lieutenant mercel testify he's not trained to do that he actually specifically said he's trained not to do that, he's actually trained, once you get the suspect under control, deescalate, back off. >> this is so important because think about the psychology of jurors, one of the reasons that you have the voir dire questions that talk about the amount of weight you would give to an officer testifying or the benefit of the doubt that we know that people extend to officers, nobody believes that a peace officer gets up in the morning, puts on his or her uniform and goes out with a badge with the intent to kill someone unjustifiably. that psychology is top of mind for prosecutors to help the jurors feel comfortable about whatever verdict they render. this is not a police officer that they're trying to attack. this is somebody who was only a cop in name. having the continuous testimony from different law enforcement perspectives to say this is not what we do, he is no longer one of our own. at the time that he engaged this

behavior, he was not one of us. this distancing is very compelling for jurors to be able to get over the psychological hurdle of having the thought that all police are on the stand right now. it's -- no, it's this one person, but it's also very important here as well, to think about why it is -- why you have the continuum here. the continuum of the testimony, last week, so emotional, john, such compelling testimony from a 9-year-old, up to somebody more than a half a century older, you've got the more reserved, sort of conthemplative, unaffected by what's going on. that has the credibility of these witnesses going through the roof. it's not somebody with an agenda, not somebody who has a vested interest in, per se, working for the prosecution or the defense. these are neutral people who have testified and trained a

universal application of information. they have universally trained cadets and veterans year after year on the same information. this distancing, this sort of disinterested, nonagenda related party is very critical for a prosecution's ability to really persuade the jury that, look, you're hearing from every angle. this is not what cops do. it went from reasonable use of force to criminal assault. that link is what they need. >> and chief, five decades of experience, walk us through that very important point laura is making about credibility. the judge has said that he wants to limit the number of minneapolis police officers that come in and testify. he has said he doesn't want it to be redundant but he has allowed several of these training officers to come in because we have heard, mr. nelson, the defense attorney try throughout the trial to raise the question of doubt. put yourself in mr. chauvin's shoes, mr. floyd resisted at

first. the crowd developing, give him a break, the defense they're trying to make and officer after officer and sergeant yang today, and lieutenant mercel today, actually, no, the training walks you through this. you're repeatedly trained every couple years to get you through a situation like this, to know when to back off. >> listen, i think that the prosecution is bringing forth the right witnesses that really, i think, damaged the defense's notion that what he did was within policy, it's part of his training, and for the average person they don't really know what that training is. i mean, you know, it's important to be able to bring that out. and i think what's happened, at least where we are right now in my opinion is that that whole part of that defense has pretty much been taken away. the only thing he's got left is looking at the medical examiner's report, talking about

the toxicology results, did he have a lethal dose of drugs, did he not have? trying to get into the cause of death. as far as process and procedure goes with his training and with policy, i mean, it's clearly, clearly not something that's appropriate, not only in a minneapolis police department but any police department in the united states, the level of force that he used. and so i think they're very smart with who they're bringing forward to testify. you don't need 100 witnesses, you just need the right ones and so far they've done that. >> laura, one witness we did not hear from today and unclear if we will hear from during the trial is george floyd's friend who was in the car with him as all this played out. that friend obviously has legal liability. there's a question of drug use. there's a question of the counterfeit bill. there was a pre-trial hearing this morning before the jury came into the room. the judge said he believes there might be a narrow area of possible questioning but he deferred a decision. >> so to remind the audience,

someone tries to invoke the fifth amendment, they're saying i am exposed to legal liability here, if i answer your questions honestly it invites prosecution, or probably the intervention of law enforcement, maybe an arrest, maybe a trial. so the judge is going to allow people to invoke this fifth amendment to try to guard against that, and recognizing that the witness may have some of that exposure. the question is, will every question that's asked of this particular witness lead to that sort of exposure? what the judge is hoping to do from the defense counsel is to say give me a list of all the questions you intend to ask, each particular question they have a right to invoke the fifth amendment, but it's nothing you can do blanketly, saying hey, listen, there are some aspects he might invoke. let's have the person have blanket immunity, the blanket use of the indication of the fifth amendment. so the judge is not ruling yet what happens here. but remember, if you're the prosecutor, do you want after the case you have built, do you want someone taking the stand,

