Riots after Death of Man in Minneapolis Police Custody

[PopoJeff]

Still not sure what the charging document has to do with Floyd being a longtime criminal.
But sure..if you want to bring up apples in and oranges argument, go for it.  

I still stand by my statement, that a decades long criminal arrested 10x has a 10x greater chance of finding a bad cop than a criminal who has only been arrested once.


And if you want to talk about excited delirium, and positional asphyxiation, I'm sure I mentions both of those really early in this thread. (Page 6 was my first mention of it)

[1715172799]

1715172799

[1715172799]

1715172799

[1715172799]

1715172799

[Gyfts]

Fentanyl 11 ng/mL - clearly in a safe range

Where does it say 11 ng/mL is safe? Article states "Blood concentrations of approximately 7 ng/ml or greater have been associated with fatalities where poly-substance use was involved." unless you're talking about something else.

[Gyfts]

Fentanyl 11 ng/mL - clearly in a safe range

Where does it say 11 ng/mL is safe? Article states "Blood concentrations of approximately 7 ng/ml or greater have been associated with fatalities where poly-substance use was involved." unless you're talking about something else.

It also says 10-20 ng/mL is the suggested range for anaesthesia.

"Poly-substance use" in this case most likely means adding fentanyl to other nervous system depressants, of which meth is not one. Here's a more specific study that determined the mean concentration of fentanyl in multi-drug overdose deaths was 26.4 ng/ml.

Among the 36 natural deaths the following co-administered drugs were identified: antidepressants (11), oxycodone (9), benzodiazepines (7), morphine/codeine (5), and hydrocodone (4).

This study offers a different perspective.

https://ndews.umd.edu/sites/ndews.umd.edu/files/ndews-hotspot-unintentional-fentanyl-overdoses-in-new-hampshire-final-09-11-17.pdf

Despite the ubiquitous presence of multiple drugs in these decedents, the effects of fentanyl
were evidently so strong that there were no statistical differences in the fentanyl level (mean
and standard deviation) with or without the presence of these co-intoxicants. The range of
fentanyl levels was wide, from 0.75 to 113.00 ng/mL, with an average of 9.96 ng/mL.

Nevertheless, the mean and range of fentanyl levels when fentanyl was the only drug found in
toxicology were statistically the same as the mean and range for the cases where fentanyl was
only one of several synergistic co-intoxicants. This suggests that fentanyl presence alone seems
to be sufficient to cause death.

You do not necessarily need a concoction of other drugs for fentanyl to be dangerous. Regardless, I'm not saying that George Floyd died of a drug overdose because both autopsy reports ruled the death a homicide. However, it did play a factor in his death. This is what the first autopsy report plainly stated. It isn't my medical take.

[BADecker]

This study offers a different perspective.

https://ndews.umd.edu/sites/ndews.umd.edu/files/ndews-hotspot-unintentional-fentanyl-overdoses-in-new-hampshire-final-09-11-17.pdf

Despite the ubiquitous presence of multiple drugs in these decedents, the effects of fentanyl
were evidently so strong that there were no statistical differences in the fentanyl level (mean
and standard deviation) with or without the presence of these co-intoxicants. The range of
fentanyl levels was wide, from 0.75 to 113.00 ng/mL, with an average of 9.96 ng/mL.

Nevertheless, the mean and range of fentanyl levels when fentanyl was the only drug found in
toxicology were statistically the same as the mean and range for the cases where fentanyl was
only one of several synergistic co-intoxicants. This suggests that fentanyl presence alone seems
to be sufficient to cause death.

It's not a "different perspective" -- its just a broader range of data. It also includes a large number of people who tested positive for alcohol (32%) which could very well be weighing down the average concentration of fentanyl in those who died, as that is often a lethal combination of drugs. The study I quoted is more relevant as it doesn't include those with alcohol in their systems.

