when ms. frazier starts recording. reasonable police officers are aware when they're using force that sometimes what they are doing does not look good to the general public. reasonable polil hear the frustration growing. a reasonable police officer will hear the increase in the volume of the voices. a reasonable police officer will hear the name calling, right? chump. whatever names that are being called, they will hear the person, they will hear thisthei consideration. a reasonable police officer will rely on his recent training. a reasonable police officer will

hear what, i'll come back to the training, a reasonable, a reaso officer will hear what the crowd is saying, he will compare his actions to what they are saying, and he will determine, i know i'm being recorded, right, i know i'm being recorded, they're saying that i'm doing something that is awful looking, am i doing this.

>> bro, you can get him off the ground, bro. you can get him off the ground. >> you can see, officer chauvin body language tells us a lot, right? that's what we just heard. looking down, looking up, looking around, looking down, looking over, looking around. he's comparing a reasonable police officer is doing what a reasonable police officer would do, he is comparing his actions, his own actions, in response to what the crowd is saying. a reasonable police officer again will rely on his training. 2020, march of 2020, tactics of a crowd, never underestimate a

crowd's potential. most crowds are compliant. crowds are very dynamic creatures and can change rapidly. a crowd may contain elements of several types of groups. now i acknowledge that this is in dealing with massive crowds. protests and things of that nature. these are the tactics, but never underestimate a crowd's potential. because a reasonable police officer has to be aware and alert to his surroundings. a reasonable police officer will consider his department's policies on crisis, and what is defined as a crisis? crisis. an event or situation where an individual's safety and health are threatened by behavioral challenges to include mental illness, developmental disabilities, substance abuse, or overwhelming stressors. a crisis can involve an individual's perception or experience of an event or

situation as an intolerable difficulty that exceeds the individual's current resources and coping mechanisms and may include unusual stress in his or her life that renders him or her unable to function as he or she would normally would. the crisis may not necessarily, may, but not may not necessarily result in an upward trajectory or intensity, culminating in thoughts or acts that are possibly dangerous to himself, herself, or others. right? a reasonable police officer is recognizing that the crowd is in crisis. that all of these things, the members, the bystander, the citizens, whatever you want to call them, they are in crisis. so a reasonable police officer considers his department's training. what are these potential signs of aggression that i may be confronted with? somebody standing tall.

somebody red in their face. raised voice. heavy breathing. tense muscles. this is from the crisis intervention training. this is what was testified to. these are signs that police officers are trained to look for in a crisis, as potential signs of aggression. how do you respond to those? you appear confident in your actions. you stay calm. you maintain space. you speak slowly and softly, and you avoid staring and eye contact. again, these are t deal with a . as this crowd grew more and more upset, or deeper into crisis, a very critical thing happened. at a very precise moment.

and i cannot in my opinion understand state the importance of this moment. a critical moment in this case. if you recall, from dr. tobin's testimony, nobody disagreed, that mr. floyd took his last breath at 8:25:16. what is happening at the very precise moment that mr. floyd takes his last breath? you're taking one piece of evidence, and you're comparing it against the rest. this moment, 8:25:16, as mr. floyd is taking hi

>> back off. >> look at him. >> he's not responding. >> three things happen. mr. floyd takes his last breath. you see officer chauvin's reaction to the crowd is to pull his mace, and shake it. he's threatening the use of force as is permitted by the minneapolis police department policy. and genevieve hanson walks inin. startling him. all of these facts and circumstances simultaneously occur at a critical moment.

and that changed officer chauvin's perception of what was happening. after this point, the crowd grows louder and louder. right? and at this point now, mr. floyd has taken his last breath, and the question is the rendering of medical aid. when do we stop cpr, according to the minneapolis police department's policy, when it's not safe. you heard the lieutenant talk about this and you heard nicole mckenzie talk about this. consider nicole mckenzie's testim officer, which would include nicole mckenzie, she discussed at length the difficulty of

performing cpr in what she would describe as, or she did describe it as a hostile environment. you miss signs. breathing can be confused for effective breathing. as she testified, people at the area can be part of the decision to affect procedures at a scene, she talked about it is difficult to focus when you don't feel safe. it makes it more difficult to assess a patient. makes it more likely that you can miss signs that a patient is experiencing something. so the distraction she said can actually do harm to a patient. when we're talking about this critical decision making model, right, the lieutenant said, sometimes you have to take into consideration whether it is

worth the risk to remove the handcuffs and render medical aid. because it's unpredictable. right? all of this information is coming at a reasonable officer. the reasonable police officer standard can also be extended to officer chang, right, what is his perception of the crowd? you heard him testify. you can also look at what his body, what was he doing during his, during this time?

