influence of a was under the influence of a controlled substance. they can take into consideration, because again, this is a dynamic and ever—changing, just like life, things change. it's a dynamic situation. it's fluid. they take into account their experience with the subject at the beginning of the a reasonable police officer tries to predict or is at least cognisant and concerned about future behaviour based upon past behaviour. but the unpredictability of humans factors into the reasonable police officer's analysis too because sometimes people take reasonable police officers, they take someone into custody with no problem and suddenly they become a problem. it can change in an instant. a reasonable police

officer will take into consideration his immediate surroundings. are there bystanders, are there civilians? a reasonable police officer will take into consideration who he is at the scene with. are these veteran officers, are they rookie officers? what do i know about my partners and my partners abilities? so throughout the course of this trial, the state has focused her attention on nine minutes and 29 seconds. the proper analysis is to take those nine minutes and 29 seconds and put it into the context of the totality of the circumstances that a reasonable police officer would know. and the proper analysis starts with what did the officers and what would a reasonable officer

know at the time of dispatch? well, these are records that are capped and they've been introduced, you can look at them. this is exhibit 151. this is the computer aided dispatch report. you heard the testimony of the 911 dispatcher, this is information that they are passing out to the officers. you will see that the initial information that a police officer has in his squad car looking at his computer or hearing over the radio was that on may 25, 2020 at 8:02 a:m., a business, cup foods, who police officers have the obligation to respond to these calls whether it be from a person or a

business, but a citizen of the state of minnesota, minneapolis runs a business and they call for assistance, and they told the officers, the reporting party, there is a male who provided a counterfeit bill to the business. he is six feet tall or higher. —— cup foods. he is sitting on top of a blue mercedes ml 20 suv, the licence plate also appears that this subject is under the influence. so the analysis of what a reasonable police officer would know in this circumstance is that a, a business is requesting it's held, the suspect is still there, he is large and he is possibly still under the influence of alcohol or something else. so the analysis begins at 8:02am and 13

seconds. you may recall the testimony of the 911 dispatcher as well and it is not reflected in this exhibit pretty well. and in the evidence, exhibit number 10, exhibit pretty well. and in the evidence, exhibit number10, you exhibit pretty well. and in the evidence, exhibit number 10, you can hear the audio recording of the dispatch to the officers. jenna informed you that initially officer chauvin was assigned to this call under code three priority one basis. code three, get their lights and sirens coming there fast, right? it is priority one because the suspect is priority one because the suspect is still unseen. separate minneapolis police department policy, get there fast, the person is on scene, right? that's what she testified. and then very quickly after that, that occurred at 8:0aam and 20 seconds. and then what you

see or what she told you was the sector car, sector car 320, that is the car that patrols this part of the car that patrols this part of the city, said "hey, we can take this call," and officer chauvin and officer tauber cancelled from the call and sector car 320 officers king and laying took it, and that occurred over government when officer kueng and officer lane to cover, you can go back and listen to that dispatch and you can hear them talking to each other. officers king and lane arrived at the cup of at 8:08am and 20 seconds.

so now we see police officers are responding, they are on scene at 8:08am. both the dispatcher and peter chang described that during the course of the interaction between the initial interaction between the initial interaction between officer kueng and officer lane to mr floyd through dispatch they heard what sounded like a stroke, she described him as she is trained to listen and she heard these sounds of a struggle and she aired out on her own other officers need to respond code three to assist officers king and lane. so a reasonable police officer is

emergent to a scene, he gets cancer from the scene, he is now being told that other officers need assistance and step it up, get there fast. so you can see again based on the records that at 8:10am, backed up 320 with 330. so now 330 is officer chauvin and officer tile, they are backing up officer kueng and lane, and you can see peter chang respond at 8:10am and 21 seconds. you hear 320 taking one out, so that means they are removing someone from the vehicle at... the scene is ultimately code for, all clear at...

so literally, this demonstrates to you a couple of things. how quickly a situation can change from second to second, minutes minutes, they went from get there fast, back off. get there faster because someone needs help, its clear. the situation is dynamic and is a fluid facet they are provided with information that an officer needs assistance. they testified about the sound of a struggle, right? and if you recall, the sergeant specifically said all of this information would be no to a reasonable police officer and it goes into and factors into the reasonableness of the use of force. —— sergeant stiger. ultimately, officer and officer thao arrive at cup

foods. —— officer chauvin. let's pause this for one second here, sorry. when we look at, ijust have to give you a little piece of information. when we look at officer chang's video, officer chang arrives first, you see the time is 11633 z, zulu, that is greenwich mean time, subtract five from one a:m., back 2am. —— back to officer chauvin and officer lane pull up. 8:16am. "go over there".

