Image 01 Image 03

LIVE: Chauvin Trial Day 4 – State Ready to Present Body Cam & Surveillance Video

LIVE: Chauvin Trial Day 4 – State Ready to Present Body Cam & Surveillance Video

Defense claims Prosecution to show only shortened videos, wants full-length versions

Welcome to our LIVE coverage of day 4 of the trial of former police officer Derek Chauvin, over the in-custody death of George Floyd.  I’ll be live blogging the court’s proceedings all day in real-time!

For those who may not know, I’m Attorney Andrew F. Branca, an internationally-recognized expert in use-of-force law, providing daily real-time legal analysis of the Chauvin trial’s proceedings as a guest commentator for Legal Insurrection, as well as over at my own blog, Law of Self Defense.

Anyone interested in a free podcast version of our daily legal commentary and analysis of the Chauvin trial, you can find that available at the Law of Self Defense News/Q&A Podcast, available on most every podcast platform, including Pandora, iHeart, Spotify, Apple Podcast, Google Podcast, simple RSS feed, and more.

Yesterday the prosecutors put on the witness stand Minneapolis Police Department Lieutenant Jeff Rugel.  Lt. Rugel’s connection with the Floyd case is entirely tangential, but legally important–Rugel manages the MPD’s video, audio, 911, and computer information systems.  That is, Rugel manages the systems that control both the MPD’s body cameras and the city’s “Milestone” surveillance camera system, as well as the city’s 911 recording system and other computer records.

As a technical legal matter, before evidence like video and audio can introduced as evidence, the side admitting that evidence must first establish foundation for that evidence.  Some human being must appear on the witness stand, under oath, and testify that the evidence is what it’s claimed to be.  Yesterday afternoon Lt. Rugel served that role, with his testimony providing the necessary foundation to allow the body cam, surveillance, 911, and computer records to be introduced into court.

Note that having been introduced doesn’t mean that any particular piece of this evidence will be admitted in front of the jury.  Establishing foundation is a necessary first step to admission, but there can still be challenges that a particular piece of evidence is inadmissible for other reasons (e.g., irrelevant, excessively prejudicial, etc.).

Interestingly, after Lt. Rugel’s foundational testimony yesterday, the jury was excused from the courtroom, and he provided additional testimony in response to various defense counsel questions about the nature of the offered evidence, as well as the manner in which that evidence was being offered by the state. In particular, it appears that the state intends to offer only abbreviated versions of the body cam and surveillance video footage, and to do so using methods that lack features available in the MPDs own software systems (such as the ability to zoom and pan in a video).

After this additional testimony by Rugel the defense made a motion to allow the full-length body cam and surveillance videos to be offered into evidence–and provided Judge Cahill with those full-length videos on a USB stick, for his review, so we know the defense has them–as well as requested that Judge Cahill require that the videos be shown in court using the MPDs more capable software systems.  Judge Cahill indicated he’d have a response to all that by Friday morning.

Interestingly, the state announced that while they would not have foundational objections to the full-length versions of the full-length videos offered by the defense–how could they, their own witness just provided the necessary foundation for all these videos!–they they would likely have separate admissibility objections.

If you’re wondering why the state would object to full-length versions of the MPD body camera and surveillance video of the Floyd in-custody death–me, too.

You can see video of this discussion outside the hearing of the jury here:

Bottom line, the appearance of Lt. Rugel to provide the foundational testimony needed to offer the MPD body cam and surveillance video into court suggests that we should expect to start seeing that video evidence argued in front of the jury shortly.

This is important, because up to now most of the jury has seen only the very worst parts of the bystander video shown repeatedly over the media, and thus don’t have anything like the full context of what occurred throughout Floyd’s arrest on May 25, 2020.  As they are exposed to more video of Floyd being uncooperative and actively resisting lawful arrest, including kicking with his legs at arresting officers and thus requiring that they restrain his legs for purposes of safety, they will see that there were a great many factors that led to that day’s outcome other than Chauvin’s knee.

Meanwhile, we’ll continue live blogging today’s proceedings in court, as we have been doing since the start of jury selection, and providing commentary and analysis of those proceedings in our separate “wrap-up” post after the court has adjourned for the day.

Here’s a live video feed of the day’s proceedings:

We are using a new live blogging software. If you encounter any problems, post in the regular comment section to this post.