You do not necessarily need a concoction of other drugs for fentanyl to be dangerous. Regardless, I'm not saying that George Floyd died of a drug overdose because both autopsy reports ruled the death a homicide. However, it did play a factor in his death. This is what the first autopsy report plainly stated. It isn't my medical take.

Actually the first autopsy report doesn't state that at all. The title is "CARDIOPULMONARY ARREST COMPLICATING LAW ENFORCEMENT SUBDUAL, RESTRAINT, AND NECK COMPRESSION." You can argue that fentanyl played a role in his death, but you're on your own here. So actually it is your "medical take."

Was an autopsy done? You can get two or more coroners or doctors to disagree on cause of death, sometimes even with an autopsy.

The point is, all these Covid deaths aren't really known to be Covid deaths.

[PopoJeff]

Still not sure what the charging document has to do with Floyd being a longtime criminal.
But sure..if you want to bring up apples in and oranges argument, go for it.  

Still not sure how Floyd being a longtime criminal justifies the clearly excessive use of force that led to his death. You're saying that not only was Floyd's previous crimes (or current one of passing a fake $20) grounds for the death penalty but the cop had the right to act as executioner? If not, what are you saying exactly? Think about it.

And if you want to talk about excited delirium, and positional asphyxiation, I'm sure I mentions both of those really early in this thread. (Page 6 was my first mention of it)

Okay and seeing as how you are not a medical examiner you aren't a credible source when it comes to speculating upon his cause of death.

1. Nope.  Never said that. I guess English wasn't a good subject for you.  Try reading the WORDS again.  I said a criminal with 10 arrests is 10x more likely to encounter a bad cop than a criminal who was arrested once.
  I've never justified the unlawful death of Floyd.  But you seem blind to basic facts, so wrongfully opine away fella.  

2. I have 2 decades of training, education, and experience with excited delirium and positional asphyxiation. No one here has ever heard those words before this Floyd case. I knew it the first time I saw the video. Been there, done that. And, I'll go so far as to say, Chauvin wasn't the primary cause for positional asphyxiation, he's secondary. The primary cause will be the cop that was on Floyd's back, preventing the rise and fall of Floyd's chest cavity.    You can offer dissenting opinion now, or put this in your back pocket and get back to me after trial.


And, I'll be so bold as to add..... go ahead and protest Minneapolis Police policy all you want. Those idiots still had the choke hold as an approved Use of Force technique.  Most every other department in the US removed that policy decades ago for the exact reason of this entire subject.

[Spendulus]

Still not sure what the charging document has to do with Floyd being a longtime criminal.
But sure..if you want to bring up apples in and oranges argument, go for it.  

Still not sure how Floyd being a longtime criminal justifies the clearly excessive use of force that led to his death. You're saying that not only was Floyd's previous crimes (or current one of passing a fake $20) grounds for the death penalty but the cop had the right to act as executioner? If not, what are you saying exactly? Think about it.

And if you want to talk about excited delirium, and positional asphyxiation, I'm sure I mentions both of those really early in this thread. (Page 6 was my first mention of it)

Okay and seeing as how you are not a medical examiner you aren't a credible source when it comes to speculating upon his cause of death.

1. Nope.  Never said that. I guess English wasn't a good subject for you.  Try reading the WORDS again.  I said a criminal with 10 arrests is 10x more likely to encounter a bad cop than a criminal who was arrested once.
  I've never justified the unlawful death of Floyd.  But you seem blind to basic facts, so wrongfully opine away fella.  

2. I have 2 decades of training, education, and experience with excited delirium and positional asphyxiation. No one here has ever heard those words before this Floyd case. I knew it the first time I saw the video. Been there, done that. And, I'll go so far as to say, Chauvin wasn't the primary cause for positional asphyxiation, he's secondary. The primary cause will be the cop that was on Floyd's back, preventing the rise and fall of Floyd's chest cavity.    You can offer dissenting opinion now, or put this in your back pocket and get back to me after trial.


