tv CNN Newsroom With Brooke Baldwin CNN April 14, 2021 12:00pm-1:00pm PDT
yes. >> would you agree with me that for over half of that time period, mr. chauvin's left knee was on the neck and his right knee is at times on the back and at other times on his left arm or pushed in against his left side? >> that is correct. those are all the positions that i observed the knee to be in, the right knee, during that period of time. >> and so mr. floyd then is sandwiched, in a way, between mr. chauvin on top and the asphalt pavement beneath him, right? >> yes. >> it's a yes or no question. >> yes. >> i want to ask you a question
about putting pressure on someone's neck. that is if you're on a person's neck and applying pressure to the neck, doctor, do you agree that if pressure is applied to nobody's neck in the prone position and the person is squeezed until they become responsive, and if that pressure is maintained for a minimum of four minutes, that can cause irreversible brain damage, because the brain may be starved of oxygen, is that true? >> once cessation of oction oxygen starts -- >> dr. fowler, is my question true? >> would you please restate the question? >> yes, sir. if you apply pressure to someone's neck and squeeze until the person becomes unresponsive and you maintain that pressure for at least four minutes, you
will cause irreversible brain damage because you will have starved the brain of oxygen, is that true? >> correct. it takes four minutes of no supply of oxygen to the brain to cause irreversible brain damage. >> now, if somebody dies as a result of the consequences of insufficient oxygen or low oxygen, we know when that person dice, they're going to die of cardio pulmonary arrest because everybody dice of cardiopulmonary arrest, right? >> yes. >> if that person dice of low oxygen, that person will also die of a fatal arrythmia, correct? >> correct. every one of us in this room will have a fatal arrythmia at some point. >> because that's kind of how you go? >> yes.
>> so, i want to talk about the role, the physical activity, struggle, if you will, on the oxygen stores, reserves, of somebody in it the prone position. do you agree that when somebody is involved in a pretty vigorous physical confrontation, they would certainly have what's referred to as an oxygen deficit? >> yes. any kind of exertion, you build up a degree of lactic acid and other metabolites that need to be removed from the body and the term is used more in the lay environment, but, yes, you have some makeup to do. >> and because you're using up your oxygen reserves then? >> somewhat, but it's also more generation of the metabolic by-products from the actual activity as well. >> well, would you agree
somebody with an oxygen deficit, who is involved in a rigorous physical confrontation would be more susceptible to positional asphyxia than would otherwise be the case? do you agree with that? >> yes. it would be more difficult for them to regain their -- to get rid of metabolic by-products because of the activities that occurred before. >> and would you agree, then, that a person with an oxygen deficit or a debt is more prone to any kind of asphyxia than a person completely at rest? do you agree with that? >> yes. a fully oxygenated person at rest would certainly be at no risk of -- not no, but a substantially lower level of risk of an arrythmia compared to someone who has be exercised hard. >> doctor, are you familiar with a text known as spitz and
fisher? >> yes. >> this is a standard text from medical examiners, isn't it? >> it is certainly one of the recommended books fellows will read as part of their training, yes. >> one in the past you referred to as a reliable text? >> yes. >> it is handed out to all forensic pathologists in training as just a standard text? >> again, it's recommended they use that as one of their references. >> and you're aware that this text on medicalological investigation of death contains sections on death by asphyxia, doesn't it? >> yes. >> would you agree that death by positional asphyxia, that that is death caused by low or
insufficient oxygen that the causes for that may be what's referred to as endless? >> yes. hence the complexity of these particular cases. >> so, you spoke with mr. nelson about the fact that on autopsy, when somebody dies of asphyxia or insufficient oxygen, you might see injuries to the ribs or to the vertebrae that indicate the type of restraint or at least how the asphyxia came about, you might see that, right? >> yes. >> you might see what is referred to as traumatic manifestations, things like bruises, evidence of injury on autopsy, you might see those, right? >> yes, absolutely. >>. >> do you agree, doctor, that
