Image 01 Image 03

LIVE: Chauvin Trial Day 8 – Will State’s Non-MPD Use of Force Expert Save This Prosecution?

LIVE: Chauvin Trial Day 8 – Will State’s Non-MPD Use of Force Expert Save This Prosecution?

Not seen a prosecution suffer a day like yesterday since Zimmerman trial

Welcome to our ongoing coverage of the Minnesota murder trial of Derek Chauvin, over the in-custody death of George Floyd.  I am Attorney Andrew Branca for Law of Self Defense, providing guest commentary and analysis of this trial for Legal Insurrection.

Anyone interested in a free podcast version of our daily legal commentary and analysis of the Chauvin trial can access the Law of Self Defense News/Q&A Podcast, available on most every podcast platform, including PandoraiHeartSpotifyApple PodcastGoogle Podcastsimple RSS feed, and more.

Well, yesterday was truly a terrible, horrible, no good, very bad day for the prosecution in the trial of Derek Chauvin, for reasons I detailed in yesterday’s wrap-up post, which you can find here:

Chauvin Trial Day 7 Wrap-Up: a horrible day for the prosecution

The bottom line, however, is that two of the state’s most important witnesses, the Minneapolis Police Department use-of-force trainer Lieutenant Johnny Mercil and the MPD medical services coordinator Sergeant Nicole MacKenzie, both provided extensive testimony highly favorable to the defense on cross-examination—and therefore, of course, highly damaging to the prosecution.

If you haven’t seen their cross, I provide it again here for your viewing pleasure—it’s worth the watch:

Mercil Cross-Examination (April 6, 2021)

MacKenzie Cross-Examination (April 6, 2021)

Indeed, so effective was the testimony of the medical coordinator for the defense, that the defense has informed the court that they intend to re-call her as a defense witness when it’s the defense’s turn to present the jury with their case in chief.

Now a week-and-a-half into the state presenting its narrative of guilt for the jury, until yesterday I would have characterized the prosecution’s performance as weak, scattered, and not entirely internally coherent—all terrible traits when one bears the burden of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.  Indeed, those are traits that foster a reasonable doubt.

Yesterday, however, was a genuine catastrophe for the state, on a level I’ve not seen for a prosecution since the trial of George Zimmerman.

In the Zimmerman case, the bad days for the prosecution were not isolated events, but rather occurred sequentially, day after day, with each day seemingly being worse for the prosecution than even the previous horrible day. Whether that will prove to be the case in Minnesota v. Chauvin remains to be seen—but it doesn’t look good for the prosecution so far.

Today the State will presumably seek to recover its balance with the testimony of its paid expert witness on use of force, Sergeant Jody Stiger of the Los Angeles Police Department.

Stiger began his direct testimony yesterday afternoon, with the court recessing for the day before direct was completed, so I expect we’ll begin today with Stiger’s continued direct.

What I saw of Stiger yesterday was not what I’d call compelling or impressive testimony, however.  Sure, he said the words the state paid him to say, essentially stating in a conclusory manner that Chauvin’s use of force was excessive. He even suggested that instead Officer Lake,  who Stiger believed had established a rapport with Floyd, should have continued to talk Floyd through the whole interaction. Really? After Floyd had taken a fatal dose of fentanyl upon initial contact by Lake? I guess that’s one view of events, but it doesn’t strike me as a view likely to stand up to critical questioning on cross-examination.

For your viewing pleasure, here’s yesterday’s partial direct questioning by the state of Sergeant Stiger:

Stiger Direct Questioning (April 6, 2021)

In any case, I suppose we’ll find out today, when Sergeant Stiger is subject to the cross-examination skills that Defense Counsel Eric Nelson used with such destructive (to the state’s case) effect with state’s witnesses MPD Lieutenant Mercil (use of force trainer) and MPD Sergeant Nicole MacKenzie (medical trainer).

That’s where things stand today, folks as we prepare to conduct our usual LIVE real-time coverage of the trial proceedings throughout the day, followed this evening by our usual end-of-day wrap-up commentary and analysis.

Here’s the live video feed of today’s trial proceedings:

Here’s today’s LIVE Blog commentary:

Until next time, stay safe!


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. He wrote the first edition of the “Law of Self Defense” in 1997, which you can now order in its current edition for just the price of shipping and handling by clicking here.  To know YOUR state’s use-of-force laws in an actionable way that will keep you safer physically and legally, take our state-specific advanced use of force class either streamed online or via a shipped DVD with a 100% no-question- asked money-back guarantee, here:  Law of Self Defense State Specific Use-Of-Force Class.

[Featured image is a screen capture from video of today’s court proceedings in MN v. Chauvin.]




Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Any bets that Jody Stiger got a lot of coaching last night

Coaching based on limited and one-sided story, which seems to be their practice.

So more direct this morning before handing over to Nelson.