Here’s today’s live blogging, updated in real time throughout the day:

Enjoy the show!


Attorney Andrew F. Branca
Law of Self Defense LLC

Attorney Andrew F. Branca’s legal practice has specialized exclusively in use-of-force law for thirty years.  Andrew provides use-of-force legal consultancy services to attorneys across the country, as well as near-daily use-of-force law insight, expertise, and education to lawyers and non-lawyers alike in the form of blog posts, video, and podcasts, through the Law of Self Defense Membership service.  If this kind of content is of interest to you, try out our two-week Membership trial for a mere 99 cents, with a 200% no-question- asked money-back guarantee, here:  Law of Self Defense Membership Trial.

[Featured image is a screen capture from the live video of this trial, <em>Minnesota v. Chauvin</em>.]


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


one would think that the state would want to establish the manner of death right away and put that to bed.

    Joe-dallas in reply to REDACTED. | April 1, 2021 at 10:15 am

    Most murder trials – the state wants to get the emotional issues in front of the jury first, the pain , the suffering, the attempts by the bystanders to save him, etc. Presenting the emotional side first makes the forensic aspects more believable,, “the ME’s conclusion of homicide” – ie more easy for the jury to belief the knee was the likely cause. (except in this case the actual forensic aspects support the drug overdose as the cause of death)

    That is also why the prosecution has repeatedly shown the edited/worst parts of the videos shown so far. Again the purpose is to make the forensic aspects – ie the knee as being the cause of death

    FOAF in reply to REDACTED. | April 1, 2021 at 4:18 pm

    There is an old saying, “If the facts are against you pound the law, if the law is against you pound the facts, if the law AND the facts are against you pound the table”. The prosecution is essentially pounding the table by emphasizing the emotional aspects i. e. the video of Floyd lying on the ground with Chauvin’s knee in him. It suggests where the facts and law really are in this case.

Turn on the water works again…

Is every prosecution witness going to start crying on command? This is getting ridciulous.

The Packetman | April 1, 2021 at 10:31 am

Holy crap, the emotions start early today …

This Ms. Ross is quite the actress. Her accent has changed 3 or 4 times in the last 10 minutes, and she seems capable of turning the water works on and off, along with her coyness.

mister naturel | April 1, 2021 at 10:52 am

So the Salvation Army hires junkies as security personnel?
just asking

WOW, indeed. He was calling out for his girlfriend, not his mom??

Wow, a couple of low life drug dealers might get whacked over this. Any witness intimation with this trail? I bet there is. Any bribery in this case, check out the 17 year old that video tapes it. This case is dirty everywhere.

I don’t know how he can get a fair trial.

She is turning out to be a GREAT witness for the defense!

Girlfried Ross –

her testimony can cut both ways – both hurt and help defense

A) shows that he survived drug use


B) Defense – came close to dying before due to drug use

    fogflyer in reply to Joe-dallas. | April 1, 2021 at 12:07 pm

    Also counters the prosecution narrative that Floyd could handle a “lethal” dose of Fentanyl because he was an addict. Girlfriend testified he had been clean for several months right before his death and alluded that Fentanyl was NOT his drug of choice and probably didn’t know what he was actually taking as the pills were made to look like Percocet.

      Char Char Binks in reply to fogflyer. | April 1, 2021 at 4:35 pm

      Nobody is “good” at taking drugs. The more tolerance a druggie builds, the more he needs, and the more he takes. An OD death may happen the first time, or the thousandth time, but it’s always the last time.

        drednicolson in reply to Char Char Binks. | April 2, 2021 at 12:00 am

        Dealers cut their “product” with fillers to stretch the supply out and widen their profit margins. The mix of drug to filler varies, and addicts are creatures of habit. If a user changes dealers, either because the regular got busted or the user has moved, frequently the new fix will be taken in the same amount as the old one, with no thought given to how “pure” the new mix may be. A cause of many accidental ODs.

“Mama, life had just begun
But now I’ve gone and thrown it all away

Mama, ooh
Didn’t mean to make you cry
If I’m not back again this time tomorrow
Carry on, carry on as if nothing really matters

Too late, my time has come
Sends shivers down my spine
Body’s aching all the time
Goodbye, everybody, I’ve got to go
Gotta leave you all behind and face the truth

Mama, ooh (Any way the wind blows)
I don’t want to die
I sometimes wish I’d never been born at all”

–Bohemian Rhapsody, Queen

I have yet to see a state witness that helps their case.

    lurker9876 in reply to robbied. | April 1, 2021 at 8:37 pm

    Not even Pleoger. The only thing he did was to provide his opinion on certain things. He also appeared to be swayed by the kangaroo court of the crowd.