the majority of cases where somebody dies of asphyxia are very subtle and, in fact, no traumatic manifestations are visible at all? >> that is correct, depending on the circumstances. >> and what i mean by that is that there isn't necessarily any evidence, any physical evidence on autopsy of what it is that caused the low oxygen in a majority of cases, right? >> any substantial number of the cases. i'm not sure it's absolutely the majority. >> brent, could you -- page 18 . >> this is from spitz and
fisher, for identification purposes. your honor, it's exhibit 418, for the record. am i reading here correctly that, however, majority of cases are subtle, often with no traumatic manifestations at all. i read that accurately? >> yes, i did. >> thank you, brett. are you familiar with a publication called night forensic pathology? >> yes. >> and that's another reliable authority for forensic pathologists, isn't it? >> correct. >> did you know that knight's forensic pathology also has a chapter on suffocation and asphyxia? >> yes. >> that doesn't surprise you, does it? >> it doesn't surprise me and i've seen it. >> that's exhibit 815, just for identification purposes. i want to show you what's at
page 354. this is taken from knight's. knight's says, there are no truly distinctive autopsy signs of pure hypoxia and most of the alleged criteria are caused by other factors other than lack of oxygen. did i read that accurate? drv dr. fowler? >> no, i'm just trying to read it and process it. >> no, please, take your time. >> yes, that's what it says. >> you had some discussions with mr. nelson about strangulation. you do understand in this case that no one is contending that mr. floyd was manually strangled
by anyone, you understand that, don't you? >> oh, absolutely. there was no evidence of manual strangulation and no discussion of manual strangulation. >> dr. fowler, do you agree with respect to positional asphyxia, the diagnosis of positional asphyxia is one that is made by investigation because you won't find an autopsy finding that necessarily specifically tells you why the person is asp asphyxiated? >> correct. the scene information becomes very important. >> you spent quite a bit of time talking about the prone position studies. and i referenced them just a few minutes ago by chan and others.
let me ask you a couple other questions just about those studies to try to correlate them to this case. is it true, dr. fowler, that none of the prone restraint studies that you referred to actually studied subjects who had someone's knee on their neck in the prone position, is that true? >> that is true. >> none of the studies went for as long as 9:29, is that true? >> that is true. >> do you agree, dr. fowler, that if the weight of several
officers or a police officer is put on the actual torso and abdominal areas of a person, a person in police custody, that can cause compressional or positional -- >> we are going to pause because i want to take you to a very sacred space in our nation. the president is walking towards section 60 of arlington national cemetery. this is hallowed ground. this is where we have lost and buried members of the u.s. military and men and women who have died in both iraq and afghanistan. so, as we look at these pictures, orrin lieberman is with me, our pentagon correspondent. remind me why this is significant. >> reporter: this is a powerful moment. section 60 means a lot. in isn't the resting place of famous generals who won wars or those who decided the outcome of
generation after generation, women and men who prepared to live their lives for their country. they don't give for their country, per se, they give it for their mothers, their brothers, sisters, fathers, uncles or aunts. it means i have trouble these days ever showing up at cemetery and not thinking about my son. who proudly insisted on putting on that uniform and going with his unit to iraq and giving up his spot as attorney general in the state of delaware because he thought it was the right thing to do.
look at them all. i'm sorry? >> was it a hard decision to make, sir? >> no, it wasn't. to me, it was absolutely clear. absolutely clear. i went through two, bin laden and this, from the very beginning, if you recall, i never thought we were there to somehow unify iraq. i mean, excuse me, afghanistan. it's never been done. it's never been done. thank you all for being out here in the rain. it means a lot. thank you.