I find myself looking forward to Nelson’s cross after each witness. He destroyed every state witness thus far and it was fun watching them.

How did Andrew find the WaPo live link before the WaPo channel even posted it?

Doesn’t matter

They are demanding blood, our Supreme Court Justices are so terrified of the mob they gave A
Erica away to the facists Globalist pigs

This P.O. hasn’t got a chance

Pigs in a blanket, fry them like bacon

Got one race monger his own television show and a run for President

You think these 12 people will have the spinal fortitude to stand against the mob?

It’s only gotten 1,000 times worse since Zimmerman…

Left knee still on Floyd’s neck area

Would that be specifically that part of the “neck area” known as the “shoulder”?

Until and unless State can prove BRD that DC knee caused GF death not sure what a jury can do but find not guilty. If Im writing closing, I have a big sheet of paper, write a big “O” on it and say this is the proof that State has shown to prove DC knee caused GF death. Then write here is proof Fetanyl caused death. Show ME report. Good day.

If the judge grants Hall’s request to not testify in person and plead the 5th can Nelson bring that up in trial and make the jury aware of thar?

Is Mr. Chauvin on trial for not following MPD policy to the letter, or for something else. I keep forgetting on these directs.

Prosecutions argument is that they should have handcuffed GF and left? They keep saying that they shouldn’t have had any use of force after he was handcuffed, then that simply the cops presence is ‘force’. Its pretty ridiculous.

Also, prosecutions story changes with the witness. wtf.

    Midfiaudiophile in reply to Smooth23. | April 7, 2021 at 10:53 am

    I’m confused by why they keep talking about double-locking the handcuffs so they won’t tighten? Is that a potential factor in Mr. Floyd’s death? Was there any way for Chauvin to see that the handcuffs were or were not double-locked? Why is this so vital for Schleiter? Something about race?

And yet despite all this great reporting by Andrew Branca, if you were to look cursorily at any of the main stream media feeds and news stories you would think that the prosecution is crushing it and it’s a slam dunk case that Chauvin is guilty. It’s all just theater for them. They’re just hoping for more riots.

Opinions!! Opinions!! Opinions!! Did Stiger interview all 4 of these officers???

Wow…not a certified expert on use of force!! Only here for personal representation!

Yes, but still have to be objectionable reasonable.

Is that verbatim?

I think it is Officer Lane, not Lake.

If Stiger is going to rely on Graham v. Connor as some kind of national standard on police uses of force, because he’s not personally an expert on MPD use-of-force policy, there’s going to be a problem. Because Graham v. Connor pretty much just sets forth the objective reasonableness test, it doesn’t go anywhere near the level of detail you need to criticize officers for things like knee placement.

Eggshell Skull | April 7, 2021 at 11:17 am

Both the initial 911 call “he’s not in control of himself” and the obvious, profound impairment observed by everyone gets left out when it’s implied GF should’ve just been ticketed.

I’d also note counterfeiting is one of only two crimes listed in the constitution. I think that makes it more than a nuisance or infraction.

Then the bizarre behavior where GF is persuasively mouthing compliance, but physically resisting officers to the point where 1. a gun is trained on him and 2. a second police officer is needed to cuff him.

All these point to a person who should not be in control of a vehicle- if fact we’ve had decades of drunk (impaired) driving PSAs telling us we’ll end up in jail if we drive impaired.

How is this profound impairment being ignored, or maybe condoned in this trial? It’s a disservice to public safety.

This whole thing is bizarre. Chauvin weighs 140 lbs. Floyd played football and was 230 lbs of mostly muscle. He no doubt could squat several times the weight of Chauvin and when you do that you put a bar across the back of your neck and let it take most of the weight.

Eggshell Skull | April 7, 2021 at 11:36 am

“I ate too many drugs”

    The prosecution has to be dying inside about now.

    Even Floyd knew why he was dying.

    That had to be a terrible way to go and I have a lot of sympathy for him, but that wasn’t murder.

    Question: Even at that point where Floyd admitted to having chugged a bunch of drugs, could the police have saved his life if they induced vomiting with something like syrup of ipecac?

    I suspect the answer is ‘no’ because enough of the drugs had passed beyond the stomach and absorption was inevitable. As I understand in my completely non-expert reading, an overdose death seldom has more drugs in the bloodstream than it takes to kill somebody, i.e. if somebody ate a pound of fentanyl, they’d die with the same rough blood concentration as somebody who took a few grams, because once you are dead, you don’t absorb any more.

      hrhdhd in reply to georgfelis. | April 7, 2021 at 6:10 pm

      Doesn’t hooping involve a non-stomach body part?

      Eggshell Skull in reply to georgfelis. | April 7, 2021 at 6:16 pm

      No Idea!

      someone said test numbers are flawed in that the test aft death gives an inaccurate reading.
      How, then, would it be possible to get an accurate reading? Test live dead people?

