updated incidence rate and benefit risk comparisons for different populations by age and gender over the last couple of weeks the 2 committees have spent almost 24 hours in committee reviewing these reports each report has been carefully scrutinized by them and by the members of the working group and further information has been obtained where necessary we've also had independent adjudication of these cases by an expert he would tell a just and we worked with another group of human toll just to develop a case definition of these events to make sure that the cases were identified throughout the u.k. and reported via the yellow card scheme. based on the currently available data the commission has met since advising the following 1st pregnant woman should continue to discuss with the health care professional whether the benefits of having the vaccine outweigh the risks for them. number 2 people with

a history of blood disorders to increase the risk of clotting should only have the case or just get it it's part of the briefing happening live in london where britain's. medicines and healthcare regulatory agency are discussing recent developments on the astra zeneca vaccine again they are saying the benefits of the vaccine weigh the risks stressing that the vaccine remains very effective at preventing cool verts but they have also said that more work is needed to establish a link between astra zeneca and these blood courts however they deputy chief medical officer has said that they will have a change of course and people under 30 in the united kingdom will be offered an alternative vaccine to astra zeneca if one is

a vailable interesting developments there let's get more now from jonah hole he joins us live from london joiner this briefing is going to be extremely important in the u.k. given that the u.k. has relied so heavily on the cessna zeneca vaccine and millions of people have all ready. so what are the main takeaway so far from this briefing which is ongoing and how is that going to affect the population there who are still getting this vaccine as we speak. well look i think the important point to make out of this is to echo what has been said in this press briefing by the medical regular medicines regulator and the joint committee on vaccines and immunization which is that the instances of blood clots this very unusual instance of blood clots involving low platelet counts which is it what has alerted attention here and it's

been able to be tracked through to similar instances in europe are absolutely minute in proportion to the number of people have actually received this jab and what is being recommended here is not to scrap the vaccine in any way but to affirm that the benefit of the vaccine continues to outweigh any potential risk so we're not talking here about the absolute the railing of the ukase vaccine program the after zeneca job will continue to be rolled out its 2nd doses will continue to be rolled out to people who've had a 1st all that's being recommended is that in adults under 30 at this point they should be offered an alternative if one is available and if those particular adults are at that time healthy or not susceptible to the worst effects of covert 1000 because of other pre conditions it's a hedge view a careful analysis of the astra zeneca job which the these organizations say has been undertaking it echoes what has been said by the european medicines agency in

amsterdam a short while ago and essentially it is a green light to continue the program what we did get out of this are some new numbers. 20000000 doses have been handed out so far of the astra zeneca job in the u.k. over 20000000 doses of those they've been 79 cases of this rear blood clotting incident and of those 19 people have died now broken down that equates to 4 people in a 1000000 and that as i say is an absolutely tiny risk and one that the medicines regulators in this country for the time being it seems. willing to live with albeit as you said more research research required more data needs to be looked at haven't confirmed the causal link yet of the time being it's good to go i don't. know how we're going to let you get back to that briefing it is so all wouldn't go away and i thank you very much indeed for bringing us the top lines there from fats pivotal

briefing. back again nights in the us for many apis placements our show his murder trial has resumed we are hearing cross-examination all the witnesses let's step back in to that trial and hear how it's progressing. are you familiar with a graphic known as a force continuum that can be used to illustrate this point and does the minneapolis police department use a similar item of force continuum to illustrate this point to its officers yes they did if we can show publish exhibit 110. this is the force continuum that m.p.v. uses the version of a yes or. no if you could take that down please exhibit 19 as a demonstrative exhibit that could be used to illustrate this disconsolate and i'm going to ask that exhibit 19 be published at this point. no.

you have. our answer republishing exhibit 19 and what i'd like you to do is walk the jury through the concepts of proportionality using 19 demonstrative to explain you begin please ok if you look on the far left you see the subject's behavior it starts off being active aggression goes down to act of resistance then passive resistance. will start at the top being act of aggression so if the subject behavior is active aggression then depending on the severity of it if it could cost serious bodily injury or death then else or is allowed to use deadly force moving down if the subject actions don't meet the deadly force threshold then an officer

is allowed to use of the time also stunning strikes and unconscious neck restraint stunning strike is basically. a type of force that an officer can use when he has been assaulted to temporarily stun the person so that they can. can try to control them. obviously also unconscious neck restraint believe is when an officer uses a neck restraint or carotid restraint to temporarily make the person unconscious continually moving down as the subject's behavior is less aggressive moving closer to active resistance you see and also is allowed to use a cd which is a. conducted electronic device or what you might be known to know as a taser and also they can use a chemical aerosol which you would also maybe know as a pepper spray. if the subject behavior doesn't meet that threshold then an officer

can utilize a distraction technique a distraction technique is typically similar to a stunning strike but. basically a distraction technique is used to temporarily. stun the person in order to follow up with another technique to possibly take him down to the ground are or used to control him as well as you have a control takedown as well and a conscious neck restraint to control the person based off of there are active resistance moving down if the subject behavior is passive resistance then an officer can use a joint manipulation or pressure point or escort holes in these are probably the most commonly used types of force when all cers are in the field and then lastly you have verbalization and just and also is present when the person is complying or

you know possibly passively resisting just verbally. and if no resistance is offered binges your presence. certainly you have an opinion to a degree reasonable professional certainty how much force was reasonable for the defendant to use on mr floyd after mr floyd was handcuffed placed in a prone position and not resisting. yes' when the right opinion was that no 4 should have been used once he was in that position i see on the sick continuum that freeze deadly force is deadly force defined. yes is a defined in minneapolis police department policy yes it is at this time a plea to publish exhibit 216 and if you could move to page 2.

