George Floyd revisited
George Floyd’s death has been in the news again recently because Tucker Carlson did a segment claiming he wasn’t murdered:
Carlson said that, thanks to this new information, it is now “conclusively” known that former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin, who is serving over 20 years in prison, did not murder Floyd by kneeling on his neck for several minutes on May 25, 2020.
Hennepin County Prosecutor Amy Sweasy, who is in the midst of a lawsuit against her boss, alleged in her deposition that an autopsy found no indications that Floyd was murdered. …
Sweasy said in her deposition that Dr. Andrew Baker, the medical examiner who performed Floyd’s autopsy, withheld and lied about the true cause of death as he feared the public’s reaction. He allegedly told Sweasy that the autopsy results contradicted the public’s narrative.
“He said to me, ‘Amy, what happens when the actual evidence doesn’t match up with the public narrative that everyone’s already decided on?’ … and then he said, ‘This is the kind of case that ends careers,’” the deposition reads.
Sweasy’s deposition is new and I suppose it’s news. But evidence that Baker’s original evaluation of Floyd’s cause of death was that it was not strangulation was known as long ago as May of 2021, and at that time it was also alleged that Baker had been coerced and threatened to get him to say otherwise.
I’ve written a ton of posts about George Floyd’s death and the trials of Chauvin and the others. I’ve read many detailed reports on the trials, I’ve read the entire transcript of the interactions between Floyd and the police that day, I’ve read the recommendations that were in place at the time of Floyd’s death for Minneapolis police when attempting to restrain offenders, I’ve read the autopsy, and I’ve written about all those things in great depth. I concluded long ago that Chauvin did not murder George Floyd, and that the trial was unfair for a host of circumstances including the fever pitch pressure of the public and press that had concluded otherwise on the basis of the video of Chauvin restraining Floyd.
However, I don’t think there’s anything on earth at this point that would change the general public opinion that Floyd was murdered and that Chauvin was the perp. The fallout from that perception – not just in the US but around the world – has been incredibly destructive.
I don’t think the public opinion is anything but an annoying distraction in this case.
What truly matters is the remaining legal options to get an innocent man out of prison. May the rest of the world believe he is Genghis Khan and Hitler combined; I don’t care; it wouldn’t, alone, hurt him any more than it hurts Trump, for example. As long as Derek is not free, there is one more political prisoner in the United States than there would be otherwise, and this *is* a problem.
That is the big problem with “trial via press”. The public often ends up with an opinion that is based on information that is simply wrong. IE “The crossing state lines with a weapon” point of view from the Rittenhouse case or “Breonna Taylor was shot in bed asleep when the cops raided the wrong house”. (Both of those are simply wrong if you know the facts of either case.)
However, I don’t think there’s anything on earth at this point that would change the general public opinion that Floyd was murdered and that Chauvin was the perp. The fallout from that perception – not just in the US but around the world – has been incredibly destructive.
It’s amazing how intractable a narrative can be once it’s set in the general public’s mind, especially when it’s linked with certain established beliefs and moral certainties and combined with visuals as in this case. There’s the belief that a large percentage, even a majority of police are racist and unjust with regards to their treatment of incidents involving black men. And there’s a belief that there’s a huge number of incidents of white cops unjustifiably killing black men, or otherwise mistreating them or falsely implicating them in crimes. These are beliefs that are not truly borne out by any actual evidence and factual statistics, but are nevertheless regarded as near certainties by a depressingly large percentage of the populace. And challenging those beliefs, even when one has the benefit of actual facts, can sometimes be extremely dangerous to one’s career not to mention one’s social prospects.
But in fairness, the general public opinion regarding any given singular event can and has changed over time. It can often take a very long time however, sometimes after the participants in the event have been dead for many years. As an example, think about the OJ Simpson trial, what people’s perceptions of it were at the time versus what they believe today.
BTW This leads into a new word I learned. Previously I would have thought the press was simply wrong. These days I think they’re actually “Paltering”. IE Lying with facts.
If Floyd would have had to spend longer in prison in Texas, he would not have been on the street in Minneapolis that day.