And, I'll be so bold as to add..... go ahead and protest Minneapolis Police policy all you want. Those idiots still had the choke hold as an approved Use of Force technique.  Most every other department in the US removed that policy decades ago for the exact reason of this entire subject.

How exactly can the cop be charged with murder if the technique used was an approved use of force?

(Note that may sound like a dumb question, but we've got here a dumb cop, dump police department...)

[Gyfts]

Still not sure what the charging document has to do with Floyd being a longtime criminal.
But sure..if you want to bring up apples in and oranges argument, go for it.  

Still not sure how Floyd being a longtime criminal justifies the clearly excessive use of force that led to his death. You're saying that not only was Floyd's previous crimes (or current one of passing a fake $20) grounds for the death penalty but the cop had the right to act as executioner? If not, what are you saying exactly? Think about it.

And if you want to talk about excited delirium, and positional asphyxiation, I'm sure I mentions both of those really early in this thread. (Page 6 was my first mention of it)

Okay and seeing as how you are not a medical examiner you aren't a credible source when it comes to speculating upon his cause of death.

1. Nope.  Never said that. I guess English wasn't a good subject for you.  Try reading the WORDS again.  I said a criminal with 10 arrests is 10x more likely to encounter a bad cop than a criminal who was arrested once.
  I've never justified the unlawful death of Floyd.  But you seem blind to basic facts, so wrongfully opine away fella.  

2. I have 2 decades of training, education, and experience with excited delirium and positional asphyxiation. No one here has ever heard those words before this Floyd case. I knew it the first time I saw the video. Been there, done that. And, I'll go so far as to say, Chauvin wasn't the primary cause for positional asphyxiation, he's secondary. The primary cause will be the cop that was on Floyd's back, preventing the rise and fall of Floyd's chest cavity.    You can offer dissenting opinion now, or put this in your back pocket and get back to me after trial.


And, I'll be so bold as to add..... go ahead and protest Minneapolis Police policy all you want. Those idiots still had the choke hold as an approved Use of Force technique.  Most every other department in the US removed that policy decades ago for the exact reason of this entire subject.

How exactly can the cop be charged with murder if the technique used was an approved use of force?

(Note that may sound like a dumb question, but we've got here a dumb cop, dump police department...)

You can be charged for just about anything. Doesn't mean the charges will stick. This was clear from the charges against officer Garret Rolfe from the Atlanta police department who got 11 charges for a justified shooting.  It'll be on a jury to determine whether Chauvin acted within guidelines.

[PopoJeff]

Rather than drag on the quote boxes:

Nutildah: I bring it up, because it's factual information.   The more crime you commit, the more you get arrested, the greater the chance you have of finding that bad cop. It's Russian roulette. You pull the trigger enough times, you're likely to find a bullet.  This bullet's name was Chauvin.

Spendulus:  the technique used to have two branches. A choke hold, and a sleeper hold. One was permitted to be used in deadly force situations, one was permitted to be used in only non-deadly force situations. Other departments in the US discontinued the use of both, because an inch or two difference in application can move the applied pressure from the artery to the windpipe, and there were too many unintentional deaths.
   A cop can be criminally charged when the approved policy is used when not warranted. I have a policy that says I can shoot someone who shoots at me.  Me shooting someone is authorized under some conditions. Me shooting someone who does not present a deadly threat is a policy and law violation.  This is what Chauvin (and the other guy on Floyd's back) did. They used approved force techniques when the prerequisite conditions were not present.

[Spendulus]

They used approved force techniques when the prerequisite conditions were not present.

GOT IT.

Meanwhile, do YOU want to align yourself with "Black Lives Matter?"

How about chanting "Black Lives Matter?"

What would one be affirming?

https://www.battleswarmblog.com/?p=44832

Radical marxism.

I kind of don't think MLK would have liked or approved of this. I think he would have spat on it.