calling out the definition of deadly force. sir could you read into the record for the jury what the definition of deadly force is beginning at force which the actor uses yes force which the actor uses with the purpose of causing or which the actor should reasonably know creates a substantial risk of causing death of great bodily harm. i'd like to know republish exhibit 254 the composite. and this is the force of why i ask you sir you have an opinion to a degree of reasonable professional certainty whether the force used as shown in exhibit 254. whether that force being applied then for the restraint period which you defined is 9 minutes and 29 seconds would constitute deadly force yes what is

that opinion that i would why is that because at the time of their strength period mr floyd was not resisting he was in the prone position he was handcuffed he was not attempting to. evade he was not attempting to resist and the pressure. that he was that was being caused by the body weight would cause a position. which could cause death is positional asphyxia a known risk in law enforcement yes it is how long have indeed years of positional asphyxia been know. at least 20 years i can recall a department of justice memo from i believe in 1905 that discussed it and i know that i was trained on it in 1005 as well in the risk or the danger positional

asphyxia of the potential worst outcomes death is that right yes or no. and when we talk about positional asphyxia the risk is that risk increased with the increase in pressure on the subject yes so positional can occur even if there is no pressure no body weight on. on a subject of just being in that position and especially being handcuffed. creates a situation where the person has a difficult time breathing which can cause death when you add body weight then it just increases the possibility of death and additional weight did you see in your analysis here the defendant's body weight as well as the individuals the 2 other officers one of the other officers appear to be pressing down on mr floyd was

that officer king yes it was officer lane he was. in in applying the rules of use of force and use reasonable force. the officer has to consider the tally of circumstances is that right yes or in one of the circumstances can be the location of that that could be important right yes and are you aware that there was a group of bystanders eventually began to watch the defendant on the other officers use force on mr boyd yes sir and your experience with the los angeles police department in your use you were patrolling if you ever had to use force or apply force or handcuff a suspect. in view of bystanders or have you ever had to handcuff an unwilling

suspect or subject to the few bystanders yes or. have you ever had to do so in the presence of a hostile crowd yes or would you define hostile crowd in that context. i would define a hostile crowd in the situations i've been in where the crowd or members of the crowd were threatening and or throwing bottles and rocks. at the police if you had that experience yes or more than one occasion yes i think. so if i could publish exhibit 184. getting back to the circumstances of the. disappeared to be. bystanders that were gathered watching the defendant apply force to mr floyd. when you review the body for cameras to just see anybody throw the rocks off 99 did you see anyone attack physically attack the officers no i did not

did you hear following your name call there was a name calling yes but it was a volley woods but that was the most of it did that factor into your analysis. no why not because i did not perceive them as being a threat. and why is that. because they were merely filming and they were most of it was their concern for mr ford. ality in the 1st continuum of the officer is the officer evil to increase the use of force on an individual based on the conduct of some 3rd party over whom the subject has no control no also it can only use force based on the subject's actions. and your knowledge that loud noise and name calling can in fact distract yes it can

be. what is a an experienced trained officer do in the face of that sort of distraction. they continue to assess and reassess their force or they would can they would attempt to. lower any type of threat level that they may perceive. you know based on your review of the office materials in the records as of may 25 2020 how long had defendant done a minneapolis police office approximately 1000 years. and if we can call out i'm sorry publish exhibit 2 o 3. and if you could highlight the top portion. these appear to be a workforce training records of the defendant is that right. and it indicates approximately. 866 hours yes of the training. you think that should have been sufficient training

to prepare the defendant for the destruction absolutely. you take that out. now sir what you doing now is it would be possible it would be possible for a group loud group to distract a defendant from being attentive to george floyd is that right yes do you believe that occurred you know i don't know why is that because in the by one video you have the end here mr floyd. displaying his cover. and pain again you can also hear the responding to him. at this time i'd like to publish exhibit $47.00 and bring us to the body that's the body work camera footage of wayne. bring us the point of