Decent people should grieve for those officers, who were “lynched” by the system; or rather the people who controlled the system.
We should also grieve over the effect, possibly permanent, that this travesty has had on our society.
My best friend, my Other Brother, saw the first pic and concluded that Floyd was MURDERED! Forget that the pics really did not show a knee down on his neck and other videos also show that. And the video of Floyd in the cop car already saying he couldn’t breath. Nothing, nothing at all will change his mind. He is Right leaning and often has harsh words to say about Biden and Dems, but his mind is made up on Floyd.
Lots of inconvenient stuff may come out during the discovery phase that will, at the very least, embarrass Hennepin County (that is, if they’re capable of feeling embarrassment) and that is why I think they’ll settle sooner rather than later. But of course the good liberals of the Twin Cities will continue to cling to their belief that George Floyd was an unfortunate victim of racism, not his own lack of judgement and poor life choices.
FWIW, here’s a different take from one of the medical examiners in the civil trial who happens to be one of the leading medical voices in calling out and opposing covid insanity:
George Floyd Did Not Die Of a Fentanyl Overdose
Although the American public is lied to about nearly everything at this point, the cause of Floyd’s death is not one of them. I should know as I was the medical expert who testified in his civil case.
https://pierrekorymedicalmusings.com/p/george-floyd-did-not-die-of-a-fentanyl
Chauvin should have had a change of venue and it is a tragic failure that Minnesota did this to him. We are now in an era when blacks can do no wrong and are to be celebrated regardless of merits. Take a look at TV commercials. This will not end well and we will probably all trying to learn Mandarin in a few years.
Marisa – I cross examine experts all the time. There is a lot of hedging in that report to reach the conclusion he was paid to reach (no civil litigant puts out a report from an expert that doesn’t say what they want it to say–they are highly contrived). Every expert is biased, especially when paychecks are involved, and he is a professional expert witness. His opinion is also based on assumptions and statistical probabilities regarding opiate effects, uses weasel wording that a lawyer can quickly catch (not solely the cause, was not wholly responsible, etc.) and assumes that the only opiate source (central to his breathing-theory) would have been IV or pills, when one of the defense theories was “hooping” (allegedly involving another orifice, which the family heavily contested, saying that “hooping” meant to Floyd, playing basketball). His opinions also aren’t fully consistent with the criminal trial theory (that CO2 necrosis was caused by CO2 inhalation from nearby vehicles).
Again, not saying what is true one way or the other, because I haven’t done the in-depth analysis. (I do think that sadly, police who operate in high-crime areas are all too used to perpetrators crying wolf; which doesn’t excuse things, but is one of the many contributing factors that led to the outcome here). In theory this is the role that cross-examination is supposed to play, but when you have factors that take the blindfold off Lady Justice (and in the criminal case, things like Chauvin’s attorney getting new Brady material specifically on these complex medical issues during trial), this is where the system falls down.
I fault the judge most of all–he allowed this mess, first by not transferring venue, for not sanctioning the prosecution for late disclosures, not properly vetting jurors, etc. It is not fair to a defense attorney (especially one who is being paid on the cheap most likely by Chauvin’s union) dealing with the entire weight of the state on a highly charged political football to get new information like that during trial. There is physically not enough time to deal with it, and prejudice to the defendant is a natural result.
Legal options for Chauvin.
1. The Court of Appeals denied the assignment of error that venue should have been changed. I think the MN S. Ct. refused to hear the case. Scott Johnson at Power Line has followed the case. I don’t know if a cert petition was filed to SCOTUS.
2. While I’m not a criminal attorney, I think the next procedural step would be post-conviction relief based upon actual innocence. The best venue would be in federal court with a writ of habeas corpus. Because this is not a death penalty case, I’m note sure if it is available. And I recall a federal plea deal so maybe that’s been foreclosed.
Chauvin was railroaded. And Neal Katyal celebrates that. That creep was in Omaha last week.