[PopoJeff]

GOT IT.

Meanwhile, do YOU want to align yourself with "Black Lives Matter?"

How about chanting "Black Lives Matter?"

What would one be affirming?

https://www.battleswarmblog.com/?p=44832

Radical marxism.

I kind of don't think MLK would have liked or approved of this. I think he would have spat on it.

Absolutely not. The BLM movement has demonstrated a very high rate of criminal activity, and by policy, I am not permitted to associate socially or politically with known criminals.

Additionally, my personal belief is that they are narrow-minded, and their movement is counter-productive to their goals.
  "Don't racially profile me, or I'll steal your TV" is a piss poor way to send the message you want.

[Spendulus]

GOT IT.

Meanwhile, do YOU want to align yourself with "Black Lives Matter?"

How about chanting "Black Lives Matter?"

What would one be affirming?

https://www.battleswarmblog.com/?p=44832

Radical marxism.

I kind of don't think MLK would have liked or approved of this. I think he would have spat on it.

Absolutely not. The BLM movement has demonstrated a very high rate of criminal activity, and by policy, I am not permitted to associate socially or politically with known criminals.

Additionally, my personal belief is that they are narrow-minded, and their movement is counter-productive to their goals.
  "Don't racially profile me, or I'll steal your TV" is a piss poor way to send the message you want.

In the USA, there's a joke that Airport Security has been reduced to Airport Security Theater.

But when "Black Lives Matter" is reduced to "Black Lives Matter Theater", bent to certain Marxist, totalitarian, anti-American interests, it is at it's essence, "Anti-Black."

I personally resent such things, the taking over of one thing for the political purposes of another. Reality is, the group that's doing things for Blacks in the US is Trump, and the Republican Party, with the recent passing of criminal reform law. Did Obama do that? Nope.

[BADecker]

GOT IT.

Meanwhile, do YOU want to align yourself with "Black Lives Matter?"

How about chanting "Black Lives Matter?"

What would one be affirming?

https://www.battleswarmblog.com/?p=44832

Radical marxism.

I kind of don't think MLK would have liked or approved of this. I think he would have spat on it.

Absolutely not. The BLM movement has demonstrated a very high rate of criminal activity, and by policy, I am not permitted to associate socially or politically with known criminals.

Additionally, my personal belief is that they are narrow-minded, and their movement is counter-productive to their goals.
  "Don't racially profile me, or I'll steal your TV" is a piss poor way to send the message you want.

In the USA, there's a joke that Airport Security has been reduced to Airport Security Theater.

But when "Black Lives Matter" is reduced to "Black Lives Matter Theater", bent to certain Marxist, totalitarian, anti-American interests, it is at it's essence, "Anti-Black."

I personally resent such things, the taking over of one thing for the political purposes of another. Reality is, the group that's doing things for Blacks in the US is Trump, and the Republican Party, with the recent passing of criminal reform law. Did Obama do that? Nope.

You misunderstand.

The people of the land are very slow at standing up and acting like bulls and bears rather than sheep. Nobody, not even Trump, can make the people stand up.

When the average people of the country, those who work and live, get fed up with what BLM and Antifa are doing, they will swarm over these riot-groups, and they will be gone.

Trump couldn't stop the people without destroying them with the military. But the good people need to wake up and do what they need to do to protect themselves, and bring peace to America.

[hornetsnest]

GOT IT.

Meanwhile, do YOU want to align yourself with "Black Lives Matter?"

How about chanting "Black Lives Matter?"

What would one be affirming?

https://www.battleswarmblog.com/?p=44832

Radical marxism.

I kind of don't think MLK would have liked or approved of this. I think he would have spat on it.

Absolutely not. The BLM movement has demonstrated a very high rate of criminal activity, and by policy, I am not permitted to associate socially or politically with known criminals.

