about whether they allow people who have professional knowledge, not just regular people, to help in a medical situation. If they do not allow people with professional knowledge to come up, state their profession, and then help, Nelson should have made that clear on her cross-examination when she testified that she, a FF, was not allowed to help.

I don't know how "common knowledge" it is that they don't allow professionals to help. There's a professional replying with us right now that says she's never been stopped from helping when police are there but EMS isn't.

Here's what she said:

Sorry, just saw your question. Very sincerely, no. I never had any officer stop me from helping when their own squad hadn't shown up yet.

IMO, the testimony should be considered along with the rest of the bystander testimony. The gist for me is that lay people and experienced people saw that GF was in distress, but DC continued maximal restraint despite advice from laypeople, regular people, and his own fellow officer TL.
 
Last edited:

wasnt_me

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2010
Messages
5,048
Reaction score
6,249
I don't think the police can allow strangers to get involved in any type of situation where they have a person in custody. That would not happen. I don't hold this against the police at that scene but I believe Chauvin is guilty--not sure yet what degree.

I don't think we have to hold that against them. They didn't need her help because they are trained themselves to take a pulse and provide some amount of aid to distressed people on their own. They didn't need her in order to recognize it, and for me, her testimony helped me to understand that if she can recognize it, so can the police on scene.
 
Last edited:

SouthAussie

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2012
Messages
25,209
Reaction score
134,094
I agree with this, but I contend that the reasonable among them did listen and actually took the pulse and actually came to the conclusion that GF should be rolled over. DC and TT might be the only people on that scene who didn't think or were unaware that GF needed medical attention. TT was tending to the crowd. DC has no excuse.

Chauvin knows he has no excuse. He was willing to plead guilty to 3rd degree murder.

<modsnip: unnecessary>
 
Last edited by a moderator:

SouthAussie

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2012
Messages
25,209
Reaction score
134,094

"If, in fact, Derek Chauvin is acquitted, he could still face federal criminal civil rights charges. We do know that a federal grand jury has been meeting to consider those charges. And if, in fact, he is charged and convicted in federal court, he could face up to life in prison."

I wonder if this is what Chauvin was trying to avoid with his former plea. A potential lengthy federal sentence.
It seems he had asked for immunity against prosecution on federal charges if his plea was accepted.

People don't generally try for a plea deal unless they are attempting to avoid something worse. imo
 

MsBetsy

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2018
Messages
18,817
Reaction score
165,328
It's really common knowledge that police officers keep people a safe distance from a person they have detained. They have a duty to protect the public from a person they have arrested. This goes without saying. I don't expect the deal with the firefighter to be a big factor in regards to the Jury. IMO
But in this case it was the person being arrested who needed protecting, not the bystanders. They probably would have performed life saving measures themselves, had the officers allowed them to.
 

wasnt_me

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2010
Messages
5,048
Reaction score
6,249
"If, in fact, Derek Chauvin is acquitted, he could still face federal criminal civil rights charges. We do know that a federal grand jury has been meeting to consider those charges. And if, in fact, he is charged and convicted in federal court, he could face up to life in prison."

I wonder if this is what Chauvin was trying to avoid with his former plea. A potential lengthy federal sentence.
It seems he had asked for immunity against prosecution on federal charges if his plea was accepted.

People don't generally try for a plea deal unless they are attempting to avoid something worse. imo

It reminds me of a case I followed a long time back. Frank Jude. If I remember correctly, the off-duty officers that beat him got off, but not with the civil rights charges. I believe that some who didn't even have state trials got convicted for the civil rights violations in the Frank Jude case.
 

Leve

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 21, 2004
Messages
360
Reaction score
1,998
And if someone was impeding your ability to breathe, you wouldn't struggle?

He started yelling I can't breath long before he was pinned down.

And honestly, I would have gotten into the back of the police car as quietly as possible and concentrated on nothing but breathing.

Maybe some people act out yelling and crying during panic attacks. Theres probably vidros out there but no way would I watch them. Lol. Seeing stuff like that makes ME start to panic.
 

wasnt_me

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2010
Messages
5,048
Reaction score
6,249
The problem for me was he was acting like that before they tried to put him in the car or he was on the ground.