Branca comment in regard to Girlfriend Ross testimony -“To the extent evidence supports defense argument that drug overdose also contained stimulants, undercuts state’s argument.

This testimony favors defense again.”

My comment – That is assuming the jury understands the concept! I doubt that several will understand

    REDACTED in reply to Joe-dallas. | April 1, 2021 at 11:39 am

    and then there is “do they want to understand” crowd, which aint sparse

    Joe-dallas in reply to Joe-dallas. | April 1, 2021 at 11:41 am

    Just to clarify, many of the state’s witnesses are cutting against the State’s theory,

    Though my point is whether the jury is able to see through the State’s narrative and recognize and understand the incompatibility of the testimony with the state’s theory. (no offense to Branca’s comment – the offense was intended to the jury panel)

      kimd09876 in reply to Joe-dallas. | April 1, 2021 at 1:27 pm

      I think the jury is going to have riots of last summer in their heads and may avoid evidence that points to acquittal.

        lurker9876 in reply to kimd09876. | April 1, 2021 at 1:38 pm

        If I were a member of this jury panel, I would probably go into the witness protection program along with my family members. If Chauvin is acquitted, then the other 3 officers’ will be acquitted or their cases dismissed.

        With Bravender’s testimony, it appears that this is standard operating procedure for dealing with drug overdose. Also, he made it clear that drug overdose is a common issue in that “hot block”.

How many times had Floyd experienced overdose and treated by doctors in the last few years – both in Houston and in Minneapolis?

    lurker9876 in reply to lurker9876. | April 1, 2021 at 11:46 am

    Furthermore, the medical industry should have plenty of historical data and observation on drug abuse and overdoses by users over time, especially with drug tolerance.

    Floyd was complaining about his tummy, pain, etc., in March – similar complaints on May 25th, 2020. How much drugs were in his system last March and how did that compare to what was in his system on that fateful day?

      Chewbacca in reply to lurker9876. | April 1, 2021 at 12:11 pm

      If the prosecution was actually familiar with the tolerance that addicts build they would know that it requires them to have to use more narcotics to get the same high. It doesn’t make you less susceptible to dying from that increased amount.

        lurker9876 in reply to Chewbacca. | April 1, 2021 at 1:40 pm

        Agreed. Floyd was most likely high in the store and by taking more of that Percocet and meth in the car, he got higher…fentanyl 3X his body weight plus all other drugs. Why was he on the left side on the ground?

        Char Char Binks in reply to Chewbacca. | April 1, 2021 at 4:39 pm

        The prosecution knows; they just choose not to say.

        Joe-dallas in reply to Chewbacca. | April 1, 2021 at 6:16 pm

        With alcohol – a person’s body doesnt become more tolerant of the alcohol. What happens is the body develops coping skills/social skills to enable the appearance of developing tolerance. However, once the liver starts to deteriorate, the tolerance starts to rapidly fall, often to the point that only one or two beers will cause the alcoholic to pass out.

        On the other hand with opiods, as chewbacca pointed out, it takes more to get the same high. Unfortunately I cant find any article that is authoriative as to what effect habitual use has on body functions (as opposed to pain tolerance)

Frank’s re-direct is very weak after Nelson’s cross examination. Every time!

I share Joe-dallas’ concern about the jury.

    BillyHW in reply to lurker9876. | April 1, 2021 at 12:16 pm

    Nelson has done pretty well for himself considering he’s all alone. I wish he had Mark O’Mara to help him though.

      lurker9876 in reply to BillyHW. | April 1, 2021 at 1:54 pm

      Is Nelson a public defender? If so, he should see a really good job offer after this.

      Midfiaudiophile in reply to BillyHW. | April 1, 2021 at 3:44 pm

      Exhibit 248 should be bad for the prosecution, so I’m not sure why they’re bringing it back up. It shows Officer Chauvin’s body weight across Mr. Floyd’s back and left shoulder, not his neck.