Additionally, my personal belief is that they are narrow-minded, and their movement is counter-productive to their goals.
  "Don't racially profile me, or I'll steal your TV" is a piss poor way to send the message you want.

In the USA, there's a joke that Airport Security has been reduced to Airport Security Theater.

But when "Black Lives Matter" is reduced to "Black Lives Matter Theater", bent to certain Marxist, totalitarian, anti-American interests, it is at it's essence, "Anti-Black."

I personally resent such things, the taking over of one thing for the political purposes of another. Reality is, the group that's doing things for Blacks in the US is Trump, and the Republican Party, with the recent passing of criminal reform law. Did Obama do that? Nope.

You misunderstand.

The people of the land are very slow at standing up and acting like bulls and bears rather than sheep. Nobody, not even Trump, can make the people stand up.

When the average people of the country, those who work and live, get fed up with what BLM and Antifa are doing, they will swarm over these riot-groups, and they will be gone.

Trump couldn't stop the people without destroying them with the military. But the good people need to wake up and do what they need to do to protect themselves, and bring peace to America.

It's a global problem and the catalysts and their handlers have tentacles embedded all across the societal spectrum that enables dominance.The ANTIFA and all other so called activist groups are only a small visible part of a global "revolution" that enable certain facets required to remove opposition to the end product at the end stage.

The list is not limited to these well known recommendations:

1. The creation of racism offences.
2. Continual change to create confusion
3. The teaching of sex and homosexuality to children
4. The undermining of schools’ and teachers’ authority
5. Huge immigration to destroy identity.
6. The promotion of excessive drinking
7. Emptying of churches
8. An unreliable legal system with bias against victims of crime
9. Dependency on the state or state benefits
10. Control and dumbing down of media
11. Encouraging the breakdown of the family
12. Attack the authority of the father, deny the specific roles of father and mother, and wrest away from families their rights as primary educators of their children.
13. Abolish differences in the education of boys and girls
14. Abolish all forms of male dominance – hence the presence of women in the armed forces
14. Declare women to be an ‘oppressed class’ and men as ‘oppressors’

[Gyfts]

It's not a "different perspective" -- its just a broader range of data.

You are disagreeing here just to disagree and you're playing a game of semantics. Your first link suggested a safe range for anesthesia was 10-20 ng/mL which is a formal medical procedure that will result in death unless supervised by a physician so I'm not sure why you felt inclined to post that number. Your second study stated the average concentration of fentanyl used in natural and overdose deaths. The study I linked demonstrated fentanyl is dangerous alone at a much lower concentration. So yes, a different perspective, a different set of data, a different concentraiton considered safe, whatever you want to call it.

its just a broader range of data. It also includes a large number of people who tested positive for alcohol (32%) which could very well be weighing down the average concentration of fentanyl in those who died, as that is often a lethal combination of drugs. The study I quoted is more relevant as it doesn't include those with alcohol in their systems.

I disagree here, your study is not more relevant at all because George Floyd's other substances included only small amounts of methamphetamine in his system. Furthermore, your study was maybe the second Google search result after you type in words related to fentanyl dosages in overdoses because I saw the same exact study on Google search results prior to you linking it. Your study examines accidental overdoses. An accidental overdose is of course going to have an inflated concentration of fentantyl where someone over consumes drugs and dies. This does not mean any concentration below this number is safe. The alcohol in the study I provided is a confounding variable which are present in all forms of studies, including yours. Your study doesn't mention alcohol, but could have a range of other confounding variables that weren't examined by the authors., Regardless though, 68% of the individuals tested presumably did not have alcohol in their system. You can gather from this that it is utterly untrue to claim 10 or 11 ng/mL of fentanyl is considered safe.

Interestingly enough, your study examines natural deaths and 1/6th of natural deaths in those that tested positive for fentanyl, the cause of death is listed as  Arteriosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). George Floyd's cause of death in the autopsy report also has natural causes listed as Arteriosclerotic cardiovascular disease. This might suggest that fentanyl can exacerbate this condition and potentially highlights the role drugs played in George Floyd's death.