>> stay close. we'll figure it out, all right? >> you have the officer pacing, turning around 360 degrees, right? his attention is focused on what's happening with the crowd. but he also has another job. reasonable police officers and how they interact with the crowd is a consideration. you can also take into consideration the reactions of shawanda hill and maurie -- >> what is he doing?

>> look, they are still -- >> oh, man. what is he doing? >> a nonpolice officer and their reactions to what's happening. but also consider the paramedics, right? the paramedics. they did the load and go, right? derek smith testified he got oust ambulance, he checked all four corners to gauge what was happening, and determined in his words that it was an unwelcoming environment. and he told his partner that they need to move to a different location. a more safe and secure location. remember nicole mckenzie's testimony, too, as unreasonable

as it sounds, paramedics get attacked, too. we have all of these different opinions in terms of the use of force. right? we have all of the opinions of seth stoughton, stiger, barry broad, zimmerman, arradondo, david ploeger, lieutenant mercel, and they all reach very different conclusions about when the force became unreasonable. all you have to know about barry broad about what he was talking about is this physically managing any person, his opinion is you can use nondeadly force to physically manage a person. it's all within the model of the

mpd decision making model. i found the most interesting person to be relevant to the use of force lieutenant johnny mercel. considering that he is derek chauvin's actual use of force trainer. so the best glimpse that we're going to get into, the training of a minneapolis police officer, comes from the trainer who conducts the training. he conducted hundreds of trainings over the years. he corrected the state at certain times in terms of how strike charts don't apply to restraint techniques. he said the knee on the neck is not an unauthorized move. and it can be utilized in certain circumstances. he described using a knee on the neck and bac be there for an extended period of time depending on the level of resistance you get. he said that once the suspect is handcuffed, it does not necessarily mean that it is time to move your leg, because when

people are handcuffed, they can thrash around and continue to be dangerous to themselves and others. he talked about the ground defense program, because it's safer for both the suspect and the officer. he talked about ground defense as a form of using your weight to control a subject, and therefore replacing the need to punch or strike them. he said there's no technique, you need to be fluid and adapt to the circumstance, he personally trains to put a knee up to the shourd, up to the base of the neck, and he described this maneuver as routinely trained by the minneapolis police department. he testified that there are circumstances that an officer would need to use his weight to continue to control a subject. he recognized the concept of awful but lawful. right? sometimes the use of force is just not that attractive. he's experienced himself arresting people who have claimed to have a medical

emergency. he explained how one way people can resist is through their words. he describedagain, and vice-versa. he described how officers are trained not to just focus on the subject but also the bystanders. he trains officers if you're fighting with a suspect, and that person becomes compliant, it is a legitimate consideration for the continued use of force to control a subject. that if a subject overpowers more than one officer at a time, that is a legitimate consideration in the continuation of the use of force. he talked about substance abuse and how that officers are trained, right, i understand that super human strength is not a phenomenon, i know there are no supermen or spidermen, all right? but officers are specifically

trained that someone under the influence of certain types of controlled substances exhibit this behavior. they become stronger than they normally would. we've all heard the anecdotal stories of the pregnant mom lifting the car off of someone, right? it's not literally describing a super hero, it's simply describing that someone is more, exhibiting a greater strength, and the minneapolis police department specifically trains that. he trained about neck restraints of the minneapolis police department has a specific written policy on the use of neck restraints and it was permitted, even though this wasn't a neck restraint, or a chokehold. he talked about how you need to cut off the blood supply for this, for a neck restraint, to both sides of the neck. he talked about how someone whose heart rate is beating faster, they go u described the

of force. that is, force affect the officer himself, his cognition, his abilities, his mental and physical state. he agreed that not using the mrt is a form of deescalation. he describes that sometimes you have to use your body weight to control a subject until the scene is code four. he said that minneapolis will train officers that under certain circumstances, an officer can hold a person in a prone position until the scene is safe. and he's done it himself. you have to take into consideration the presence of bystanders, where officers are located, and the environment that they're in. lieutenant mercel agreed that there are circumstances, as i talked about this a minute ago, you have to make a decision, is

it worth the risk to take the handcuffs off to perform medical procedures. he said there are circumstances that you wouldn't put someone in a recovery position, depending upon the safety of people, including the crowd. while awaiting ems. he described how crowds can make situations chaotic. he says simply because a person is not actively resisting, that does not mean that you cannot use force. it doesn't mean that you cannot use force. simply because someone isn't stabbing you, or punching you, or shooting at you, it doesn't mean that you can't use force. and that is specifically in the minneapolis police department policy on the nondeadly use of force that we've looked at a couple of times. the use of force is an