0k, pull up. 8:16am. "go over there". ok, just stay put, i don't want 0k, just stay put, i don't want anybody— 0k, just stay put, i don't want anybody near the scar. —— near this can _ anybody near the scar. -- near this car. ., ., ., ., , car. information gathering in terms of this assessment _ car. information gathering in terms of this assessment and _ car. information gathering in terms i of this assessment and reassessment of, again, the decision—making process of a police officer, right? "don't come over here where i am" officer chang says. "go over there, they need your help." because at that point at that precise moment, they don't know what is happening over at the squad car. they don't know that officers kueng and lane struggle with mr floyd getting him out of the car, that they sat him down, that they stood him up, that they walked over. they haven't seen

any of this information and there is no evidence to suggest that they had. so that doesn't factor into the information. again a reasonable police officer, what do they know? and they don't know that. but they are starting to get some indication, "hey, go over there." right? are starting to get some indication, "hey, go overthere." right? "hey, go over there." you can see right in about 8:17am and i apologise for the quality of the picture, officer chauvin is arriving and walking up to the squad car. so what a reasonable police officer, what would a reasonable police officer see in this instant? what a reasonable police officer would see what could be defined because again, i reasonable police officer has to be aware of his department policies, active aggression or active resistance. let's call it active

resistance. let's call it active resistance. let's call it active resistance. "a response to police efforts to bring a person into custody or control for detainment or arrest. a subject engages in active resistance when engaging in physical actions or verbal behaviour reflecting an intention to make it more difficult for officers to achieve actual physical control." so as derek chauvin walks up to this scene he has all of the information from dispatch, he has all of the information from officer chang sending him over. he knows his department policy on the difference between active aggression, active resistance, passive resistance, based on policy training, etc. this is an officer's consideration of again the use of force, all of these things factor into it. so what does

he see? he sees officers kueng and officer lane struggling with mr floyd attempting to put him into the car. he hears the words that mr floyd is saying at that point. "i'm claustrophobic, i'm a good guy, and a good man, i'm claustrophobic, i just had covid." he is hearing this information. he is observing with his eyes, a reasonable police officer is observing this with his eyes and his ears and assessing what he sees pursuant to policy. and what he sees pursuant to policy. and what he sees pursuant to policy. and what he sees at minimum is active resistance. mr floyd is not simply getting in the back—seat of the car. so let's watch what does officer shoving maxine when he walks up?

this is from his body camera from 8:17am and 21 seconds to 8:18am and 15 seconds, just shy of a minute. —— officer chauvin. shouting. j officer chauvin. shouting. ., , �* shouting. iam claustrophobic. i'm claustrophobic... _ shouting. iam claustrophobic. i'm claustrophobic... no _ shouting. iam claustrophobic. i'm claustrophobic... no you _ shouting. iam claustrophobic. i'm claustrophobic... no you cannot - shouting. iam claustrophobic. i'm claustrophobic... no you cannot get| claustrophobic... no you cannot get in the front! — claustrophobic... no you cannot get in the front! get _ claustrophobic... no you cannot get in the front! get in _ claustrophobic... no you cannot get in the front! get in the _ claustrophobic... no you cannot get in the front! get in the car! - claustrophobic... no you cannot get in the front! get in the car! oh, - claustrophobic... no you cannot get in the front! get in the car! oh, my| in the front! get in the car! oh, my god! please. _ in the front! get in the car! oh, my god! please, please! _ in the front! get in the car! oh, my god! please, please! i— in the front! get in the car! oh, my god! please, please! i can't- god! please, please! i can't breathe! — god! please, please! i can't breathe! please! _

god! please, please! i can't breathe! please! my - god! please, please! i can't breathe! please! my ba - god! please, please! i can't breathe! please! my ba is l god! please, please! i can't- breathe! please! my ba is shouting. shouting! by by 8:18am officer is not laid a finger on mr floyd, but he is observing and a reasonable police officer is doing this, he walks onto a scene, he sees active resistance occurring, potentially active aggression occurring, he has two other officers, he has not intervened. but again based on the policies and the training that you have seen, what were his options available to him at that time? if a person is actively resisting in the centre, distraction techniques, control take—downs, conscious neck control ta ke—downs, conscious neck restraints. control take—downs, conscious neck restraints. these are options

available to mr chauvin at this point. he has per his training these techniques at his disposal. a reasonable police officer would be making his observations. he would observe the white foam around mr floyd's mouth. he would consider the possibility that this person was under the influence of something. basically using the information from dispatch making these observations, how was he analysing this? how would a reasonable officer analyse this and what would be known to a reasonable officer? a reasonable officer would look at the size of the person and assess that person's size in relation to his own size.