Actually the first autopsy report doesn't state that at all. The title is "CARDIOPULMONARY ARREST COMPLICATING LAW ENFORCEMENT SUBDUAL, RESTRAINT, AND NECK COMPRESSION." You can argue that fentanyl played a role in his death, but you're on your own here. So actually it is your "medical take."

I was wrong here. You're right, the first autopsy report only lists the toxicology results without making any remarks as to whether they contributed to his death.

The charging document however lists fentanyl intoxication and methamphatemine usage as a significant condition - https://content.govdelivery.com/attachments/MNHENNE/2020/06/01/file_attachments/1464238/2020-3700%20Floyd,%20George%20Perry%20Update%206.1.2020.pdf

Also, it'd be hard to find a medical professional that states being on fentanyl does not at all exacerbate heart conditions or make you more susceptible to death under extreme physical restraint. So I guess my "medical take" might not be too far off.

[PrimeNumber7]

If Chauvin gets off, I don't think it'll be because of the prosecutor's record. I don't think the defense will invoke Ellison's domestic abuse past with all the other evidence that's available. Regardless if he gets off or not, I thought this was a clear cut case of murder when I watched the video. Now it seems more like poor department policy and potential negligence than anything else.

I don’t think it would be appropriate for a judge to allow the defense to bring up personal shortcomings of the prosecutor in a criminal case.

The reason for my prediction is that I believe the DA will intentionally throw the case to push a political narrative that benefits his party. This would also likely create additional riots. Ideally this won’t happen until after the election and Trump will be more willing to institute a zero tolerance policy on rioting.

Trump recently said that he decided against sending in the troops to allow Americans to see how badly liberals are running their cities. I strongly disagree with this (this is partly based on my living in a major liberal city), as it is the presidents job to protect all Americans.

[TECSHARE]

"New Transcripts Detail Last Moments for George Floyd"

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/08/us/george-floyd-body-camera-transcripts.html?action=click&module=Top Stories&pgtype=Homepage

https://int.nyt.com/data/documenthelper/7070-exhibit-final07072020/4b81216735f2203a08cb/optimized/full.pdf#page=1

"Lane: your getting in the squad.

George Floyd : want to lay on the ground ! I'm going down, going down, I'm going down.

Kueng: Take a squat

George Floyd: I'm going down

Speaker 9: Bro, you about to have a heartattack and shitman, get in the car!

George Floyd: I know I can't breathe. I can't breathe crosstalk 00:10:18 ] .

Lane: Get him on the ground .

George Floyd: Let go ofmeman , I can't breathe. I can't breathe.

Lane: Take a seat"


These transcripts from the body cams were just released. As you can tell from the text, it is abundantly clear George Floyd was having trouble breathing well before he was even on the ground. The autopsy results showed several types of contraband in his system, along with a COVID diagnosis. This seems to be clear evidence whatever disease he was suffering, it began well before he was even on the ground.

[madnessteat]

~snip~

Interesting information. Except I don't think it's gonna have much effect since there's no stopping this snowball. I've already heard that in some states, black guys have started robbing white truckers. Somebody's got to fight them back and stop this mess.

[BADecker]

GOT IT.

Meanwhile, do YOU want to align yourself with "Black Lives Matter?"

How about chanting "Black Lives Matter?"

What would one be affirming?

https://www.battleswarmblog.com/?p=44832

Radical marxism.

I kind of don't think MLK would have liked or approved of this. I think he would have spat on it.

Absolutely not. The BLM movement has demonstrated a very high rate of criminal activity, and by policy, I am not permitted to associate socially or politically with known criminals.

Additionally, my personal belief is that they are narrow-minded, and their movement is counter-productive to their goals.
  "Don't racially profile me, or I'll steal your TV" is a piss poor way to send the message you want.