muddying the water in the way of asking questions and saying, i plead the fifth? every juror is going to look at this and say, are they hiding something? what are they trying to hide? and then they will transfer those suspicious thoughts onto the prosecution's case. they don't want them there. if you're the defense you want that sort of scenario. you want them wondering what does this person not want me to know? if the idea of substantial causal factor of death is at play here, why don't you want me to hear from somebody who was inside that car. you've raised the use of drugs, et cetera. this is going to be a battle that's going to be for another day but the judge is right, to inquire at this juncture which aspects of the testimony do you think are going to be so markedly different from what we've heard from the cup foods employee who merely observed and said that he observed george floyd as potentially being under the influence. why would his statement from the car perspective be so different to inculpate one, and not give liability to the other? that will be wrestled with, i

think i said on thursday, at the least. >> he did say on thursday and it's very important insights you made there, we're watching the testimony in the courtroom. sometimes the rulings judges make in talking with the case is sometimes can have as big an impact on the case down the road as well. we're taking a quick break, waiting for the trial of officer derek chauvin to resume. a quick break.

[ announcer ] we are now boarding. get away... without going anywhere. be one with nature. get to know the locals and sample the cuisine. book a dream vacation delivered right toour door. sometimes the greatest destinations aren't far away.

♪ wayfair you've got just want i need ♪ hey, i just got a text from my sister. you remember rick, her neighbor? sure, he's the 76-year-old guy who still runs marathons, right? sadly, not anymore. wow. so sudden. um, we're not about to have the "we need life insurance" conversation again, are we? no, we're having the "we're getting coverage so we don't have to worry about it" conversation. so you're calling about the $9.95 a month plan -from colonial penn? -i am. we put it off long enough. we are getting that $9.95 plan, today. (jonathan) is it time for you to call about the $9.95 plan? i'm jonathan from colonial penn life insurance company.

sometimes we just need a reminder not to take today for granted. if you're age 50 to 85, you can get guaranteed acceptance whole life insurance starting at just $9.95 a month. there are no health questions so you can't be turned down for any health reason. the $9.95 plan is colonial penn's number one most popular whole life plan. options start at just $9.95 a month. that's less than 35 cents a day. your rate can never go up. it's locked in for life. call today for free information. and you'll also get this free beneficiary planner, so call now. (soft music) ♪ hello, colonial penn?

we're in a break right now of the trial of former police officer derek chauvin with the killing of george floyd. big headlines including the fight against covid. this afternoon president biden leaving the white house to tour a vaccination site in virginia where we are told he will announce he's moving up now the target date for all adults here in the united states to be eligible to get a covid vaccine. the new deadline is a nod the progress the administration has made to boosting supply and

other steps states are taking so far. looking at this map, in 33 states now adults 16 and older already eligible to go online to get a covid vaccine. 12 more states and the district of columbia added to the list. the president is trying to accelerate it even more. here's where we stand as of this day, shy of 19% of american people fully vaccinated from covid and 32% and some change there have at least -- have their one dose of the vaccine. the acceleration of the vaccine rollout is quite dramatic, if you look by age, older americans, 75% of those between 65 and 74, 75% over the age of 75 have been vaccinated. good progress here, the challenge with younger americans from 50s on down, 50 to 64, 44%. the vaccine trend line, this is where the administration is claiming significant progress and the numbers back them up, the seven-day average right now, more than 3 million vaccines a

day, shots in arms across the united states. the numbers are going occupy. over the weekend they got to 4 million, at least on one day. the state by state trend map in terms of new cases, the race that's going on, vaccine rollout competing within 15 states right now. more new covid infections at the moment, than the data a week ago. 15 states trending in the wrong direction, 24 states holding steady. the administration wants to push that down. only ten states in green at the moment, meaning fewer new covid infections now compared to the data a week ago. if you look at the case timeline, again, well down from the horrors of the winter surge, but still, more than 79,000 new infections reported yesterday, more than 79,000 new infections, too high of a baseline, the administration says yes this progress with vaccines, but that is a high number, and has experts saying there could be potentially fourth wave. 60,000 was a baseline before we went way up here, 79,000 new infections reported just yesterday.