“Finally, and most importantly, despite the publicity, riots, and heightened security around the courthouse, all jurors who served confirmed that they could decide the case based on the evidence presented in court and could be fair and impartial. Kinsky, 348 N.W.2d at 324 (“If [] the jurors indicate their intention to set aside any preconceived notions and demonstrate to the satisfaction of the [district court] that they are able to do so, [appellate courts] will not lightly substitute [their] own judgment.”). State v. Chauvin, 989 N.W.2d 1 (2023) (Minnesota Court of Appeals), review denied, July 18, 2023.
I would think if a cert petition had been filed, Scott Johnson would have reported it. My legal research service doesn’t show if a cert petition was filed.
Floyd exhibited a health condition before the restraint was applied, which warranted the premature exit from the police vehicle into a hostile environment. The plausible cause of death was a progressive condition. Kory suggests that there may have been contributing factors, but cannot affirmatively exclude any preexisting condition(s).
Democrats Propaganda Ministry brainwashing the public, I was sure St Floyd was a OD and Chavin was railroaded by a Kangaroo Court.
Reading about the Jan6 Ralliers getting abused in jail canonly think Chauvin is getting abused as well.
However, I don’t think there’s anything on earth at this point that would change the general public opinion that Floyd was murdered
Not in the short run. But if the seeds of a counterfactual were well planted, the facts would have a chance to grow out there in the ‘public cognizance’, and perhaps some day they’d contribute to some social benefit to parties other than progressive activists.
Marisa, I read your link. It certainly sounds compelling. As stated in the earlier comment, it sounds a lot like a “paid expert” who was paid to reach a conclusion.
I don’t think that his report was part of the criminal trial. So, it is not relevant to the conviction of the police officers. It does not change any of the facts that were presented, or not presented, in the case.
The discussion for now is whether the prosecution and conviction of the police officers was justified.
One fact that gets lost in weeds, is that Derek Chauvin was employing an approved restraint procedure. So, at the extreme, Floyd died as a result of an accident that was triggered by his criminal act, and subsequent resistance to the police.
Once the case was prosecuted and brought to trial, a key fact was that the ME expressed one opinion after his autopsy; then testified differently at the trial. His testimony was questionable at best. That fact was known at the time; now there is specific evidence.
I may be mistaken, but I believe that he was the only one who actually examined the corpse; and all other ‘expert opinion’ was based on his final notes–which may or may not have been consistent with his initial notes.
This reminds me not a little of the Dreyfus affair. Unfortunately I don’t think the outcome will be the same.
neo,
Your reporting on the event, shortly after it happened all the way through Chauvin’s trial and conviction was excellent.
@Neo: Proverbs 22:6, “Train up a child in the way he should go, even when he grows older he will not abandon it.”
You are truly an exception, to go from left to right politically, and I take it, in your later years.
I teach Physician Assistant students at a university and am 69 years old. Whenever anything borders on their worldview, whether religion, politics, or economics, they are already highly resistant to change. I’ve concluded that the median age of ‘epistemic closure’ is around 21. My PA students range from 22 – 30.
And it seems the older we get, most all of us get even more fixed in our views. Thus in my view, you’re on solid ground to say, “However, I don’t think there’s anything on earth at this point that would change the general public opinion that Floyd was murdered and that Chauvin was the perp.”
Given the allegations that the ME report was subject to political influence, I don’t think anyone involved is going to have any credibility in defending the report. I certainly would give zero weight to an ME who is accused of caving to political pressure. Do we really think after fudging a report he’s now going to admit it ?
There is a similar trial going on in Tacoma, WA right now. Three officers are charged with murder/manslaughter of a black man, Manny Ellis.
The incident took place three years ago. The city of Tacoma has already given his family $4 million. Official admission of gait before a trial was ever held. Sad.
Ellis had a heart condition and was high on drugs. He was much more violent in resisting arrest than Floyd was. The officers tazed him and put a “spit bag” over his head. (To prevent Covid infection – it was the summer of 2020.) Witnesses heard Ellis complain that he couldn’t breathe. He died at the scene.
The top medical examiner says he died from manual asphyxiation, but the defense is contesting that strongly. They are pushing for the observation that Manny’s diseased heart failed due to his violent exertions against the police.