      I did think the M.E. said it was just a plain old heart attack brought about by all these things. Agitation, exertion, restraint, drugs, heart disease.someone implied that him saying “I can’t breathe” before being restrained indicated the heart attack was ‘in progress’ then before his big struggle or the prone restraint.

      BTW, they said, on redirect, it was “I ain’t do drugs.” Worse, really, as he’s lying about all the dope he obv did take

        randian in reply to Eggshell Skull. | April 7, 2021 at 9:10 pm

        So the prosecution is arguing that the cops should assume he’s telling the truth about being unable to breathe, and that he’s lying about not having taken drugs? Which mind reading class does the prosecution suggest?

Is this a police restraint symposium or a murder trial? Day 9 and still no cause of death.

    Joe-dallas in reply to Eddie Baby. | April 7, 2021 at 11:54 am

    Its only day 8 – The state has plenty of time.

      Joeybags4 in reply to Joe-dallas. | April 7, 2021 at 1:55 pm

      Guess theyre strategy is end strong. Sadly their own ME, the only one who did an actual autopsy, will kill this case entirely.

      FOAF in reply to Joe-dallas. | April 7, 2021 at 2:50 pm

      One theory I have heard is that the prosecution is deliberately dragging things out so the jury will be bored and ready to go home by the time Nelson presents the defense case. With the malignant and profoundly evil NOI operative Keith Ellison running the show it is 100% certain that the prosecution has no intention of acting in good faith on any aspect of this trial.

    Midfiaudiophile in reply to Eddie Baby. | April 7, 2021 at 1:53 pm

    It took them until day 6 to even establish that Mr. Floyd WAS dead.

I wonder, is most of the prosecution there just to collect a paycheck and not piss off the state or their boss?

Midfiaudiophile | April 7, 2021 at 11:55 am

I’m half an hour behind or so, still on Stiger direct. Did he really just say that force used against Floyd constituted deadly force BECAUSE Floyd “wasn’t resisting”?

Where did they find this clown?

    Flatworm in reply to Midfiaudiophile. | April 7, 2021 at 12:07 pm

    It’s at least partially Schleiter’s fault, he’s mixing up the concept of “deadly force” and “excessive force”, which are orthogonal concepts. Deadly force isn’t necessarily excessive, and force short of deadly force can nonetheless be excessive. It’s definitely sloppy.

thad_the_man | April 7, 2021 at 11:57 am

The thing is it is not clear that he said “drugs”, but given that can you think of another word that would fit.

“I ate too many sliders.”
“I ate too many Taco Bell Burritos”.

Drugs is probably the most likely fit.

I didn’t hear “I ate a lot of drugs” on the audio/video, but I did hear “ate of lot of.” Very clever indeed of Nelson. Unfortunately, I think someone else said “Mercedes” around the same Floyd was talking.

    I heard it, and it makes perfect sense in context.

    But people are very suggestible when it comes to prepping them for what they are about to hear.

    foospro86 in reply to foospro86. | April 7, 2021 at 3:24 pm

    When Nelson played it for Reyerson, I heard it perfectly: “I ate too many drugs.” Wow. A nice surprise play for the defense.

Funny how Schleiter requested a few sidebars at the beginning of Nelson’s cross but went quiet after that. And Carhill seemed to overrule Schleiter. Carhill must have conveyed something to Schleiter…

Would love to ask him about Rodney King and then show the FULL video of what a strong resisting man can do to a group of cops… Oh, and ask him about how no restraint was attempted for the Summer of Floyd in LA. Equity you know.

Think about Mercil’s testimony yesterday. He’s seasoned and knows how to throw a prosecutor into the ocean.

He’s the guy who has to train cops to NOT die when arresting a suspect. He’s the guy impacted MOST by the defund the police movement.
Everyone he’s ever trained is watching. Everyone he will ever train will come to know about his testimony.

What you saw in his testimony was some good Jiu Jitsu.

    lurker9876 in reply to Andy. | April 7, 2021 at 12:11 pm

    And Arradondo, too. I get the impression that many MPD officers will have second thoughts about continuing their employment in that little town of Minneapolis. As with the Portland officers, MPD officers are likely to NOT have any support. Arradondo testified for the state, which demonstrated that he did not support Chauvin and the other 3 officers, especially if they get acquitted.

    Once they are acquitted, they should leave the entire state.

    luckystars in reply to Andy. | April 7, 2021 at 12:46 pm

    I was thinking the same thing. Is he really going to throw his fellow cops under the bus or is he gonna throw the prosecutor under the bus? There has to be some element of that here, including the medical cop.

      Andy in reply to luckystars. | April 7, 2021 at 1:54 pm

      Mercil is a seasoned bull. Don’t send a rabbit to kill a fox. I thought about it even more and the prosecutors likely had a lot of access to him BEFORE the trial. They had no clue this ass whooping was coming. That my friends is a damn good cop and a damn fine leader. It gives me hope that he’s one of the good guys.

