My contention is that he believed he couldn't breathe due to his claustrophobia. He came out of the front of an SUV. I guess you didnt hear him on the video ask if he could sit in the front seat of the squad car. You think its doubtful a claustrophobic would say he couldn't breathe when that is a common complaint from claustrophobics?
The front of the SUV is a confined space, but no issues there. So relaxed he was nodding off uncontrollably and hard to wake, according to his ex girlfriend. He said he was claustrophobic when he was outside too. The prosecutions own police witnesses confirmed that during arrest, many people fake illness in order to avoid being arrested.
Do you believe that high levels of fentanyl doesn't suppress breathing?
The effects of fentanyl on the respiratory system include a decrease in peripheral and central chemoreceptor gains on ventilation and a direct inhibition of respiratory neural activity.
In this paper, respiratory depressant effects of fentanyl are described quantitatively by a mathematical model. The model is an extension of a previous one, which reproduces the human ventilatory control system on a physiological basis. It includes the following: three compartments for gas...
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
How do you account for a meth/fentanyl combination partially dissolved pill with Floyd's saliva on it being found in the back of the squad car?
I found the prosecutions experts more compelling than the defense experts and I come from 40 years on the defense side of things.
Appealing to authority is a non-argument. You have a predetermined opinion of what you think the verdict is, and have already stated you know what the defence will say before they even started their part of the trial. In other words, no point in hearing from the defence, you already know he is guilty. Maxine Waters feels the same way. If you have predetermined guilt before hearing the defence, you will end up finding reasons to support your belief and downgrade those which contradict your conclusion. That is bias. Forty years of experience does not eliminate bias. It comes inbuilt into the human brain.
You were insinuating that he was guilty of robbing the woman based upon a probable cause report ( which I assume you dont get the distinction of what a probale cause report is)
A common definition of probable cause is below:
A common definition is "a reasonable amount of suspicion, supported by circumstances sufficiently strong to justify a
prudent and cautious person's belief that certain facts are
probably true".
Source:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Probable_cause#:~:text=In United States criminal law,grand juries issue criminal indictments.
So he probably did it. Factor in his skipping bail, unlicensed firearm possession, being identified in a lineup, skipping court, and fighting with police officers adds up to someone who was most likely guilty and wanted to escape, because they thought they would be going to jail. And you said yourself that in the court of public opinion, the person is not innocent until proven guilty.
The whole issue with reasonable doubt is not whether or not you believe claustrophobia was the cause of his breathing issues, but whether you believe serious heart problems, and drugs in his system combined with fighting with police officers cannot be a significant contributing factor. They were contributing factors according to the autopsy.
Edit: Other contributing factors include the other officers. If Chauvin is guilty, so are they, most likely. Therefore, Chauvin's portion of guilt becomes less of the pie and a smaller contributing factor. What about the paramedics, who did a "load and go" rather than resuccitating on the spot. That vital lost time could have been a contributing factor that led to Floyd being incapable of resuscitation. Why did they do a load and go? Because the scene did not seem safe. The agitating crowd therefore also have some culpability. The more factors that are culpable of causing death, the less it all falls on Chauvin.