because it's a part of the risk threat analysis, right, that we have heard about so much. a reasonable officer would know that these are two rookies putting this man in the car. in fact as the evidence establishment mr chauvin trained one of the officers. so, a reasonable officer would step back at this point to see if these two guys can get this under get this point to see if these two guys can get this under control. a reasonable officer will hear the words that the suspect is a saying, "i'm a good guy, i'm a good guy, i'm claustrophobic," and he is when you compare those words to the actions of the individual because this is part of the analysis. because i can say i'm going to co—operate with you, i'm going to do whatever i wanted, but if my behaviour is inconsistent with what i am saying,

a reasonable officer takes that into consideration. in fact, a reasonable officer who is aware of his department policies knows the de—escalation policy. that is in place. and part of what a reasonable officer has to do is to consider whether a subject's lack of compliance is a deliberate attempt to resist or an inability to comply based on these factors. medical conditions, mental impairment, development of disability, physical language, language barrier, influence of drugs or alcohol or behavioural crisis. so an officer, a reasonable officer has to take the information and assess is the suspect purposefully or intentionally deliberately trying to thwart our efforts to take him into custody or are they experiencing one of these other types of factors? but

such consideration when time and circumstances reasonably permit shall then be balanced against the incident facts when deciding which tactical options are the most appropriate to resolve the situation safely. so again, reasonable officer based on the totality of the circumstances are going to take all of this information and, all of these policies all of these trainings in and a reasonable officer at that point would conclude that the amount of force that was being used by officers kueng and maine was insufficient, was not enough use of force to overpower mr floyd's resistance to getting into the car. —— officers kueng and lane. he hasn't seen it, he has heard it, he is familiar with the policies. and so at precisely 8:18am and 15

seconds, officer shoving macros hands—on. officer kueng, officer lane and officer chauvin struggled. fought. whatever adjective you want to use, they struggled with mr floyd. from 18 a.m. until 8:19am and 12 seconds, about one minute, a little over a minute. it doesn't really seem like it is that long of a time but again, an amount of physical exertion, remember how sergeantjody stiger described this. sergeant jody stiger described this. when sergeantjody stiger described this. when the apparent attempts to get him into custody were refutable, i wrote his quote down, "the futility of their efforts became apparent." they weren't able to get him into the car. three minneapolis police officers were not able to get mr floyd into the car. they themselves

are experiencing that surge of adrenaline, reasonable police officer would be experiencing that surge of adrenaline. and again, balancing all of the evidence against each other, let's look at three different angles of the struggle. this is officer kueng's body camera. shouting. , ., bodycamera. suourme. , a, n bodycamera. suourme. , ., [mm shouting. get in the squad! i can't breathe. shouting. get in the squad! i can't breathe- get — shouting. get in the squad! i can't breathe. get in _ shouting. get in the squad! i can't breathe. get in the _ shouting. get in the squad! i can't breathe. get in the car! _ shouting. get in the squad! i can't breathe. get in the car! let - shouting. get in the squad! i can't breathe. get in the car! let go - shouting. get in the squad! i can't breathe. get in the car! let go of i breathe. get in the car! let go of me man. — breathe. get in the car! let go of me man. i _ breathe. get in the car! let go of me man. i can't _ breathe. get in the car! let go of me man, i can't breathe! - breathe. get in the car! let go of me man, i can't breathe! please| breathe. get in the car! let go of -

me man, i can't breathe! please man! he is_ me man, i can't breathe! please man! he is under_ me man, i can't breathe! please man! he is under arrest— me man, i can't breathe! please man! he is under arrest right _ me man, ican't breathe! please man! he is under arrest right now— me man, ican't breathe! please man! he is under arrest right now for- he is under arrest right now for forgery — he is under arrest right now for force . ., ., ., forgery. for what? please man, i can't breathe! _ forgery. for what? please man, i can't breathe! on _ forgery. for what? please man, i can't breathe! on the _ forgery. for what? please man, i can't breathe! on the ground! - forgery. for what? please man, i can't breathe! on the ground! he forgery. for what? please man, i. can't breathe! on the ground! he is under arrest _ can't breathe! on the ground! he is under arrest for _ can't breathe! on the ground! he is under arrest for forgery, _ can't breathe! on the ground! he is under arrest for forgery, forgery . under arrest for forgery, forgery for what? this under arrest forforgery, forgery for what? this is the video of the same time period from officer lane. i'm going away on the ground. i been away the _ i'm going away on the ground. i been away the ground. —— i'm going to win onthe— away the ground. —— i'm going to win on the ground~ — away the ground. —— i'm going to win on the ground. i'm going down, i'm going— on the ground. i'm going down, i'm going down, — on the ground. i'm going down, i'm going down, i'm going down. get in the s: uad! going down, i'm going down. get in the squad! you're _ going down, i'm going down. get in the squad! you're going _ going down, i'm going down. get in the squad! you're going to - going down, i'm going down. get in the squad! you're going to have - going down, i'm going down. get in the squad! you're going to have a l the squad! you're going to have a heart attack _ the squad! you're going to have a heart attack man, _ the squad! you're going to have a heart attack man, get _ the squad! you're going to have a heart attack man, get in - the squad! you're going to have a heart attack man, get in the - the squad! you're going to have a heart attack man, get in the car! | the squad! you're going to have a | heart attack man, get in the car! i can't breathe!