        Midfiaudiophile in reply to Andy. | April 7, 2021 at 3:02 pm

        One other thing is that the settlement already having happened may have… demotivated some of the LEO witnesses in the way that they might portray their testimony, since they no longer have as much skin in the game (vulnerability to termination due to budget cuts, for example).

oppressivemath | April 7, 2021 at 12:06 pm

All those state objections and sidebar requests seem like an effort to throw off (the 1) Nelson who has lost his place a few times over past couple days. Doubt that behavior from state’s desperate dozen would play well with the jury…

thad_the_man | April 7, 2021 at 12:09 pm

So is the prosecution going to add an audio expert to theuir witness list to claim he didn’t say “I ate too many drugs.”

    Voyager in reply to thad_the_man. | April 7, 2021 at 12:15 pm

    That would be ridiculously bad strategy, in its own way. Whether or not they are able to prove of disprove it, they would spend about a day or three hammering the phrase and thought into juror’s heads.

    By passing on objecting to it, they have to either let it slide, or ensure that the jurors will remember it.

    That’s part of why I’m wondering if the Prosecution is just looking for media sound bites and phoning it in on the actual case?

    Observer in reply to thad_the_man. | April 7, 2021 at 12:34 pm

    Why would they even bother? Once the toxicology report is in evidence, the jury will know that Floyd did eat too many drugs, whether he said it or not.

Johnny Weissmuller | April 7, 2021 at 12:11 pm

Officer Lane (not Lake). One of the two rookies out on patrol together.

    lurker9876 in reply to Johnny Weissmuller. | April 7, 2021 at 12:18 pm

    I have to wonder why MPD put together TWO rookies for a precinct fraught with high crimes. That sounds like a massive operative and poor management decision. I would never pair up two rookies like that.

Branca’s coment – “Can’t BELIEVE the state called as an expert someone who is offering expert testimony in court for the FIRST TIME in a case of this magnitude and profile.”

I have testified on multiple times as both fact witness and as expert witness several times. (fwiw, I am not very good at it, though my side always won).

There is a fine line between coming across as knowledgable, competent and sincere which out coming across as a paid whore. (The expert the defense has lined up comes across to me as the paid whore).
That being said, I would fault the prosecution for weak coaching and poor selection. Though the state may not have had better choices

“Ah ha, I ate too many drugs!” — George Floyd.

Nelson seriously showed that clip. Devastating.


Nelson: And YOU were trained that way.

Stiger: Yes.

Wonder if Jody was friends with Dorner?

“Slightly, yes”

“Somewhat, yes”

whatever…hedging his answers – he knows that he got trapped.

There goes Schleiter – object and lost.

I thought something similar.

He is also on medical leave. That might be to avoid pressure, or he might have been told to take it as a form of pressure or a way to keep him out of the loop.

Brancha’s comment re Reyeson (BCA agent) – “Wondering what light Reyerson is expected to shed on any of the relevant factors in this case.”

My question to Brancha is reyeson is testifying as a fact witness or expert witness or both ? If fact witness, what facts is he testifying to ?
If expert witness, the State has already had 5-6 “experts” testify, Isnt that redundant and normally barred?

    I know of no effort to qualify Reyerson as an expert, in the technical sense, and as case agent he’s presumably here as a fact witness. I’m just not clear on what facts he can share that would be relevant to Chauvin’s charges.

    Guess we’ll see. Or not.

    I did note that he claims to have been through some kind of cop’s forensic course, but I can’t believe they’re going to have him provide forensics testimony. Maybe just use as foundational for one of the several medical examiner’s reports?

I just noticed this about Nelson’s technique. The answer to every one of his questions is “yes” with very few exceptions.

This is a negotiating / sales technique to get the outcome you want. You ask a series of questions to get the person you are swaying to say yes. Then you gradually work towards your “sale” In this case- it’s the juries ears that are hearing yes.

Brilliant. This is probably kindergarten stuff for skilled attorneys, but I’m a pseudo sales hack.

Isn’t the 35-40 pounds of gear carried by a patrol officer a good bit of an exaggeration? Seems like +/- 20 pounds would be a more reasonable estimate?

    Olinser in reply to RayCL. | April 7, 2021 at 8:38 pm

    No, not really. For a patrol officer I’m assuming that weight includes a vest.

    Vet here – vests with the plates are HEAVY. I don’t know about police vests but a military vest with just front/back plates is ~20-25 lbs. Side plates can kick it up to 35+ lbs just for the vest depending on the size.

    Add another 10-15 lbs for the pistol/ammo/belt stuff like tasers etc and yeah, 35-40 seems about right.

Midfiaudiophile | April 7, 2021 at 1:52 pm

I wish Nelson had brought in the interview Stiger did about Dallas and the “No matter how many classes I take, I may be able to recognize mental distress, but if he acts violently I only have so many options at my disposal” line, but he was a good victim for the defense without putting him on the spot and setting him on the defensive.