202223 seconds. and at this time i'd like to publish that play that section for the jury. room. for the one. who. you. know i'm. right is that the exchange that you testified to of the defendant responding to statements of mr foy yes sir and certain approximately how long did the defendant continue to restrain george floyd after the exchange we just heard. i believe 6

minutes ok thank you i have no further questions. as you know. i may have just a moment to give up your. morning

surgeon siker want to thank you for being here. do you enjoy the rain last night yes well different than california yes you don't get that much. so you know i have a few questions 1st and foremost about your experience. have you ever previously testified in any court or in any state or in federal court as an expert on the police use of force. have you ever been qualified by any court of competent jurisdiction on an ex as an expert in the use of police force yes where

in los angeles during a trial of use of force that i was the investigator for it's not the only time in that case yes. and you are here in your own personal capacity correct yes or you are not here as a representative of either the los angeles police department or the office of inspector general correct correct. the training that you've experienced and that you have conducted that has all been. by the los angeles police department correct . so the training you receive to become a police officer is primarily conducted by the los angeles are correct yes you may have gone to some outside vendor training but those vendors had to be approved by the los angeles police department right yes meaning. the training that you attended outside of l.a.p.d.

stuff would have to be consistent with los angeles police department's policies not necessarily you know. they could be in compliance with california ok now you would agree that the policies of the los angeles police department are their policy correct correct and the policies of every police department are going to be different to some degree to some degree yes. and some police departments may authorize a particular form of force while others don't correct. to a certain extent yes and that is a question. of the reasonableness of that type of force one department may say this is not a reasonable use of force and another department may say this is a reasonable use of force base in my dream and experiences every agency that i've seen base their use of force policy on persons conversos is pretty standard. but in

terms of the actual tactics of the use of force so a department may authorize. the use of a particular tool another department may not authorized to. use of and thus they're both uses of force or potential uses of force and the instruments to use that force may be different yes but they all have to fall into the objective was understood. one department could determine that that type of an instrument or that technique is within the reasonableness object of reasonableness standard all another department may not carry it so there can be another way of saying reasonable minds can differ. now you testified that you have been a trainer for the los angeles police department in terms of their tactics correct

yes sir so when you talk about your training experience are you doing it from. like a teacher you're teaching lecturing that type of standpoint or are you doing the training on the mats training training the techniques or both both. you've never been trained by the minneapolis police are correct you know him. but upon being hired in this case you received a lot of materials in this case right yes it is that you received. an extensive amount of minneapolis police department training materials right yes and you received investigative reports from the bureau of criminal apprehension correct yes and you received video cameras cracked or videotapes. and you received materials within the training materials that also contained like

videos or examples an illustrative type of materials as part of the training ritter right. let me rephrase sometimes in a powerpoint presentation there may be a video embedded in that in that powerpoint presentation and that video is an example of a specific move or it may be training exercises or the scenario based dreams did you see all of those no i did not know it was able to because most of the power point presentations were in a p.d.f. form so i was not able to view that ok so you've not seen the training videos prepared by the minneapolis police are you know. but all of this material that you have received is in fact what you used in part to form your opinions in this case right yes you relied on those materials to a certain extent yes and some of those materials were completely irrelevant to this

case reed yes such is the use of the tazer right yes such as. the mounted patrol unit. but you received other information that was informative and had an effect on your analysis. yes so those training materials were in an important part of how you came to form your opinion. now you alternately prepared a written report cracked. and in your written report you detail your opinions and findings on a case correct yes or and you also made an exhibit of the materials that you review right now would you agree that your report in total 461 page

he is right i have here. 461 pages yet of the 461 pages 26 pages constitute your opinions right and from page 27 to 461 this is a list of the materials that you reviewed in preparation of this case that i received that you received yes and you reviewed some but not all of these materials correct. ultimately what you concluded that you received a total of $5737.00 different training what year or items to review. i don't know the exact number but if if if the last number in their lives is 5737 with which you dispute that well i would have to look at it but i would disagree i would disagree. in addition

to your analysis you're using and relying on your own training. your own experience as a police officer. your experiences doing both peer review of use of force with the los angeles police department and your investigation of uses of force direct for. sin and you alternately submitted your report to the state of minnesota on january 31st of this year correct of this for since you have submitted your pour have you received any additional information investigative or otherwise about this case. so any training materials that were came to us prior to me subsequent to january 31st any investigative information that was received you've not had an opportunity to review that report.

since submitting your report it's fair to say that you've also had several conversation with prosecutors in connection with this case correct. i believe that you met with prosecutors or conversed with prosecutors in february 1st of this year march 3rd of this year march 11th of this year and april 3rd of this year which you dispute me if i told you that those were the dates i mean i would have to look at my calendar but i believe that.

it's almost 1500 hours g.m.t. coming up 10 am in minneapolis in the united states we have been watching live coverage of day 8 of the derrick chauvin murder trial we've been hearing from sergeant jodi from the los angeles police department minneapolis but he has been there testifying as an expert there is on the use of force and the role it played in brings the death of george floyd's. top of the hour right now hello i'm kemal santa maria thanks for being with us for this news hour on al-jazeera we will return to minneapolis shortly but the other developing news in the past hour has been the reports on the oxford astra zeneca coded 19 vaccine delivered by both british and european medical authorities will start with europe 1st of all where they have found a quote possible link between the astra zeneca vaccine and a rare blood clotting disorder however the regulators insist the benefits of the shot fall.