The media are anti-police here, so the trial coverage is loaded toward convicting the police. Another sad case where some innocent cops will probably serve time.
@ BigD in re “Paltering”. IE Lying with facts.
I have often, in the past, noted about some news reports (generally the NYT and WaPo) that every word in the post is true, but the story as a whole is false — because of their selection of facts and the structure of the narrative.
Now, most of the leftist media has given up on printing even slanted truth, and gone straight to almost totally lying.
“FWIW, here’s a different take from one of the medical examiners in the civil trial who happens to be one of the leading medical voices in calling out and opposing covid insanity:
George Floyd Did Not Die Of a Fentanyl Overdose”
I started reading that opinion with an open mind right up until I read the part where he claimed that Floyd was suffering “prolonged, three officer-weight bearing prone restraint episode.”
Except that’s utter BS. If he watched all the video evidence, read the autopsy reports, reviewed all the witness statements and is so devoted to accuracy and impartiality, why would he make a claim that is demonstrably false?
There were three officers involved in the incident, but one was just standing there watching the crowd, guarding against their encroachment on the scene. One was holding Floyd’s legs.
He further admitted that the fact Floyd could say “I can’t breathe” means that…he could breathe. You can’t talk when you can’t get air. His conclusion on the cause of death was linked to his inaccurate charge that three officers where putting their weight on Floyd’s upper body:
“Instead, my conclusion was that Mr. Floyd died by the combined forces of three officers bearing weight on his thoracic cage (upper back, lower back, and neck/throat) against a concrete surface, rendering him unable to take in sufficient oxygen or expel sufficient carbon dioxide with each breath.”
Except for the minor detail that it didn’t happen. Other than possibly for a few seconds when they were first getting Floyd out of the car, onto the ground and under control, there were never three cops putting their body weight onto Floyd’s upper body. It simply didn’t happen that way.
Which means that this “expert’s” opinion means nothing. It’s based on events that did not occur.
I went back and watched a couple of the videos again just to make sure I wasn’t remembering incorrectly.
The only one who had any weight on Floyd’s upper body was Chauvin and, when you watch the video, it’s clear that most of Chauvin’s weight was on the leg on the ground. The knee on the back of the neck was only used to keep Floyd under control. In the video, you can clearly see Floyd’s head and neck thrashing around and lifting up. He was able to lift his neck high enough to completely turn his head from one side to the other. And Chauvin was constantly applying a little more pressure when Floyd thrashed around, and then relaxing when Floyd relaxed.
Chauvin did not kill Floyd.,,he was not exerting enough pressure to restrict airflow through the trachea and his weight was not on Floyd’s chest or preventing him from taking full breaths. The cop holding his legs did not kill Floyd…most people’s lungs are not in their legs. The cop standing there watching certainly did not kill Floyd unless he did it through The Force.
I’m sorry, but I place no weight whatsoever on the analysis of an “expert” who completely misrepresents the facts of the case he’s analyzing regardless of how many paragraphs he spends trying to convince us that he knows what he’s talking about and is completely neutral. BTW: in my experience someone who spends that much time trying to convince me of something smacks of someone who who is desperate to get me to believe something he doesn’t believe himself.
None of this matters, sorry to say, because one of the primary remembrances of mine of St. George of Floyd was the numerous funerals he had, the last being a horse-drawn gilded carriage. There is no way after those magnificent celebrations of his life that the narrative will ever change.
If Floyd was a victim of black gang violence, it would never have made any news at all. Nobody would have cared.
If Floyd was a black child who was killed in back gang cross-fire, nobody would have cared.
Just another example of the leftist mind-set; it makes zero difference who gets killed or how they get killed.
What matters is who did the killing.
Hamas can slaughter women and children and babies; the left supports Hamas and condemns Israel.
For the left, the ends justifies the means. You have to crack a few eggs to make an omelete.
The left will accept any strategy, any effort, an infinite number of people to be sacrificed, as long as it promotes their agenda.
Unfortunately, the media, here and in W.Europe, is riding shotgun for the left, providing them an “independent” source of propaganda.
Free Derek Chauvin.
Per Harry Reid: “It worked, didn’t it?”