the president saying there, look at them all. look at them all, all the tombstones. he said he carries a card on him and it's always updated with the latest number of lives lost of u.s. military and personnel and the number today he read, 2,488 troops and personnel. oren lieberman, forgive me for cutting you off. it felt right to just sit in silence. >> of course. that moment so crucial, that moment where he not only laid the wreath down and saluted the wreath. he looked around at all the tombstones. section 60 is a small part of arlington national cemetery. you get the sense it weighs on him as he stepped away, and he walked away from the camera there. he paused. he looked at the names and, perhaps just as importantly, he looked at the dates, taken far too soon in america's recent wars in iraq and afc. that weighs on him. you get the sense from the answers he gave, the few words
he spoke in arlington nashlg cemetery, in section 60. for him, enough was enough. america had its objectives, america achieved its objectives and after 20 years, that 20 years marked on this coming 9/11, for president joe biden, it was time to get out and make sure that cemetery wasn't filled with the lives of more people from afghanistan. >> thank you. you heard one of the reporters asking him, mr. president, was it a hard decision? he said, no, it was clear. oren, thank you. and i want to take everyone back to minneapolis to it the derek chauvin trial. >> oxygen reserves would have been during the subdual and compression on may 25th of 2020 while he was underneath the body of mr. chauvin? you wrote a report containing your opinions in this case and it is dated february 22, 2021, right?
>> yes. >> i will represent to you and assume for purposes of my questions that nin eee, it's th amount of air that remains in your chest between breaths, will you accept that for the premise of my question? >> end expiretory lung volume? >> yes. >> i refer to that simply as the body's oxygen reserves, as a common way to refer to it. >> it's the air left in your lungs, it's not the body's oxygen reserve. your major oxygen reserve is the oxygen left in your bloodstream. >> we'll just call it the elev then. >> thank you. >> do you agree that as the eelv decreases, that it takes more work to breathe? >> i believe so, yes.
>> incidentally you had a discussion with mr. nelson about >> can we agree that word doesn't appear in your report in any of the 31 pages expressed in your opinion? >> that is correct. >> now, you had made some comments earlier that you couldn't find anything in the literature if the hypopharynx was impeded? >> yes.
>> and i take it you looked at forensic pathology literature? >> i searched general and forensic pathology sources, yes. >> did you look in actual physiology journals, sir? >> that i would consider to be part of the general medical literature. >> so, yes, you looked at physiology journal? >> i searched broadly for it. i don't know whether it's -- i did not specifically focus on look at physiology journals only. >> i don't want to confuse the jury. now, do you -- >> no. >> do you -- i'm sorry, judge. >> side bar, please. >> elie, let me bring you in. this seemingly surgical approach from this prosecutor at all these points the witness made. what's going on here? >> this is a clinic. i give the prosecutor jerry blackwell credit here because he's quiet but taking this witness apart. he started -- this is when we were covering the president. he got the expert witness to
admit he had not calculated in the weight of derek chauvin's police equipment. we know that's 30 or 40 pounds. that means either this witness is sloppy or biased and trying to generate a certain result. he also -- it looks like the judge is talking. >> dr. fowler, i was simply trying to get a clearance, if you can give us one. do you have a specific recollection of actually looking at physiology journals on the question of the relationship between the hypopharynx and the ability to breathe? >> i specifically did a search which includes human physiology journals and nothing came up on my search. so, therefore, i did not read any physiology journals on this because nothing came up in the search. >> so, dr. fowler, did you equate quantitatively and include in your report what mr. floyd's elev was while he
was sitting on the sidewalk before the subdual and restraint began on the ground? >> no, i don't believe i did. >> did you calculate and record the amount of air he took in with each breath at any point in time either before or during the subdual and restraint on the ground? >> no. >>. >> did you do any quantitative assessment in your report for the time while he was sitting on the sidewalk by the dragon wok or whether his breathing, his eelv was normal or abnormal? >> no, i did not. >> incidentally, if his eelv was 89, that is 89 millimeters of mercury, would you agree that that would have been normal then before the time of the subdual and restraint on the ground?