incredibly difficult analysis. you can't limit it to nine minutes and 29 seconds. it started 17 minutes before, that nine minutes and 29 seconds. all of this information has to be taken, you have to look at it from the totality of the circumstances. you have to look at it from the reasonable police officer's standard. you have to take into account that officers are human beings. capable of making mistakes. in highly stressful situations. in this case, the totality of the circumstances that were known to asonable police officer in the precise moment the force was used demonstrates that this was an authorized use

of force. as unpracticive, as unattractive as it may be. and this is reasonable doubt. stiger talked about being on the panel. they have five officers on a panel to assess whether uses of force are reasonable. sometimes it's 4-1. sometimes it's 3-2. sometimes it's 5-0. because the reasonableness of the use of force is not an easy thing to consider. i know, again, and i'm sorry, i'm long-winded. there are a couple of other things i need to talk about very briefly. i promise i'll be as brief as i can. before i get to the cause of death. first is that concept of intent. as the state showed you with respect to counts one and two, you have to address mr.

chauvin's intent. pay careful attention again to the instructions. words have meaning. intentionally or intentional, means that the defendant either has a purpose to do the thing, or cause the result specified or believes that the act, if successful, will cause the result. in addition, the defendant must have kthat are necessary to mak conduct criminal, and that are set forth after the word intentionally intentional. the same, you'll see a very similar instruction, you will see this very similar instruction twice. intent. did officer chauvin intentionally apply unlawful force? that's what you're being asked to decide. did he purposefully,

purposefully apply unlawful force to another person? in count two, you have to decide, did he purposefully perform an act, he did intentionally perform an act that was imminently dangerous? what considerations do you have at your disposal? what pieces of evidence do you have, i will try to go through these quickly. what evidence is there? what evidence is inconsistent with intent? so facts and circumstances that are important for you to decide in terms of his intent is within the context of aiding and abetting other people. first, officers know that they are being videotaped. they know they're being videotaped by themselves. they know they're being videotaped by bapolis

police department milestone camera. they know these things. do you do that you know is an unlawful use of force when you have four body-worn cameras, immediately in the area, where you have multiple civilians videotaping you, where you know your actions are being reviewed through a city-owned camera, where there are surveillance cameras, do people do things intentionally and purposefully when they know they're being watched? remember, officer lane offered to have, when they were putting mr. floyd in the squadturn on the air conditioner.

>> please crack it for me. please. >> i will. >> please stay with me, man. thank you. man. please. >> you're good. >> okay, okay, okay. >> have a seat. >> windows down, man. >> take a seat. >> i'm going in. >> take a seat. >> i'm not that kind of guy. i'm not that kind of guy, need . >> roll the windows down.

>> hey, listen. listen. >> i'm not that kind of guy. >> please, man. >> i'll roll the window down three times. i'll turn on the air conditioner. is that evidence of intent to apply unlawful force? officer chauvin confirms that mr. floyd is under arrest. >> man. >> you're under arrest right now for forgery. >> officer chauvin made a decision not to use higher levels of force when he would have been authorized to do that. including punches. kicking. elbows. right? all of these tools were available to officer chauvin. that is not an intent to purposefully use unlawful force. they called for ems.

within one minute of putting him on the ground. they step it up within another minute and a half. act to speak means he can breathe and they say it repeatedly, remember? they tell him to relax. >> oh, my god. i can't breathe. >> officer chauvin is never swearing at him. he's not calling him names. all of this stuff that we've already talked about, and i don't need to go through this again, all of this stuff that we've talked about, throughout the entirety of not reflect an

intent intentionally, commit an unlawful use of force. all of the evidence shows that mr. chauvin thought he was following his training, he was in fact following his training, he was following minneapolis police department policies, he was trained this way, it all demonstrates a lack of intent. there is absolutely no evidence that officer chauvin intentionally purposefully applied unlawful force. officer chauvin is also otheri

floyd. >> should i put his stuff in the car? no, we need to get him in the ambulance. let's refocus. officer chauvin had no intent to purposefully use, he did not purposefully use unlawful force. these are officers doing their job in a highly stressful situation. according to their training, according to the policies of the minneapolis police department, and it is, it's tragic.

it's tragic. they go to the hospital. they perform cpr. they call their supervisors. was this an imminently dangerous act? was putting mr. floyd, imminently dangerous act? we heard a lot about the prone position. consider just the basic prone position. people sleep in the prone position. people suntan in the prone position. people get massages in the prone position. the prone position in and of itself is not an inherently dangerous act. it is not an inherently dangerous act. the prone posi restraint is not an inherently dangerous act. it is routinely trained and