I am starting to lean towards incompetence here with the prosecution. They are reminding me of the Oberlin attorneys who were so certain of their cause and position that they simply phoned in it for billing purposes. The real weakness of the left in general is to completely disregard anything that isn’t in their little bubble, and here it is obvious that they aren’t prepping their witnesses ahead of time to deal with questions that fall outside of the narrative. Of course, could be two reasons for that. one is that they only see their narrative, and the second is that they fear weakening the resolve of their witness by allowing them to see a different story ahead of time. The witnesses are blowing it because Nelson is leading them down a path, which is the path that perhaps the prosecution was hoping would never come to light. I guess take home lesson is 15 attorneys can’t make a bad case good. Goliath in this case is blind, deaf, somewhat crippled and asleep.

    Midfiaudiophile in reply to MajorWood. | April 7, 2021 at 2:55 pm

    Remember that most of the prosecuting attorneys are doing the case pro bono publica. In layman’s terms, free.

    They’re aiming for publicity, not pay (nominally, they’re aiming to ensure that the case is prosecuted to the fullest extent possible). And the publicity that they’re receiving is going to be of any possible incompetence on their parts.

    I don’t think they’re incompetent, I just think they’ve got a weak case. Why isn’t Katyal giving the opening statement or questioning witnesses? Because he doesn’t want to be on video trying to prosecute it.

    What happened to Erin Eldridge btw? I wasn’t fond of her questioning, but she seems to have completely disappeared now that they’re past the emotions show.

      Char Char Binks in reply to Midfiaudiophile. | April 7, 2021 at 3:59 pm

      “Pro bono publica” ROUGHLY, or IN EFFECT, means “for free”, but it literally means “for the public good”, in this case, IRONICALLY.

        lurker9876 in reply to Char Char Binks. | April 7, 2021 at 6:54 pm

        All of this left the city 27 million dollar poor?

        Remember: He was given a head of state’s funeral while your relatives died alone.

        Remember: The Congress Democrats kneed for 8 minutes plus!!

        From AnonymousPatriot at gab:

        Don’t think for a second that it’s a coincidence that this Communist government is about to launch gun control measures right before riots are about to break loose due to an almost certain acquittal in the Chauvin trial. They want you vulnerable and scared. That way they can control you. Don’t let them.

    luckystars in reply to MajorWood. | April 7, 2021 at 3:17 pm

    Because the left hires on skin color or being a “red diaper baby” if you’re white.
    They are all horribly incompetent which is why every city they run turns to dust eventually.

    Char Char Binks in reply to MajorWood. | April 7, 2021 at 3:27 pm

    Prosecutors believe in the cause, but not the case.

The Friendly Grizzly | April 7, 2021 at 2:40 pm

I’m late to the party. Why are the live blog entries doubling up?

    If you have LI open two tabs in your browser, the live blogging app sends text for each tab.

    If you open a second browser window, it MIGHT stop that.

    I’ve been keeping two open to follow comments and live blog.

The Packetman | April 7, 2021 at 2:41 pm

I’ll admit that IANAL, but of what possible significance could knowing the purpose of a catalytic converter be?!

    Joe-dallas in reply to The Packetman. | April 7, 2021 at 3:45 pm

    Man, if the prosecution is hanging this case on a catalytic converter … well, that’s not good.

    A leaky cat possibly? causing aphyxiation

    though hybrid car at idle , the gas engine is not running.

      The Friendly Grizzly in reply to Joe-dallas. | April 7, 2021 at 4:25 pm

      They can occasionally start. Even as “idle” some energy is consumed, and the “,regular ” battery needs to be topped up.

        I think it is to challenge Ms. Frazier’s comment about GF’s urine.

        I’m surprised that this BCA / forensic team did not mention anything about testing the fluids on the surface unless the rain pushed it down the drain. Or they ignored the fluids like they did with the pills.

        I expect Nelson to bring up the slide about the amount of herion and two types of fentanyl reaching fatal overdose levels and compare that to today’s state witnesses.

Frank: Does squad 320 have catalytic converter?
Reyerson: Yes. Purpose to reduce toxic emissions.

Cat’s have been around since the 1980’s – Whats the purpose of that question and purpose of that answer –

So what ever happened to the WaPo talking heads?

This is looking more and more like a political show trial because of BLM reactions and future threats.

I’m not on the jury but it sure seems like the defendant was in complete compliance with MPD policies and training. You don’t spend 19 years on the force and not know what is expected.

BLM made this political by burning down the city before they had the facts. This is typical liberal playbook tactics. Now BLM is threatening to burn down the city again if they don’t like the verdict.

If I were the judge, I would have declared a mistrial based on BLM threats and have it moved to a different state and jury.