shouting. ., ., ., �* shouting. let go of me man, i can't breathe. please _ shouting. let go of me man, i can't breathe. please man. _ shouting. let go of me man, i can't breathe. please man. he _ shouting. let go of me man, i can't breathe. please man. he is— shouting. let go of me man, i can't breathe. please man. he is under- breathe. please man. he is under arrest for forgery. _ breathe. please man. he is under arrest for forgery. i _ breathe. please man. he is under arrest for forgery. i can't - breathe. please man. he is underj arrest for forgery. i can't breathe! thank you.--- _ arrest for forgery. i can't breathe! thank you.--- i — arrest for forgery. i can't breathe! thank you, . .. i appreciate - arrest for forgery. i can't breathe! thank you,... i appreciate that. l thank you,... i appreciate that. officer tile. _ thank you,... i appreciate that. officer tile. -- _ thank you,... i appreciate that. officer tile. -- officer _ thank you,... i appreciate that. officer tile. -- officer tile. - i'm going down! i can't breathe! i can't _ i'm going down! i can't breathe! i can't breathe! _ i'm going down! i can't breathe! i can't breathe!—

can't breathe! you are talking! shouting- — can't breathe! you are talking! shouting. |_ can't breathe! you are talking! shouting. ican't _ can't breathe! you are talking! shouting. i can't breathe. | can't breathe! you are talking! i shouting. ican't breathe. he can't breathe! you are talking! - shouting. i can't breathe. he is shouting. ican't breathe. he is under shouting. | can't breathe. he is under arrest _ shouting. i can't breathe. he is under arrest right _ shouting. i can't breathe. he is under arrest right now _ shouting. i can't breathe. he is under arrest right now for - shouting. ican't breathe. he is under arrest right now for forgery. l under arrest right now for forgery. just take _ under arrest right now for forgery. just take them out.— just take them out. please man, i can't breathe! _ can't breathe! shouting. i can't breathe! suounne.�* can't breathe! shouting. �* . shouting. a reasonable police officer understands _ shouting. a reasonable police officer understands the - shouting. a reasonable police | officer understands the intensity shouting. a reasonable police . officer understands the intensity of the struggle. you can see at points mr floyd's makes kickback and it actually almost knocks officer lane over. and knocks off the body one camera and the badge of officer shoving back in the struggle. —— the body worn camera. —— of officer chauvin. a reasonable police officer will understand this situation. that mr floyd was able to overcome the

efforts of three police officers while handcuffed. with his legs. and his body strength. a reasonable police officer standard can be seen in another way, from a milestone camera, and this is what caught the attention of the 911 dispatcher. she said she observed the struggle in the vehicle rocking back and forth, back and forth. watch the vehicle.

silence

reasonable police officers will consider the training. and before we talk about the training again, there is something that i think is really important to understand, two things actually at this moment. not a single use of force expert that

testified, not a single police officer who testified said that anything up until this point was unlawful or unreasonable. it was reasonable for these police officers to put mr floyd into the squad car. it was reasonable the efforts that they took to overcome his resistance were reasonable. every single expert agrees to this point nothing is contrary to policy, training, defensive tactics, crisis intervention, all reasonable. is that the point that mr floyd brought to the ground that there becomes a dispute about the reasonableness of the use of force and what a reasonable officer would do. it was the law professor who said at the point mr floyd came out of the car

putting him on the ground was unreasonable. so, was it reasonable for officer chauvin or a reasonable police officer to put mr floyd on the ground in that instant? a reasonable police officer is going to rebuy on his training and information, his evidence, what he notes, all of the information he has built up to this point. you heard the lieutenant testify about how 15 years ago the minneapolis police department went to round defence tactics, getting people on the ground to control them. —— ground defence tactics. control that can be controlled the body, different types of move that the police use to create and eliminate space, escape versus control, those are two different things. these are the

tactics that have been employed by the minneapolis police department for 15 years. why? because it is safer for the officers and it is safer for the officers and it is safer for the suspects. it keeps people contained, controlled, and confined until they no longer are resistant. a reasonable police officer would also consider his department's policies. including the use of nondeadly force policy. force that does not have the reasonable likelihood of causing or creating a substantial risk of death or great bodily harm. this includes, but is not limited to, physically subduing, controlling, capturing, restraining or physically managing any person. this is the policy, 5—302 of the

minneapolis police