one of the issues, the variants. they're more nasty, more nasty. that's not a medical term but it's a fact and you see now the uk variant, 15,000 plus cases in the united states, and it is everywhere. we've watched over the last month that it's gone from state to state to state. it is everywhere now. one of the challenges is, yes, americans are feeling better. more confident, more americans are getting shots in arms. the administration worries, though, about scenes like this. these are fans at baylor university celebrating, understandably, their championship in the ncaa basketball championship last night but look at all those people gathered very closely together, this, texas rangers, arlington, texas, yesterday, the rangers the only team in baseball to say we will fill the entire stadium with fans right now. dr. anthony fauci looks at that scene, some of the fans are wearing masks but the doctor looks at that, more than 38,000 people packed into a stadium and he says too soon for that. >> you see the pictures of the texas rangers stadium essentially crowded, we don't want to declare victory

prematurely. we're looking at kind of a race between the vaccine, which is highly efficacious, and a real -- i don't want to say surge, because surge means you get a really high increase, we're seeing it start to creep up now. whether it explodes into a real surge or not remains to be seen. i think that the vaccine is going to prevent that from happening. >> let's get insights on all of this right now from our cnn senior medical correspondent elizabeth cohen who joins us. walk through this race that dr. fauci talks about, especially with this news from the president today that he's trying to bump up the timeline, if you will, that more adults can go online, sign up, get their vaccine. >> right, john, as you mentioned, these variants that have been coming up more and more in the united states, especially b.1.1.7, the uk variant, they are nasty, as you said, not a medical word, but i think it works perfectly. there is a race now, can we vaccinate enough people so that these variants don't take a

hold, don't get more people sick, don't kill more people? now, opening up the entire country to 16 and above could really, really make a difference. let's take a look at what's needed at this point. there are 263 million americans who are age 16 plus, 263 million. but, 156 million, so 156 out of 263 have not been vaccinated yet. they haven't even gotten a single shot. that's more than half. so there are still, even though it's been going so well and so quickly recently, there are still so many americans who can get vaccines who have not gotten vaccines. and so what this means is that if you look at the number -- >> elizabeth, sorry to interrupt, i need to go back to minneapolis to the courtroom. my apologies. exhibit 119, page 56 and we're starting to just discuss what your training is regarding handcuffing. could you please explain to the

jury how you train minneapolis -- >> we teach several different positional handcuffing techniques as well as how to approach people when they're going to be handcuffed, and then once you make contact with the person, probably place the cuffs and procedures after. >> how do you properly place the cuffs? >> well, one cuff at a time, and then once they're on and everything's under control and code 4 as we call it, things have calmed down to the point where you have control of the subject you want to make sure that you check the fit of the cuffs and double lock them for their safety. they tend to -- behind your back if you sit down they tend to tighten up on a person. so we want to be mindful of the fit of the handcuffs. >> the double locking prevents the further tightening. >> it's a button you push to prevent the cuffs from coming

undone or going in. >> and there's several different positions that an officer can be in when they're handcuffing a suspect. is that right? >> i'm sorry, can you -- >> the officer can be in many different positions relative to the subject when they're handcuffing them. >> very dynamic, yes, sir. >> standing. >> yes, sir. >> prone. >> yes, sir. >> i'd like you to please describe for the jury what techniques are used to prone handcuff a subject. >> with prone handcuffing, we want to isolate an arm and teach the officers to use a knee to control their shoulder. generally you put one knee on each side of the arm, one on the upper should, one above the middle of the back, excuse me and then isolate that arm, present the wrist for cuffing. and then handcuff. a lot of times when you're doing the prone cuffing, you'll do that with a partner, preferably. makes it a lot easier to control