We are now living in a country where lawyers, juries, judges, and police are threatened with violence if the radical left doesn’t get what it wants.

Eggshell Skull | April 7, 2021 at 2:57 pm

Did the knee moving from being entirely on the neck to the shoulder blade just OPEN KUENG UP TO BEING THE KILLER?????? (in the State’s view)????

State’s opening claimed GF’s lung was compressed so he couldn’t breath. Now that the focus isn’t the neck- it was Only Kueng who was near the lung area!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


    Observer in reply to Eggshell Skull. | April 7, 2021 at 3:12 pm

    George Floyd complained seven (7) different times that he couldn’t breathe before the cops put him on the ground. Nobody was “compressing” his lungs when he was upright. The reason Floyd was having trouble breathing — both while standing up and while lying down — was because the drug overdose was causing his lungs to fill up with fluid.

    It didn’t matter if Floyd was standing up or lying down. It didn’t matter if somebody was touching his neck or his chest. Floyd was dying because of what was going on inside his body, not outside of it. And what was going on inside his body was happening because of the self-inflicted drug overdose.

      Eggshell Skull in reply to Observer. | April 7, 2021 at 6:29 pm

      Yes, yes, we’ve all heard that a million times.

      My point is the State must make a case that that isn’t so. Part of that is now that it was positional asphyxia. The opening said that his lung was compressed so he died.

      The focus is now off the neck and onto ‘shoulder’ ‘shoulder blade’ and this thing called ‘neck area.’
      NONE OF THAT IS really OVER THE LUNG from what I recall of my cadaver course.

      Who was over his lung area???????????

Anyone else find it odd that most witnesses have only one word answers to Nelson, More verbose when answering State.

    Think38 in reply to Joeybags4. | April 7, 2021 at 3:09 pm

    Nelson is conducting cross examination. He is asking questions that look for one word answer. In most cases, he is looking for the word “yes”. That way, Nelson gets to tell and shape the story, and the witness merely confirms or denies it.

    When the defense makes its case, expect Nelson to ask more open ended questions.

    Rick in reply to Joeybags4. | April 7, 2021 at 3:24 pm

    Most witnesses are trained to keep their answers to cross examination questions as short as possible. In a rare situation a witness is so able to cream the cross examiner that the witness is given the green light to do so. I once had an expert witness so expert that I just sat back and enjoyed his cross examination, hoping it would go on and on.

    Bruce Hayden in reply to Joeybags4. | April 7, 2021 at 6:52 pm

    No. That’s fairly typical on cross examination. These are mostly hostile witnesses working for the other side (the prosecution here). As a result, you can expect that they would try to quibble and obfuscate, if given the choice. So they aren’t. Of course, if the party calling them wants to clarify something, they can do so when they get control of the witness again on redirect (etc). Of course, if the prosecution gets redirect the defense gets to behind the with recross…

    Normally, attorneys don’t get to do this asking of leading questions when conducting direct examinations, just on cross examinations. Instead, they are supposed to ask more general (non leading) questions. The exception being when an attorney can convince the judge that his witness is “hostile”. I expect to see this with the state witness yesterday that the defense has asked to gring back when it is their turn to make their case (after the prosecution rests theirs).

Frank: About the time 20:25:08, no more movement.
Reyerson: Yes.
Frank: Appear Chauvin using weight to hold Floyd down?
Reyerson: Yes.

Branca’s comment – “Don’t really understand why this testimony is being permitted, no need for expertise, and Reyerson is not providing any expertise, and he has no first-hand knowledge. The jury can view, and has viewed, the video without his commentary.”

Similar question for Branca as above – or maybe a followup question – I still dont see how Reyenson is either fact or expert witness in this case – any additional insight? foundational for what?

    Olinser in reply to Joe-dallas. | April 7, 2021 at 8:44 pm

    It’s a major sign that they know their case is imploding.

    The only ‘value’ of it is they get to keep showing the video over and over again to try and appeal to emotion.

Char Char Binks | April 7, 2021 at 3:17 pm

It was condensation from the AC!

Nelson: Attempt to understand and hear what various parties are saying? Hear Floyd say, I ate too many drugs?
Reyerson: No.

nelson: Publish Exhibit 1007, listen to Floyd voice.

Nelson plays that statement again.
Nelson: Appear that Floyd said I ate too many drugs?
Reyerson: Yes, it did.


When Nelson played it for Reyerson, I heard it perfectly: “I ate too many drugs.” Wow. A nice surprise play for the defense. Couldn’t hear it well the first time Nelson played it for Stiger.

    foospro86 in reply to foospro86. | April 7, 2021 at 3:33 pm

    “I ate too many drugs.” This has to be the headline of the day, eh Atty Branca? And affirmation of it from State’s witness no less. How many mainstream media outlets will make that the story of the day??

    foospro86 in reply to foospro86. | April 7, 2021 at 5:53 pm

    I couldn’t actually hear the “drugs” part of the 3rd time played by State. Tricky one to listen to….