To me it looks more how a drunk or high person acts then an anxiety or panic attack. Yelling out and crying ECT..

Acting like he couldn't breathe or just articulating that he couldn't breathe?

I ask that because I think we can tell a difference in GF on video when the physical effects of the restraint and being unable to breathe kicked in. They pointed out in court when GF sounded like he was in distress, when his voice became weaker, etc, until he stopped speaking and moving.

Even if DC didn't believe GF when he wouldn't get in the car or once on the ground, DC was in a position to recognize markedly different behavior in GF that should have triggered DC to de-escalate force and aid GF.

IMHO, there is faking, but there are also indicators of when it's time to take someone seriously. The bystanders saw it, and Thomas Lang saw it. DC has no excuse for not seeing it.
 
Last edited:

MadMcGoo

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Nov 1, 2018
Messages
6,548
Reaction score
21,081
He never pleaded guilty because he felt guilt. He did so because it came with a light sentence. I’d do the same. Regardless of what I felt, I’d know for sure the people were out to hang me. JMO
 

MsBetsy

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2018
Messages
18,817
Reaction score
165,328
The question was posed about whether they allow people who have professional knowledge, not just regular people, to help in a medical situation. If they do not allow people with professional knowledge to come up, state their profession, and then help, Nelson should have made that clear on her cross-examination when she testified that she, a FF, was not allowed to help.

I don't know how "common knowledge" it is that they don't allow professionals to help. There's a professional replying with us right now that says she's never been stopped from helping when police are there but EMS isn't.

Here's what she said:



IMO, the testimony should be considered along with the rest of the bystander testimony. The gist for me is that lay people and experienced people saw that GF was in distress, but DC continued maximal restraint despite advice from laypeople, regular people, and his own fellow officer TL.
It was Lane's attorney who publicly suggested the bystanders should have done something to help Floyd.

I think it was in an interview with CNN that Earl Gray argued that Lane "didn't have a real good view of what was going on." He then criticized the bystanders for not intervening.

"If the public is there and they're so in an uproar about this, they didn't intercede either."

I got the quote from Insider.com, June 9th, but I don't know how to link it.

So first the bystanders were unconcerned citizens who didn't stop police from hurting Floyd and now they are an angry mob who distracted them from being able to render aid. They just can't win. No wonder the firefighter was so hostile on the witness stand. Imo
 

Gibbo214

Former Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2020
Messages
1,744
Reaction score
15,210
That's it exactly. The terror. You can help someone with broken bones, dislocations, cardiac arrythmias, burn victims and so on, but it is that terror in the eyes you never forget with someone who cannot get their breath in.
And although my MIL and I had a prickly relationship, I can still remember the terror in her eyes too, that she may have harmed her much loved granddaughter.
 

missy1974

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2008
Messages
10,142
Reaction score
31,353
He never pleaded guilty because he felt guilt. He did so because it came with a light sentence. I’d do the same. Regardless of what I felt, I’d know for sure the people were out to hang me. JMO
There are a number of reasons why people would plead guilty, it's not always because they truly feel that they are.
JMO
 

wasnt_me

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2010
Messages
5,048
Reaction score
6,249
He never pleaded guilty because he felt guilt. He did so because it came with a light sentence. I’d do the same. Regardless of what I felt, I’d know for sure the people were out to hang me. JMO

Did he say he wanted to plead guilty for a lighter sentence and not because he felt guilty or is that your opinion of why he wanted to plead guilty? Looking for clarification of what DC actually said, no offense.
 

RANCH

United we stand, divided we fall.
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
15,573
Reaction score
26,475
He never pleaded guilty because he felt guilt. He did so because it came with a light sentence. I’d do the same. Regardless of what I felt, I’d know for sure the people were out to hang me. JMO
Innocent People Who Plead Guilty

We all know that innocent people can be found guilty of crimes they didn’t commit, but innocent people might actually choose to plead guilty simply because they’re afraid to go to trial. The fear is based on a simple fact — people who go to trial and are convicted get much heavier sentences than those who plea-bargain.

Innocent People Who Plead Guilty
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top