a person. >> and if someone is handcuffed and you're using your knee on their back, or shoulder to gain control, do you leave it there for an extended period of time? >> depends on the circumstance. you can leave it there for a longer period of time depending on the resistance you get. >> what would signal to you, as a trainer, when you're supposed to release your knee? >> when their behavior deescalates, their resistance. >> relative to the handcuffing. >> that's correct, yes, compliance. >> so once you've accomplished the handcuffing, once the subject has actually been handcuffed, is that the appropriate time to release your leg? >> not necessarily. >> why? >> when people are handcuffed in the prone position they can thrash around, writhe around, they present a little bit of a threat, kick, bite, some other things. control doesn't end with

handcuffing always. >> if the subject is resisting. correct? >> that's correct. >> the mere possibility that a potential that a subject could resist like that, kicking, is that justification to leave your leg in place? >> no, sir. i would say you need behavior that would lead you to leave your knee there. >> so once the subject is handcuffed and compliant, or not resisting, is the officer to remove their knee? >> that would be an appropriate time. >> and how long, then, is the person, the subject to be left in the prone handcuffed position once they're compliant? >> it depends on the circumstances that you're involved in with this person and the -- the surrounding environment. >> okay. so assume the circumstances that i just stated, the subject is prone, handcuffed, and no longer resisting. >> if it was reasonably

necessary, you have the time to do it, get them in a different position. >> what position is that? >> it depends on circumstances. but you can put them in the recovery position on their side. you can sit them up. stand them up. >> why would you want to put them into a different position? >> there is the possibility and risk that some people have difficulty breathing when the handcuffs are behind their back and they're on the stomach. >> what is that known as? >> i'm sorry, rephrase. >> are you familiar with the phrase positional asphyxia. >> oh, yes, sir. >> is that the danger you would be trying to avoid by putting someone in the side recovery position? >> that is one of the dangers you're trying to avoid, yes. >> my previous objection. >> sustained. last answer is stricken. rephrase. >> you testified that you're familiar with the term positional asphyxia. >> yes, i am. >> why would you roll someone into the side recovery position

after they've been handcuffed and are compliant? >> several reasons are there. but one would be to prevent a potential situation where they might be subject to positional asphyxiation. >> and how soon is a subject to be placed into the side recovery position after they've become compliant and no longer resistant? >> when the scene is code 4 ask yo -- and you're able to do it. >> in terms of subject safety, how soon should the person be put into the side recovery position? >> i would say sooner the better. >> now, you testified that there are circumstances in which the subject can offer further resistance even though they're handcuffed. is that right? >> yes, sir. >> i'd like to direct your attention to page 58 of exhibit 219. this slide discusses the maximal

restraint technique. is that right? >> that's correct. >> is there a particular device that's used to accomplish the maximal restraint technique. >> the rip restraint or rip hobble. >> can you please describe the maximal restraint technique to the jury? >> yes, sir. if you have a subject that is handcuffed behind their back generally, and that's the way we like to handcuff people, and they continue to cause a threat to you or other people or themselves, we have taught our officers to use the maximal restraint technique, which is taking this rip restraint, dwhih is a nylon strap with a clamp on it and you would wrap that around their legs and connect it to the front of the body, if possible, like a belt loop or a second restraint around their waist. what that does is it depends their legs so the legs are no longer a threat to kick out at

you. they're not able to extend the legs out to kick you if they are a threat. >> are you aware that the use of the maximal restraint technique is guided and governed by mpd policy? >> yes, sir, it is. >> and that's 5-316? >> that's correct. >> is there more than one device that's authorized to perform the maximal restraint technique? >> right now it's just the rip hobble is the one we use. >> and so if an officer reasonably believes that a subject is thrashing would you recommend that they use this max maximal restraint technique to ensure their safety? >> yes, sir. >> and if they do so in accordance with mpd policy 5-316 in your training, what does the

officer need to do after the subject has been placed in the mrt and is prone? >> place them in the recovery position. >> how soon? >> as soon as possible. >> why? >> because when you further restrict their ability to move it can further restrict their ability to breathe. >> in terms of the appropriateness of force, would you agree with the proposition that force must be reasonable when it's applied? >> yes, sir. >> and would you also agree that circumstances can change, subject behavior can change? >> yes, sir. >> the environment can change? >> yes, sir. >> and are you familiar with minneapolis mpd critical