Amazing how all the so called experts in reviewing the case can’t pick up on the ” I ate too many drugs” line.
These are the people who are supposed to be paying attention to every little detail

    JaneDoh in reply to buck61. | April 7, 2021 at 4:31 pm

    To be fair, I listened to it five times and couldn’t make out the word “drugs” even after having been primed.

    On first listen, I heard, “Ah Ah! Ain’t [garble]” After Nelson suggested “I ate too many drugs,” I heard “ain’t too many parentheses” and I guessed maybe he had said “amphetamines.” Another commenter pointed out that someone else on the video is talking about the Mercedes. I guess that is who I’m hearing instead of Floyd.

      buck61 in reply to JaneDoh. | April 7, 2021 at 10:16 pm

      are you a so called expert? They are being paid to dissect every little detail in regards to video and audio. How come it was the defense attorney or somebody working with him that picked this up in all the hours of video and audio.
      Wait until they talk about the amount of preesure on the neck area, only Chauvin knows how much of his weight he was using.

How thorough can the crime scene investigators have been if they missed pills in both vehicles the first time through?

thad_the_man | April 7, 2021 at 3:40 pm

Actually GF said I ate too many Pugs.

He deserved to die for animal abuse.

Has Nelson not objected to some seemingly irrelevant/ superfluous testimony so that he can cover this material in cross, again showing alternate interpretations of events?

so the prosecution’s explanation is that Floyd was again, among dozens of times, lying to the police.

“I aint done no drugs”

sure George

    Observer in reply to REDACTED. | April 7, 2021 at 4:03 pm

    Whether Floyd said “I ate too many drugs” or “I ain’t do no drugs,” it doesn’t really help the state’s case.

    We know Floyd ate too many drugs, and the toxicology report proves it, so it doesn’t really matter if Floyd admitted it or not.

    If Floyd said “I ain’t do no drugs,” then he was contradicting what he had told the cops earlier, when they asked him if he was on something, and he told them he’d been “hoopin'” [taking drugs anally] earlier. How are the cops supposed to know how to medically treat a suspect when he’s giving them contradictory information about whether or not he’s been using drugs?

    Neither version of the statement helps the state’s case. They’re only helping the defense case by keeping attention on it.

      Midfiaudiophile in reply to Observer. | April 7, 2021 at 5:42 pm

      CUT OFF! Floyd didn’t like the meth, so only consumed the portion of the pill containing fentanyl?

      fogflyer in reply to Observer. | April 7, 2021 at 7:25 pm

      I really don’t think George was admitting to anal drug use, I think he was saying (lying) that he had just been playing basketball.

The Packetman | April 7, 2021 at 3:53 pm

George Floyd didn’t say ‘True love’, he said ‘To blave’ …

Char Char Binks | April 7, 2021 at 4:12 pm

Why does it matter how much Chauvin weighed? Maybe he only weighed 140 pounds, but he could still put most of it on floyd’s neck.

    Elzorro in reply to Char Char Binks. | April 7, 2021 at 4:45 pm

    It does not he died of an overdose of illegal drugs. He was dying from that. Nothing else. You are promoting a miscarriage of the truth, justice, and the American Way. You will crash and burn in utter total failure.

      Char Char Binks in reply to Elzorro. | April 7, 2021 at 5:16 pm

      Not a bit.

      I didn’t say Chauvin put most of his weight on floyd’s neck, only that he could have. There’s no evidence that he did and plenty that he didn’t.

      It reminds me of trayvon martin. It doesn’t matter that he “only” weighed about 160 pounds; nearly all of it was squarely on top of George Zimmerman.

      floyd drowned in his own fentanyl fluid.

    Observer in reply to Char Char Binks. | April 7, 2021 at 6:23 pm

    He could put 140 pounds of weight on Floyd’s neck without leaving a trace of any injury? Pretty good trick.

    For a couple of reasons. 140lbs is nothing. Half will be on the other foot, and a guy like Floyd can regularly put a bar across his back where Chauvin’s knee was and squat far more than what Chauvin weighed. It just isn’t all that much unless you are swinging it and delivering blows.

    The other reason it matters is that it explains why it took so many cops to control Floyd and why they might have been leery of Floyd getting loose again since I have read where Chauvin was the biggest cop there (which is really hard to imagine).

In today’s installment of “What novel theory will the state try to blame Floyd’s death on today?” Join today’s guest star, who is clearly NOT an officer with the MPD, The Ford Motor Company!

It’s apparent that many of the authorities involved in this assumed Chauvin’s guilt was such a foregone conclusion that they didn’t do a very good job investigating.

Everyday David Muir of ABC News breathlessly announces prosecution testimony. He never mentions admissions made under Eric Nelson’s cross-examination.s. We will never hear, “I ate too many drugs.”

