OK, let's do that.
That's impressive.
Why would they? Who is saying it was an overdose anyway ..... Tommy Tucker from Muleshoe, TX or Jack N'Black from Waynesville, Missoura?
What is your point?
Again, I'm impressed
I repeat:
"Who is saying it was an overdose"?
You haven't presented the tinniest amount of
"proof".
Not one bit of
"proof".
Not a single solitary bit of
"proof".
So, to answer your question about what I want:
Proof that Chauvin is guilty. That's what I want.
No, I'm
happy .... I'm
satisfied. A million is enough.
Ahhhhhh, you're talking gibberish. I think the problem is your lack of depth in understanding. I'm pretty sure it's because you've been raised and educated in the two-plane system: Far left - Far right. Democrat - Republican. Black - White. "With us" - "Against us". Chauvin - Overdose. Maybe you're really young, eh?
My friend, you just proved that Chauvin is guilty.
The standard in our system is Guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. It is up to the Jurors to determine if they have doubts, and if those doubts are reasonable. It is up to the Prosecution to prove that the evidence paints a picture that the Defendant did it. The job of the Defense is to show that the evidence could paint another picture, one where the Defendant did not do whatever it is that they are accused of.
Let’s review for a moment.
The prosecution presented witnesses to introduce evidence and testimony to show what happened that day, and explain the details to the Jury. This is normal and a part of every trial.
The Prosecution began by describing the events using the video footage, and then got down to discussing what the details, the nuances were all about.
The Coroner explained how the death happened. He explained that the pressure on the back of Floyd was sufficient to restrict airflow in such a way as to cause cardiac distress and a subsequent cardiac arrest, heart attack for us laymen, in Floyd.
A Forensic Pathologist went into more detail explaining how she had determined that the Positional Asphyxia had caused this death.
A Cardiologist explained how he had calculated the amount of force on Floyd from Chauvin, and further explained how this would certainly restrict airflow to the victim in such a way as to cause a Cardiac Arrest.
The Police Officer who trained Chauvin and re-certified him in the use of arrest techniques as part of their annual training said that the policy within the department was to use this technique only until the suspect was restrained. This Officer said that he absolutely told Chauvin about that during the class, and made a point to emphasize the policy to all the attendees.
The officer who conducted the certification process for First Responder Medical Treatment testified that they had trained Chauvin, and that part of that class was the information that just because someone can speak, doesn’t mean they are actually breathing, as they might be getting insufficient air to sustain life. Protecting the airway was vital.
Worse for Chauvin, was the fact that the First Responder Trainer went through the steps that Chauvin was taught to perform if a victim is not breathing or in respiratory distress. Chauvin did exactly none of those steps.
The Prosecution showed that Chauvin was taught what was right, and chose to do what he wanted instead. To kneel on Floyd regardless of the fact that he knew it was dangerous. Further, the prosecution was able to show that Chauvin was taught to perform certain steps in a medical emergency, and performed exactly none of them. This medical emergency was caused by Chauvin’s actions of kneeling on Floyd well past the point where it was authorized.
So the Prosecution has shown how Floyd died. With testimony from three experts. The prosecution also showed that Chauvin was told that the actions he took on that fateful day were dangerous, and were a violation of policy.
Now, for the Defense, their job is to present the Reasonable Doubt. They could not show that Floyd was combative and required excessive force to keep him from striking out, or get him restrained. He was restrained before Chauvin got to the scene.
The Defense presented a Coroner to contradict the findings of the Prosecution witnesses. This Coroner said that he would rule the death as undetermined. Undetermined, meaning that all they knew was that Floyd was dead. They couldn’t say how he had died.
The Defense Coroner said that he would have considered things that the Prosecution Coroner and experts hadn’t. Such as the amount of car exhaust that Floyd might have been breathing because of the running vehicle nearby.
As far as reasonable doubt goes, that’s pretty weak. In fact, it was so weak that when the Coroner finished, he found more than a hundred of his peers were so shocked by the claims that they wrote Baltimore to recommend that every case this fellow had worked on be reviewed since he was not using medical science to make his determinations, but was using what could best be described as Junk Science.
It is the reasonable doubt the Defense was going for. A way to paint the picture using the same evidence to show a different possibility. Or a way to show that evidence that the Prosecution had not considered, was vital to finding the real cause of death.
This thread began with the claim that Floyd obviously overdosed. That is the explanation to show that Chauvin was innocent. That would be a good bit of proof causing a great deal of doubt. If the Defense had presented such a witness it would have absolutely created some doubt, perhaps enough to get the Not Guilty verdict that team Chauvin desired.
That Defense expert we mentioned above. Let’s get back to him. The defense was unable to get the Prosecution witnesses to moderate their views. So now it is time for the Prosecution to question the Defense Expert. You remember the one who wanted to say that the car exhaust might have been to blame? That one. The only one that Chauvin put up to counter the testimony of the prosecution.
So here we go, the cross examination. The Defense Expert Coroner admitted he had no information on how much car exhaust would be put out, and didn’t know which way the wind was blowing, or how much would be present where Floyd was laying in respect to the exhaust pipe. The Defense Expert said he had no knowledge of how much exhaust the EPA would consider safe, or dangerous.
Ok, so the Defense Expert was just shown to be pulling things out of his ass. It gets worse. A lot worse for Chauvin.
The Defense Expert then stated under cross examination that as a Medical Doctor he could not recommend that someone kneel on another person for minutes at a time because it was potentially dangerous. The Coroner for the Defense further stated that as a Medical Expert, he could not recommend that someone continue kneeling after the individual had lost consciousness. So far each question from the prosecutor has destroyed the entire defense claim. That Floyd died from reasons unrelated to Chauvin’s actions.
The Prosecutor next asked if the Medical Expert would suggest or endorse that someone keep kneeling on an individual when they were unable to find a pulse. The Doctor admitted that as a medical expert he could not endorse that. Next the Prosecutor asked if as a Doctor would he suggest or recommend that CPR be started on a victim who had no pulse.
The Doctor at this point is completely screwed. He says yes. He would recommend that CPR be started.
The Prosecutor handed the hammer to the Doctor, the one to drive the last nail into Chauvin’s coffin. The Prosecutor asked if it is possible that Floyd would be alive today if Chauvin had begun CPR or allowed it to be started when they could not find a pulse.
The Defense Coroner said yes it is possible, CPR has saved many lives. Possible, not definite, not certain. Possible.
Now, in cross examination the Doctor confirmed that all of Floyd’s actions were dangerous, and that he knew they were dangerous, because he had been trained to know they were dangerous.
So Reasonable Doubt is out the window. Using the established evidence, Reasonable Doubt is gone.
We know how Floyd died. We know it is possible to have someone die that way, hundreds have died that way over the last few years before Floyd. We know Chauvin was taught not to do that. We know Chauvin was taught to do things differently. We know that Chauvin did not do those things. We know that the alternate explanation, the possibility of a reasonable doubt, has been destroyed by the guy proposing it.
So all that is left, the entire purpose behind this thread, was that they covered up something. The claim is they covered up the Overdose. And the Overdose was the real reason that Floyd died, and that makes Chauvin innocent. You’ve already agreed that there was no overdose. You correctly pointed out that I beat that well past death. But I wanted it absolutely certain that there was no way to claim that an Overdose was a valid claim. You agreed. There is no way it was an overdose. Window closed. Zero chance.
So what possible alternate explanation remains? Next responses we can compare and contrast with the most famous Not Guilty verdict, the OJ trial.
bjs.ojp.gov
www.statista.com