      There’s far-more incriminating angles of that position, and we’ve already established that Mr. Smith was at the scene, why are they bringing up that photo again?

        Midfiaudiophile in reply to Midfiaudiophile. | April 1, 2021 at 3:45 pm

        I meant this to be a new thread, but it posted here since I was considering making a reply but reconsidered. Apologies for the distraction.

    The Friendly Grizzly in reply to lurker9876. | April 1, 2021 at 3:09 pm

    Sorry for the down-tick.

Oh my!
I guess we know why Mr Hall is pleads the 5th!

When will they start putting on witnesses for the procecution?
Or did the judge decide to let the defense go first in this trial?

Bravender isn’t helping the prosecution team.

Bruce Hayden | April 1, 2021 at 12:49 pm

Been 30 years since Evidence class, but my memory is that if one party introduces less than the entirety of something like a video, the other party is allowed to show parts of it, or the whole thing, to show context, etc. that should allow the defense to show parts of the police body cams that the State did not, and the requirement that they provide all the evidence they have, should give the Defense access to the MPD’s entire suite of video tools.

We shall see.

    Referred to as the “rule of completeness.”

      Midfiaudiophile in reply to Andrew Branca. | April 1, 2021 at 2:07 pm

      This isn’t really something that Nelson can openly capitalize on, but I really don’t like Eldridge. We discussed the Leading Questions thing the other day, but it still makes me feel like rather than trying to discover the truth, she’s trying to manipulate the witness into saying what she wants him to in a way that I don’t get from Frank or the other lawyers. Seems insincere, especially on critical testimony like Bravender.

      They should have left the “Call was initially code 2, changed to code 3” thing on the floor. It seems petty and basically irrelevant. Cops noticed that it was a life-threatening situation, they called for more urgent medical backup. Why is that sinister?

      Off topic to Mr Branca, but would that also apply in the Fed case against the 1/6 rioters if the prosecution wants to use any of the internal camera footage of the Capitol building? Because I’m presuming the Feds will fight like rabid weasels to keep that footage out of the public, and the various defenses will want to see it all.

one could argue that the load and go was caused by the crowd

    Char Char Binks in reply to REDACTED. | April 1, 2021 at 4:58 pm

    Of course it was, as was the no-load, no-go of the body removal van that came to take michael brown home.

Nelson: Arrived at scene where seen officers on top of patient before?
EMT – Bravender: Yes.

Eldridge: Objection, irrelevant.

Cahill: Overruled.


Paramedic with over 20 years’ experience here. A couple of thoughts:
1 Sodium Bicarb is typically given when patient “downtime” exceeds 10 minutes.
2 Loading in the truck gets you close to equipment, and isolates team/patient from surroundings. Easier to work. Could be for a number of reasons.
3 The only reason I can think of to drive three blocks, pull over, and wait to be joined by more units is because you are worried about scene safety (the crowd)

i don’t think bravender was a net positive for the prosecution.

he stated that unresponsive people that are revived can become extremely violent. kinda lends credence to chauvin pinning his knee on the side of floyd’s neck.

    lurker9876 in reply to drozz. | April 1, 2021 at 1:45 pm

    I’ll give two examples using animals. After one of my dogs, a 60 LBS Lab mix, were put under anesthesia to be neutered, he went into a panic mode and they had to control him. He was a strong dog.

    Another one deals with horses. I’ve heard that horses will wake up from anesthesia and go into a panic mode and become violent. That’s why the rooms are well padded.

Steve Richter | April 1, 2021 at 1:52 pm

focus defense on Chauvin trying to help Mr. Floyd. He made decision the best thing for Floyd was to stay still and calm down. If release from pinned position Chauvin was worried he would try to evade the police again, causing harm to himself because of his delirious state.

Midfiaudiophile | April 1, 2021 at 2:11 pm

“You mentioned fire… why is it important that fire be brought to a situation like this?”

They really like Firefighter Hansen and they’re still trying to save her claim of “I could have saved him, but Thau stopped me” for some reason. Doesn’t seem like the optimal focus for the prosecution.

So it appears we have established that Courteney Ross was officially the fiancée?

I remember there being conflicting reports last year with some media outlets reporting Ross as his girlfriend and others reporting Shawanda Hill as his girlfriend. There was even some social media chatter accusing Ross of being an imposter or crisis actor by people who claimed to know Hill.