>> i typically do not do pulmonary medicine, so the exact ranges of human beings are not something i classically keep in my head, so i don't know that number, counselor. >> when mr. floyd was laid prone on the street, when he's face down, did you do any calculations of what any reduction may have been in his eelv due to him being placed in a prone position? >> no. >> when mr. chauvin had his knees on mr. floyd's back left arm and left side, did you do any calculations, quantitatively, for how that weight on the back would have had any impact on his eelv? >>, no i did not.
>>. >> would you agree with me that as the eelv goes down, as it goes down t takes more work to breathe? >> that's my understanding but i'm not a pulmonary physician. >> fair enough. for that you would defer to a pulmonary physician? >> for more detail, yes. let me ask you this and you will tell me if i'm asking the wrong person, dr. fowler, would you agree that pressure on the soft side of the neck also narrows the size of the upper airway, the hypopharynx? >> i have not seen any literature which indicates that happens. that was one of the specific
things i searched for. you're correct, counselor, it was not something that was put into the report because it's not something that i have ever heard of, and so i then went and looked for pressure on the neck causing restriction of the h hypopharynx. >> if we might show exhibit 941 that's already in evidence. so showing you, dr. fowler, what has been entered into evidence as exhibit 941, if we look at the left picture, we can see here, and i'll represent this is mr. chauvin who's on top of mr. floyd, you can see here mr. chauvin's knee on the back part of the neck. can you see that, sir? >> yes. >> and then on the right
picture, you can see that his knee is on the side of the neck, on the soft side, can you see that also? >> yes. on the back of the right side of the neck. >> yes, sir. >> thank you. . i think you referred to mr. floyd's death as a sudden death event. is that the word you used? >> yes. more sudden than prolonged. >> if you focus on the first five minutes that mr. floyd is restrained on the ground, you were able to see in that five minutes, first saw mr. floyd just struggling to breathe, right?
>> i'm going to object to the characterization. >> i'll rephrase it, your honor. >> you can see in the first five minutes -- or hear mr. floyd was first calling out that he can't breathe. >> correct. mr. floyd verbalized, i can't breathe, multiple times. >> and you then later hurt him actually call out for his mother? >> yes. >> and as time passed in that first five minutes, you could hear that his voice got thicker and quieter. you could hear that, couldn't you? >> i did not perceive that, but i'm no better at listening than anybody else so anybody can make up their opinion in regard to that. >> but to your hearing, you didn't hear any change in mr. floyd's voice, is that what you're saying, sir? >> not that i noticed. >> did you notice that during the five minutes that his words
got further apart? >> yes, they did. >> did you notice after roughly 4:45 that mr. floyd went unconscious? >> yes. >> did you notice that some time after five minutes, he was found not to have a pulse? >> correct. >> in your report, you refer to this as a sudden death event, but in your report, your findings, you don't record a time, do you, sir, for when the sudden death supposedly occurred, do you? >> i don't specifically remember doing that, correct. >> so, if you look at this continuum from hearing george floyd calling out that he can't breathe to the point that it doesn't have a pulse, over that five-minute time period, is it fair to say that that is what
you're referring to as a sudden death? >> no. >> then -- all right. i asked you the question about when the sudden death occurred. where in this spectrum -- it's okay if you don't know the specific time, but where in this continuum did the sudden death occur from the time he is on the ground, saying he can't breathe, to the point in time he's found not to have a pulse, are you able to generally characterize where the sudden death took place? >> what you're referring to as sudden death and i may have misinterrupted, i'm referring to as sudden cardiac arrest. there's a difference between death and cardiac arrest. cardiac arrest is not absolutely irreversible and not synonymous with a person always passing away. so there's going to be a period of time between his cardiac
arrest. for instance, in this particular case. the official pronouncement was done in the hospital. frankly, he was dead long, long before that. but the moment of death is not something you can easily document. >> so, when we are in this space, where there is a space between cardiac arrest and the actual death, are you suggesting that though mr. floyd may have been in cardiac arrest, there was a time when he may have been revived because he wasn't dead yet? >> immediate medical attention for a person who has gone into cardiac arrest may -- may well reverse their process, yes. >> do you feel mr. floyd should have been given immediate emergency attention to try to reverse the cardiac arrest? >> as a physician, i would agree. >> are you critical of the fact that he wasn't given immediate