In the USA, there's a joke that Airport Security has been reduced to Airport Security Theater.

But when "Black Lives Matter" is reduced to "Black Lives Matter Theater", bent to certain Marxist, totalitarian, anti-American interests, it is at it's essence, "Anti-Black."

I personally resent such things, the taking over of one thing for the political purposes of another. Reality is, the group that's doing things for Blacks in the US is Trump, and the Republican Party, with the recent passing of criminal reform law. Did Obama do that? Nope.

You misunderstand.

The people of the land are very slow at standing up and acting like bulls and bears rather than sheep. Nobody, not even Trump, can make the people stand up.

When the average people of the country, those who work and live, get fed up with what BLM and Antifa are doing, they will swarm over these riot-groups, and they will be gone.

Trump couldn't stop the people without destroying them with the military. But the good people need to wake up and do what they need to do to protect themselves, and bring peace to America.

It's a global problem and the catalysts and their handlers have tentacles embedded all across the societal spectrum that enables dominance.The ANTIFA and all other so called activist groups are only a small visible part of a global "revolution" that enable certain facets required to remove opposition to the end product at the end stage.

The list is not limited to these well known recommendations:

1. The creation of racism offences.
2. Continual change to create confusion
3. The teaching of sex and homosexuality to children
4. The undermining of schools’ and teachers’ authority
5. Huge immigration to destroy identity.
6. The promotion of excessive drinking
7. Emptying of churches
8. An unreliable legal system with bias against victims of crime
9. Dependency on the state or state benefits
10. Control and dumbing down of media
11. Encouraging the breakdown of the family
12. Attack the authority of the father, deny the specific roles of father and mother, and wrest away from families their rights as primary educators of their children.
13. Abolish differences in the education of boys and girls
14. Abolish all forms of male dominance – hence the presence of women in the armed forces
14. Declare women to be an ‘oppressed class’ and men as ‘oppressors’

The people would rather play with their social devices and watch movies than learn the law and use the options available for them.

[Gyfts]

...

I'm not sure why they aren't releasing the full bodycam footage to the public. There's definitely a precedent of releasing body cam video prior to a trial so for them to release a transcript and not the video seems bizarre.

I can't remember where I read this, but according to one of the documents that was released either by the DA's officer or Minneapolis PD, it stated that Floyd was claiming he couldn't breathe prior to being forced on the ground and this transcript clearly confirms that. The disease Floyd was suffering from, potentially, was ExDS, an excited delirious state which is usually caused by illegal drug use.

From the autopsy report, it's clear Floyd had unsafe amounts of fentanyl and small amounts of methamphetamine within his system and this is what most likely the officers believed Floyd was suffering from.

[coins4commies]

"New Transcripts Detail Last Moments for George Floyd"

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/08/us/george-floyd-body-camera-transcripts.html?action=click&module=Top Stories&pgtype=Homepage

https://int.nyt.com/data/documenthelper/7070-exhibit-final07072020/4b81216735f2203a08cb/optimized/full.pdf#page=1

"Lane: your getting in the squad.

George Floyd : want to lay on the ground ! I'm going down, going down, I'm going down.

Kueng: Take a squat

George Floyd: I'm going down

Speaker 9: Bro, you about to have a heartattack and shitman, get in the car!

George Floyd: I know I can't breathe. I can't breathe crosstalk 00:10:18 ] .

Lane: Get him on the ground .

George Floyd: Let go ofmeman , I can't breathe. I can't breathe.

Lane: Take a seat"


These transcripts from the body cams were just released. As you can tell from the text, it is abundantly clear George Floyd was having trouble breathing well before he was even on the ground. The autopsy results showed several types of contraband in his system, along with a COVID diagnosis. This seems to be clear evidence whatever disease he was suffering, it began well before he was even on the ground.

Yep. Which is why they should have been more careful with him and didn't need to kneel on him for so long. Killing a weakened person is still murder.