I’m assuming Shawanda Hill is the person identified in the “Hall? Or Chalanda (sp?) Hill?” exchange. Was she a girlfriend, a drug dealer, or possibly both? Should we expect to hear from her at this trial, too?

    Johnny Weissmuller in reply to JaneDoh. | April 1, 2021 at 5:32 pm

    Did Mr. Floyd get down on bended knee in a public place and offer a ring of significant value?

Also a technical note: all of the entries post-lunch have been double-posting.

Nelson: Exhibit 56, shown here, you can feel where carotid artery was while Chauvin’s knee was in that place?
Smith: Yes, sir.
Means Chauvin’s knee was not on Floyd’s carotid at that time.”

Branca question – Seems this was only time question was asked – Is defense not allowed to ask similar question to same answers multiple times? to emphasize the point?

It feels like Nelson missed an opportunity with Smith to make the point that officer was no longer needed in the ambulance as the officer was capable of performing compressions but Floyd could not be saved by compressions alone. Floyd required more advanced care than an officer could provide.

    divemedic in reply to [email protected]. | April 1, 2021 at 3:53 pm

    I don’t think so. We use cops all the time for chest compressions. Anyone can do those, and that frees up personnel with more advanced skills to do more advanced things.

      No doubt cops can do chest compressions. Anybody can do them. The question is whether failure to do chest compressions under these particular circumstances constitutes in effect a killing crime. Cops in this scenario faced with demands at multiple levels, most of which were arguably more central to their core duties than diagnosing the need for chest compressions, especially with professional medics en route on a code 3.

      In any case, not at all clear that chest compressions would have saved Floyd. CPR in general is nowhere like a guaranteed save, especially in a drug overdose situation in a patient with substantial hypertensive and cardiac disease.

        divemedic in reply to Andrew Branca. | April 1, 2021 at 5:06 pm

        You are correct in that, but I merely pointing out that cops are sometimes taken with the patient to the hospital.

        divemedic in reply to Andrew Branca. | April 1, 2021 at 5:21 pm

        I would also point out that there are times when EMS doesn’t even do compressions. For example, the safety of rescuers comes first- no one touches a patient until the scene is made safe for rescuers.

      My thought was that Nelson could have used Smith to drive the point that when the firefighters arrived, the officer was replaced in the ambulance by a firefighter, as the firefighter possessed a larger skillset than just being able to perform compressions — because Floyd’s survival required more advanced treatment than compressions alone. It would begin to lay the groundwork for later expert testimony that chest compressions performed by officers at the scene would not have been enough to save Floyd.

The Packetman | April 1, 2021 at 3:34 pm

IANAL, but I struggle to understand the point of the questioning of this fire captain … unless the goal is to completely confound the jury.

    lurker9876 in reply to The Packetman. | April 1, 2021 at 3:41 pm

    What I got from the testimonies of the last three witnesses was…standard operating procedures. Amazing demeanor from these 3 witnesses….calm and well exposed to many victims of drug abuse and overdoses. Well trained and well versed on policies and procedures. They provided NO proof of intent of harm by any of the officers since the officers were also following policy and procedures.

I see where they are going. They are trying to blame the cops for not allowing the off duty FF to begin CPR.

    drozz in reply to divemedic. | April 1, 2021 at 3:59 pm


    that’s a tough spot to put a cop in when the crowd is screaming.

    carriemae16 in reply to divemedic. | April 1, 2021 at 4:20 pm

    Agreed. However, given that off-duty firefighter Hansen did not possess or present the officers with proper identification & that she exhibited extremely unprofessional and belligerent behavior, I don’t think a reasonable person could fault the officers for not allowing her to intervene.

      divemedic in reply to carriemae16. | April 1, 2021 at 5:26 pm

      Yeah. Hard to say that you are there to help as a professional when you are calling the police officer a “b!tch”

      fogflyer in reply to carriemae16. | April 1, 2021 at 7:02 pm

      Yes, and let’s not forget that the officers expected EMTs and paramedics to be on site any second (something the belligerent Miss Hansen was not aware of.) It does actually seem like for some reason the EMTs took much longer to arrive than normal, which bodes well for the officer’s actions.

more and more the timeline looks like…the police acted by the book.

theres so much info here that never made it to the news. never saw one pic of floyds chest tat of an AK. didn’t know he was recently hospitalized for an OD

    Johnny Weissmuller in reply to drozz. | April 1, 2021 at 5:25 pm

    The tats of the deceased were in the porno film that featured him. Also described in the autopsy report.