emergency care when he went into cardiac arrest? >> as a physician, i would agree. >> when you were observing the footage of mr. floyd after he was gone unconscious, there's a point in time where you see his legs raise up. do you recall seeing his legs raise at the point he was unconscious on the ground? >> yes. >> was that leg raising, was that consistent with what's known as an anoxic seizure? >> that's what we would typically call it, yes. >> an anoxic seizure typically represents there's been some damage to the brain stem due to
insufficient oxygen, true? >> it's inoxic or sometimes we call it inoxic seizure. part of the brain that governs our actual muscular movement, which is the higher portion of the brain is not function willing properly. so, typically people with seizure disorders who have seizure activity, it's from the motor cortex and not from the brain stem. if you've damaged the brain stem at that particular stage, the person is effectively going to be deceased. >> so, but it's fair to say, when we see an anoxic seizure, at the very least, we know that the brain is suffering from insufficient oxygen? >> yes. >> do you agree that low oxygen in the body, insufficient oxygen
t can cause brain injury, can't it? >> absolutely. >> and it can also result in pea, pulseless electrical activity, true? >> true. >> now, mr. floyd had a p.e.a. when his body was taken away from the scene on may 25, 2020, didn't he? >> correct. >> is it true, dr. fowler, that the most common cause of a p.e.a. is low oxygen, insufficient oxygen? >> to the brain? >> yes. >> yes. which can also be caused by a cardiac. oxygen to the brain, from either mechanism, will cause p.e.a.
>> i have a number of questions. i'll just ask you this. i have a number of questions that have to do whether you did any quantitative measurements about mr. floyd's oxygen level, eelv at any different times, and at which time do you think his oxygen storage was completely depleted. i take it, dr. fowler, if i have any quantitative questions about his eelv, those are measurements you would not have undertaken, correct? >> correct. >> to the extent we're looking for such measurements, about either to ask a pulmonologist, but not dr. fowler as a forensic pathologist, fair enough?
>> fair enough. forensic pathologists do not typically look at living people who are breathing. >> by the same token, if i had a series of questions about measurements of the carbon dioxide levels in mr. floyd's body after he ceased to breathe, between the time he ceased to breathe and before the time he was given oxygen, when he was picked up and given medical care and taken to hennepin county medical center, you didn't do any quantitative analysis, did you, as to the carbon dioxide levels in mr. floyd's body in between the time he ceased to breathe and the time he would receive assisted oxygen? >> no, not specific quantitative analysis, no.
>> you had quite a discussion about the paraganglioma. >> yes. >> we had a witness testify to it as an incidental ganglioma. have you ever heard that? >> yes. >> you talked about the paraganglioma potentially being an issue if it were secreting adrenaline, right? >> correct. >> 90% of paragangliomas do not secrete adrenaline, is that right? >> i think that's probably correct. i don't have that number in my head, but i have no reason to disbelieve that. >> now, you're not telling the jury, are you, sir, that mr. floyd died from a paraganglioma, are you? >> no. >> and although dr. baker did identify the paraganglioma on
autopsy, he didn't perform any tests to determine whether it was a secreting tumor, that is, secreting adrenaline, did he? >> correct. the only way to test those particular tumors is -- there's two methods to test. one is to do a blood test and if the paraganglioma is one which is constantly secreting, you'll pick it up on a blood test. for those paragangliomas that tend to be cyclical, if you do a blood test and you happen to pick it up at the bottom of the cycle, it won't show. and so in some cases, the first test is to do a blood test. if it's positive, you've got your answer. if that blood test is negative, you then go on to do a 24-hour urine screen, which will pick up the surges and the dose. and that is then the second test. that would be done in these cases. neither of them were done. >> doctor, just for clarification, is it pronounced
paraganglioma or paraganglioma? >> i often add in the extra vowel. paraga paraganglioma. sorry. >> thank you. is it true that in all the world literature, there have only been six reported cases of people who have died from a sudden heart event from adrenaline release from a paraganglioma, is that true? >> that's what the literature says. because in many cases it may go completely unrecognized. >> i just asked if it was true, dr. fowler. >> yes, it's in the literature. >> now, one of the signature hallmarks of a paraganglioma is a headache, right? >> if it is one that does secretion, surge and then dip in surge. if it's one that constantly secretes a small amount, it will not cause any symptoms at all. >> all right.