The Floyd Scheme Team is being destroyed by the prosecutor and the prosecution witnesses. CNN and MSNBC ar in total panic and dropping live coverage. The real major crime here is the 27 nillion payoff to Crump/Sharpton by the ‘Innshooence Company” t the Fambly and the Crump schemers.

    Joeybags4 in reply to Elzorro. | April 7, 2021 at 6:05 pm

    99% convionced this is why the payoff was rushed. This crinminal a-hole Crump knew full well he hustled a bunch of white apologists and that the trial, just like Trayvons, would cost him millions when it be3came apparent GF died of OD.

Wow, can’t believe this so-called expert on the use of force didn’t review the MPD training videos because they were in PDF form. He opines that Chauvin used excessive force per MPD training, even though he didn’t watch the videos that were part of Chauvin’s MPD training? WTH?

    The Packetman in reply to Observer. | April 7, 2021 at 4:59 pm

    Especially damning since powerpoint presentations are often distributed via .pdf, probably the most common document format outside of a text file.

    Elzorro in reply to Observer. | April 7, 2021 at 5:00 pm

    It appears the prosecutors and their witnesses are acting for the defense. The Unprosecution.

Starting popcorn for this cross. What if the investigator found a gun in the back of the squad car? Since you weren’t looking for a gun you left it there?

Can’t wait for Andrew’s debriefing later tonight.

Another fail for the state is on the stand. jury is reportedly tired of this clown show. So far no admitted evidence supports probable cause for the charges much less proof of ‘ANY’ kind.

brancha – no cross of anderson – thoughts? would appear nothing to dispute – Floyd had drugs – Why dispute

Branca – please weigh in with your thougts

All the objective evidence presented belies the charges against the defendant. All of it. The lefties are bitterly clinging to a false narrative and a subjective video taken by a black kid.

Why were crime scene technicians not informed that drugs were involved before they first processed the vehicles? Sound like a serious omission.

Midfiaudiophile | April 7, 2021 at 5:43 pm

CUT OFF! Floyd didn’t like the meth, so only consumed the portion of the pill containing fentanyl?

    Midfiaudiophile in reply to Midfiaudiophile. | April 7, 2021 at 5:51 pm

    OK, no, the fentanyl was in a functional dose in the pill, just mixed with a relatively small concentration of methamphetamine.

State had a little bit better day today compared to Tuesday, then again they couldn’t do much worse.
That being said, having two of the so called experts who are supposed to have a complete understanding of the video couldn’t recall Floyd saying I ate the drugs line is troublesome especially when you combine the BCA people not having the pills analyzed when the vehicles were first analyzed.

    lionbush in reply to buck61. | April 7, 2021 at 6:25 pm

    Actually think this was just as bad. What we now know is the folllwing:

    Case was put into court (June??) whilst investigation was still ongoing.

    Forensics ignored pills in Floyds car and in squad car during their analysis 27th May. Focussed on blood. This is bad enough on its own.

    Defence then requested a further analysis after seeing polls in cars.

    Further analysis done in January and pills then collected.

    Lab test on pill in back of police car showed that there was saliva on it and it belonged to Floyd.

    Analysis of pills showed meth and fentanyl. Amount of fentanyl was 1% which matches the amount for pills on the street (black market).

    Picture painted shows that the case was rushed to court whilst vital evidence was missed by forensics which back up parts of coroners report of hush levels of drugs.

    Doesn’t get a lot worse than that to me.

      buck61 in reply to lionbush. | April 7, 2021 at 9:56 pm

      Like I said, it was a bad day but the media got the sound byte they were looking to run with when the expert from LAPD said excessive force

So, am I reading this right? State poured over every inch of GF car andf cop car AND DIDNT SEE OPEN AND OBVIOUS PILLS??????? Ummm, who did the checking Ellison?

I wonder if the prosecution realizes that even the most disposed to their point of view have long forgotten the river of tears they presented in the beginning

What’s the point of the extensive detailing of the collection and testing of evidence that isn’t in dispute? (And that arguably isn’t even relevant?)

GF’s blood test should tell us everything relevant about the drugs he actually took. Why do we care what markings his drug dealer carved into the pills?

The Packetman | April 7, 2021 at 6:23 pm

Aaaaaaaand … Tim Pool is quoting LI.

Don’t know if that’s good or bad!

when it was determined that Chauvin meant no harm to GF and was only doing his job as instructed

who will weep for him ?

a life destroyed over a useless felon

    lurker9876 in reply to REDACTED. | April 7, 2021 at 7:26 pm

    Yes and what will our law enforcement officers across the entire nation feel about the certain outcome? As if a Democratic AG and and will go after any LEO for nothing.

Guess what?

After successful resuscitation from a drug overdose, a criminal can kill.

Therefore law enforcement MUST handcuff and restrain individuals being treated for an overdose at all times.