Nelson’s cross of Norton and other witnesses indicated that it took 12 minutes for the people with the right skills to address Floyd medically. The EMTs did not have all of the resources needed in a safe place and needing Fire for help. Furthermore, the fact that the EMTs indicated that they needed help did not help the prosecution team explain that the off duty FF to begin CPR or chest compression.

I’m surprised Hansen is still employed as a firefighter.

Someone may have already commented on this:

Norton: Yes. I was aware a man had been killed in police custody,

How did he know he had been “killed” versus “had died” in police custody?”

    lurker9876 in reply to JAL. | April 1, 2021 at 4:06 pm

    Probably because of what the people inside the store, including Hansen told Norton.

Why was there no objection to the word “killed”? Also could/should a witness be asked if he/she was encouraged to use the terms “dead” or “deceased” in place of “unresponsive”?

are all trials this stupid ?

State is actually starting to throw some substantive punches using Chauvin’s sergeant and the policy on maximal restraint (side recovery)…. Cause of death will be critical.

I think Nelson blew a chance on re-cross with the ambulance driver to nail down why he moved to a different location.

He needed to ask something like, “So one of the reasons to move a patient into the ambulance is because you have your equipment in there, correct?”

Answer: Yes

“‘But the reason you moved the ambulance itself to a new location was for the sole purpose of distancing yourself from a crowd that you thought could be dangerous or disruptive to your work, correct?”

Seems like the answer would have had to be yes.

    Midfiaudiophile in reply to fogflyer. | April 1, 2021 at 5:17 pm

    State, in their infinite wisdom, argued that for him. “Plus, you needed to be able to focus, right?”

    Might have been good for Nelson to attack that point more aggressively, but I’m sure he can come back to put it into perspective in closing arguments.

Testimonies and victim impact statements all in one!

I am watching this delayed, so my comments are probably lagging a bit behind, but I am now seeing the photograph being shown where the 2nd ambulance paramedic is checking the pulse of Floyd. Look at how far forward his fingers are compared to Chauvin’s knee! I sure hope Nelson digs into this. It is quite obvious that at no time in any video did we see Chauvin’s knee near as far forward on Floyd’s neck as the paramedics fingers are.

Quite simply, Chauvin’s neck was NOT compressing the carotid.

Pleoger’s testimony did not yield anything concrete. He demonstrated that the officers had to make assessment and consider the best decisions at that moment of time.

ploeger scores one for the prosecution. Nelson still performed admirably in bringing in “fog of war”

The Packetman | April 1, 2021 at 6:47 pm

There was an objection by Nelson that caused the jury to be escorted out. Mr Branca will be more clear but I believe the question asked of Ploeger was ‘In your opinion was the use of force excessive?’.

Nelson objected because according to policy, the circumstances of the incident automatically required the inquiry to be held by people of higher position than Ploeger. So, if he’s not high enough to make to decision, why is his opinion relevant?

I guess he did the best he could to get that into his cross …

Midfiaudiophile | April 1, 2021 at 7:43 pm

Nelson should have objected to 77 and, possibly, 78 as purely prejudicial without evidentiary value. People have a strong reaction to seeing other people not wearing masks these days, particularly in sterile environments, like a hospital. Jurors are going to look at that picture and think either that he’s a heartless racist Trump supporter or that he has a reckless disregard for human life (Wait… wasn’t that one of the Murder charges?), particularly since there’s no good way or reason to ask WHY he wasn’t wearing the thing.

    Midfiaudiophile in reply to Midfiaudiophile. | April 1, 2021 at 8:24 pm

    The more I think about this, the more it bothers me. What does it prove? That Pleoger was at the hospital? I don’t think that’s a disputed fact.

Paramedic #2 has such a great attitude wow. Must be a really fun guy to be around.

Lets_get_a_fair_trial | April 1, 2021 at 10:10 pm

what if Nelson got an experiment on camera: a healthy non dragged person being held in the same position for 15 minutes, and remain ok (obviously). Or get data about other arrests that used the same hold, that went ok, and possibly experts opinion – that this hold can not be possibly a cause of death for a non ODed person. Wouldn’t it get Chauvin off the hook?