but to the extent that -- well, we know amongst the various complaints mr. floyd complained, he never did complain about a headache, did he? >> i seem to remember at least -- i remember one admission where he complained of a headache, but i -- i'm going from memory now. and i'm not sure. >> i'm referring to may 25th of last year. you have a recollections that mr. floyd complained of a headache? >> i know he complained of tooth pain and a few other things. i do not have a clear recollection. >> i won't hold you to that. >> thank you .
>> dr. fowler, you asked some questions about mr. floyd saying, i can't breathe, before he was put on the ground during the subdual and the restraint. do you recall that discussion? >> yes. >> were you able to see what was happening with mr. floyd as they were trying to get him into what's referred to as a squat 320? >> yes. >> were you aware of whether or not mr. floyd was experiencing being choked as he was being put into the back of squad 320? >> i did not see it around his neck, from my recollection. that's not something i noticed.
>> your honor, counsel, i have a couple of stills from exhibit 43 that's already in. and these are number exhibits 281 and 282. and i would offer those stills from exhibit 43 already in evidence. >> any objections? >> may i, your honor? >> yes. they are received. >> thank you, your honor. >> so if we could show 282.
can you see here in 282 this area, do you see where i've circled, dr. fowler? >> yes. >> do you see this arm that is around mr. floyd's neck? >> yes. >> do you recognize this person to be mr. chauvin? >> it appears to be, yes. >> if i could show you 281. i'm sorry, your honor. here we see the top of mr. floyd's face. and then there's a hand here on his neck. do you see that? >> yes. >> and so you -- these weren't images or seems you had paid special attention to before as you looked at what was going on in squad 320. you have not seen any arms or
anything around mr. floyd's neck? >> no. i had seen these particular sections. i'm sorry if i misinterpreted your question. you said before he went into squad 320. i apologize if i misinterpreted your question. >> sir, do you know whether when mr. floyd was into the back of squad 320 and before he was pulled out, whether he complained about being choked? did he say, i'm getting choked? >> i believe he did, yes. >> and it doesn't take a medical doctor such as yourself to know that if somebody is feeling they are getting choked, that would be a good reason why they would say they can't breathe? >> yes. >> i want, dr. fowler, to see if
you could clear up a couple of things in the timeline of what happened with respect to mr. floyd in restraints on the ground. was the leg extension the anoxic seizure, as we referred to, was that before he lost consciousness or after he lost consciousness? >> after. >> did you make a note as to when there floyd's -- when was his last vocal sound, do you remember? >> somewhere between a minute -- 45 seconds and a minute -- i have the information written down somewhere. before he went unconscious was about the last time he actually vocalized.