thinking model. >> critical decision-making model? >> yes, sir. >> and that's kind of a graphic -- >> objection, your honor. >> i haven't asked a question yet. >> hard not to be lead being that. try and rephrase. >> is the critical thinking model a graphical representation of a different concept? >> i don't know if i understand that question, sir. >> are you familiar with the concept of reassessment? >> of reassessment, absolutely. >> and you describe reassessment to the jury. >> yes, sir, through the critical decision-making model we've put basically a template together for officers to look at to understand their thinking processes, and reevaluation is when you're looking at the circumstances you're involved in, and you're constantly looking for factors to change so you can change your behavior. >> and is reassessment something that you've been teaching even before the advent of this model?

>> oh, yes, it's paramount to the use of force. >> and so there can be a time, a point in time when a particular type of force is reasonable, but as time passes, circumstances can change? >> yes, sir. >> and then that force would no longer be reasonable? >> that's correct. >> and if that's the case what is the officer to do? >> they're to change their force. >> thank you, your honor, i have nothing further. >> mr. nelson.

>> if i may have just a moment, your honor? >> you may . >> good morning, sir. >> good morning. >> had to check the time. thank you for being with us today. i have a few follow up questions regarding the training the minneapolis police department provides. you testified that one of your specialties or i believe that you talked about how you developed the ground defense program. >> i was one of the people that founded it, yes. >> okay. can you just describe generally what is the ground defense program. >> it's using techniques other than strikes to control individuals. i mean, that's the broad term. >> and essentially that was a program that was introduced some 10, 15 years ago to the mpd?

>> i believe it's ten years now. >> okay. and that's using different like jujitsu moves or different body control methods versus punching or striking an individual. right? >> that's correct. >> and that was a program, again, that you helped develop and found, and you continue to train throughout the minneapolis police department during your time as a -- in the training division, right? >> that's correct, sir. >> and it's fair to say that when you train a police officer you're training them in particular moves that will help improve their ability to gain compliance of a subject, right? >> that's the goal, yes, sir. >> but certainly there's no strict application of every single rule, agreed, or every single technique? >> that is correct. >> officers -- >> objection. which question is -- every move or every -- >> objection, sustained.

compound question, rephrase. answers are stricken. >> there is no strict application of every technique that an officer is trained, is there? >> no. >> officers are trained to be fluid, correct? >> yes, sir. >> and sometimes officers have to do things that are unattractive to other people. >> correct. >> in terms of the use of force. >> yes, sir. >> and an officer -- you would agree that being a police officer is a relatively dangerous job? >> yes, sir. >> you yourself in the course of your career have had to use force against suspects? >> yes, sir. >> you've arrested many people, i presume? >> yes, sir. >> and would you agree that sometimes people aren't particularly happy about being arrested? >> very rarely, sir. >> and sometimes they fight with you? >> yes, sir. >> and sometimes they argue with you? >> yes, sir. >> sometimes they make excuses? >> yes, sir. >> and ultimately one of the things that a police officer has

to do is try to determine, is this person pretending or trying to give me some excuse not to get arrested, or is this person experiencing some other crisis. right? >> yes. >> and ultimately in terms of an arrest that's one of the things that an officer has to ascertain, right? >> yes, sir. >> and again, when you've arrested people, have you had people plead with you not to arrest them? >> yes, sir. >> have you had people say they were having a medical emergency? >> yes, sir. >> would you -- have you had people say i can't breathe? >> yes, sir. >> and do you -- were there circumstances during the course of your career as a patrol officer where you didn't believe that that person was having a medical emergency?