>> if we focus in on the period of subdual restraint and neck compression, was there ever a time during the 9:29 where you saw mr. floyd either sleepy, unarousable or anything that's akin to being in a coma? >> so from the period after he has those hypoxic seizures? >> from the time he's first put on the ground, that he's pulled out of the car, squad 320, subdued and restrained on the ground, mr. chauvin is on his neck and back, did you ever see mr. floyd at any time manifest either sleepiness, a lack of awareness that he wasn't arousable and that sort of thing? >> no, not until he lost consciousness. >> typically, doctor, when
somebody passes away from a fentanyl or opioid overdose, one of the hallmarks of that is that they are very sleepy and they will tend to be unarousable and pass away in a coma, right? >> correct. if they are passing away from fentanyl overdose, that's what happens. >> and mr. floyd was manifesting none of those outward symptoms, was he, on the ground? >> correct. it does not exclude the fact that it was still having a depressive effect on his respiratory system. >> well, before he lost consciousness, his respiration rate, i think you told us that you agree with dr. tobin, was somewhere in the ballpark of 22 breaths a minute, right? >> correct. >> that is normal, isn't it? >> yes. >> if fentanyl was affecting his respiration, then you would expect a respiratory rate that
would have been appreciably less than 22 breaths a minute if it's depressing his respiratory system, right? >> unless he should have been breathing at 30 at that particular stage because of his exertion and other stressors. >> and you have no really basis or baseline to suggest that mr. floyd should have been breathing at 30 instead of the normal 22, right? >> a person who is getting short of oxygen to their brain will often increase or usually increase their respiratory rate to more than 30.
>> i want to talk with you about the methamphetamine. first, let me clear up, if i can, this issue of pills again in the car on may 25th. when dr. baker performed the autopsy, isn't it true that there weren't any pills found in mr. floyd's stomach? >> correct. dr. baker did not identify any pill, tablet, what you want, within the stomach. >> obviously any pill that's found in a car is not a pill that's in mr. floyd's body? >> correct. whatever the residual amount in those tablets was, was not in his body.
>> i think you made a statement with respect to the methamphetamine that it was not accompanied now i think you made a statement with respect to the methamphetamine that it was metabolized. >> yes. >> and i want to be clear on this. have you -- since making the statement in your report, have you learned in fact that the metabolite of methamphetamine, that methamphetamine as a metabolite was present in the toxicology results? >> i have heard a statement to that fact, yes.
>> did you investigate the statement to determine whether or not it was true? >> yes. >> and did you find that contrary to what you had written in your report you in fact found that the metabolite of methamphetamine was present from the toxicology results from mr. floyd? >> in very low levels so it did not change my opinion. >> well, the methamphetamine was only present in very low levels, isn't that true? >> that is true. >> and so there's not a lot of meth, then there won't be a lot of the metabolite either. that makes sense, doesn't it? >> corrects, and/or again a substantial amount of whatever methamphetamine is there has not been metabolized. >> so what was the level of methamphetamine that was found in this toxicology results, do you remember? >> not off hand, no. >> how about 19 nanograms per mill liter. does that sound right? >> it sounds right. i didn't want to say it because i didn't want to be inaccurate. >> thank you, doctor.
my last question, dr. fowler, and then i'll sit down for now. i wanted to again just address the timeline from your report, and i will read it to you, and my question would be whether or not this is the timeline that you still -- that you stand behind, if i may. so at 8:24:09, the last audible vocal sounds identifiable of mr. floyd's are heard. soon thereafter voices from bystanders tell police he's not breathing. mr. floyd exhibits extension movements of right lower extremity at 8:242:1 and movements of his right arm at 8:24:33. at 8:25:16 mr. floyd appears to
have passed out. so representation from your report, is that your best knowledge and information, sir? >> that's the information i extracted at that time, yes. >> and you stand by that, too, at this time, correct? >> i have no reason to disagree with that at this time. >> dr. fowler, thank you. >> shall we break at this time or can you be brief? >> break. >> okay. we'll take a 20-minute break. a 20-minute break. elie hopig. where do we begin? how about credibility of this expert witness? maybe big picture. what are the five points made in this cross? >> first of all, people hear cross-examination and they think it's angry and aggressive and think of "a few good men" and i want the truth. this was clinical and systematic. five biggest points that i saw come out of it.
first of all, the prosecutor questioned the expert about several of the studies that he relied on, but the prosecutor said none of them involved nine minutes and 29 seconds, did they? no. the experiment admitted none went that long. >> second of all, he got the expert to say he did not take key measurements to take the eelv, oxygen rates and third he got the expert to admit he's not a cardiologist or pulmonologist. those people would be more expert in the heart and lungs. remember, the prosecution called experts in bolt of those fields. fourth, he got next pert to admit that the police officer should have rendered immediate medical attention and that he faulted them for not rendering immediate medical attention and finally the prosecutor got this expert to admit that if it was an overdose the person would appear to be sleepy or in a coma, and the expert did not see either of those things with george floyd. >> before i come over to you, chief, and i'm digesting all of your points, elie, so well
executed. let me just play a key moment where the prosecutor really, really -- jerry blackwell real attacked this -- this expert witness on his point about carbon monoxide. watch this. >> you haven't seen any data or test results that showed mr. floyd had a single injury from carbon monoxide. is that true? >> that is correct because it was never sent -- >> i specifically -- i asked you whether it was true? >> that is true. >> now as you were talking about carbon monoxide, you were referring to the squad car that mr. floyd was near. weren't you? >> yes. >> have you ever laid eyes -- i don't mean pictures, physically, on the squad car that you were referring to? >> i have not. >> do you know whether it has a single exhaust or double exhaust? >> the information that i was provided it has a double exhaust with twin exhaust pipes on each
side so it has four exhausts. >> right. now, did you know the make and the model of the car? >> it is a ford explorer interceptor. >> is it a hybrid? >> yes, it is. >> okay. now, did you see any air monitoring data that actually would give you any information as to what amount of carbon monoxide, if any, would have been in mr. floyd's breathing zone? >> no, because it was not tested. >> it was a yes or no question. you haven't seen any, have you? >> i have not seen any data. >> it was a yes or no question. ultimately, elie, he says i've not seen the car or any emissions data. what did you think of that? >> the prosecutor cut the legs right out from upped this expert, and that was early on in the cross-exam. remember, a key point of the expert's testimony this morning was the theory about carbon monoxide. the prosecutor right there established that's based on nothing. you have no data or science behind that and if the jury is
watching, that i think they are seriously questioning his credibility. >> chief, what did you think of the whole back and forth? >> well, you know, one of the things that's impressed me throughout this -- this trial particularly with expert witnesses is the skill of which the prosecutors ask questions of the people providing the testimony. very skillful. i was looking for that during cross-examination of this witness. i knew that the prosecution was going to really, really go after him and go after him hard. they are very, very skillful, and i think that's important, very important for the jury to hear the responses to those questions because if you don't have that, then they are left with an impression that is really not one that i guess for the prosecution that you would want to leave him with. that there's another cause of death now, they throw carbon monoxide in it even though none
of the officers suffered any effects from it but, you know, i just think they are doing a masterful job personally. >> and -- and elie, all it takes though, it i'm just thinking of the jury, just takes. >> yeah. >> for people watching, wanting the book thrown at this former police officer, just 30 seconds here. all it takes is one juror to be not totally convinced, right, to make this -- >> yeah. let me just remind our audience. this case has come in very strongly for the prosecution in my opinion, but you never know what a jury is going to do. a jury is 12 human beings. as unpredictable as human nature is, multiply that by 12 and that's the unpredictability that goes into any jury deliberations. there's a group dynamic and you need unanimity. has to be 12-0 to convict. anything less than that will be a hung jury or 12-0 to acquit so all it takes is one. nothing can be taken for granted. >> such an important reminder.
thanks for your eloquence and all of that, and charles ramsey, commissioner to you as well, sir. we'll pick this back up tomorrow. thank you so much for being with me the last two hours. i'm brooke baldwin here in new york. let's go to our nation's capital. "the lead" with jake tapper starts right now. ♪ welcome to "the lead." i'm jake tapperance and we begin today with the world leader. president biden just minutes ago announcing the end of america's longest war beginning on may 1st with a plan, he says, to remove the remaining 2,500 u.s. service members in afghanistan before september 11th of this year which will be the 20th anniversary of the terrorist attacks that led the u.s. into this war to begin with. >> end america's longest war. we went to afghanistan because of a horrific attack that happened 20 years ago. that cannot explain why we should remain ther