>> yes, sir. >> and that's all part of the analysis in terms of the use of force, right? >> it plays a part, yes, sir. >> and so if someone comes to you and says if you tell someone i'm under arrest, one way that a person can resist arrest is through the use of their words. agreed? >> yes, sir. >> and that's a form of what we would call passive resistance? >> depending on the types of words that are used. >> so words could be both passive or active resistance. right? >> i would say yes. >> all right. so the difference between i'm having a heart attack, versus screw you, you know, you're not going to take me? >> oh, yes. >> so that's what you mean by the difference in the words, right? >> that's correct. >> or if a suspect is threatening you when you're arresting. >> that's correct. >> now, the whole concept of

this ground defense program, as you testified, was to really use body weight and control to gain compliance of a subject. right? >> yes, sir. >> and would you agree that in any use of force situation, the circumstances can change from minute to minute, second to second? >> yes, sir. >> so somebody who is initially compliant can suddenly become non-compliant? >> that's correct. >> somebody who's peacefully going into custody could suddenly become violent towards an officer? >> that's correct. >> somebody who is violent in one second becomes compliant -- could become violent again, right? >> yes, sir. >> you've experienced that yourself, correct? >> i have. >> and an officer, in terms of the use of force, you don't train officers specifically to only focus on the individual that they're taking into custody. do you?

>> no. >> do you train officers to consider and to take into consideration other factors? >> yes, sir. >> such as their partner's safety? >> that's correct. >> such as a crowd? >> correct. >> such as the difference between a crowd, right? >> yes, sir. >> are they a happy crowd or are they an angry crowd? >> yes, sir. >> in terms of we're -- we talked about the from portionality of the use of force and kind of sliding force, up and down that model. do you recall that? >> yes, sir. >> when an officer uses force, do they take into -- do you train officers to take into consideration what happened immediately prior to the particular use of force? >> could you rephrase that, sir, i'm sorry? >> sure. in terms of the continuation of the use of force do you train

officers to take into consideration what has happened with that suspect in the immediate preceding events? >> yes, sir. >> so for example if you were just fighting with a suspect and that person becomes compliant does that become a consideration in terms of a continued use of force? >> yes, sir. >> if someone has a sizable or a large size difference, do you train officers to take that into consideration in terms of their use of force? >> yes, sir. >> so if somebody -- if some person had fought with more than one officer at a time, do you train officers to take that into consideration as far as the continuing use of force? >> yes, sir. >> so one person against three people is a factor that officers would consider for the continued use of force?

>> yes, sir. >> do you train officers relevant to the use of force for people who are under the influence of controlled substances? >> it's a consideration, yes. >> and in your experience have you ever had to use force against somebody who's under the influence of a controlled substance? >> yes, sir. >> do you train officers that certain controlled substances can cause a person to exhibit more strength than they would have otherwise? >> yes, sir. >> so going back to the ground defense program. the ground control -- excuse me, the ground defense program really uses a lot of joint manipulations. correct? >> yes, sir. >> pressure points? >> not so much pressure points with ground control. >> body weight pins? >> yes, sir. >> so using your -- the

officer's body weight to physically control an individual. correct? >> yes, sir. >> now, you were previously interviewed by the fbi in connection with this case? >> yes, sir. >> and you are aware your statement was recorded, transcribed and have you had an -- were you aware of that? >> i was aware of that. >> have you had an opportunity to review your statement to the fbi? >> nope. >> okay. >> so i'm going to ask you some general questions. if i need to refresh your recollection, i'll do so. >> okay, thank you. >> so in terms of minneapolis police department policy there's a difference between a choke hold and a neck restraint. correct? >> that's correct. >> a choke hold is considered a lethal or deadly use of force. correct? >> correct. >> and a choke hold is defined by minneapolis policy as specifically blocking the trachea or the airway of the suspect from the front side.

correct? >> correct. >> so essentially what you would kind of think of as almost strangulation, putting your hands around someone's neck and squeezing the front of their neck. correct? >> yes, sir. >> in this particular case have you had an opportunity to review the body worn cameras, the bystander surveillance -- or the bystander cameras? >> i have seen both, sir. >> okay. at any point did you see officer chauvin use a choke hold in this case? >> no, sir. >> now, in terms of neck restraints you said that you testified that you have been involved in the martial arts since college? >> yes, sir. >> and i believe, if i'm not mistaken, that you also train mma fighting. >> no, sir, i do not. >> have you ever? >> no, sir. >> but in the course of your training both in martial arts as well as like brazilian jujitsu

and your training to become a use of force trainer, you have reviewed neck restraints. >> yes, sir. >> and you have taught hundreds of officers how to use a neck restraint, correct? >> yes, sir. >> and a neck restraint as you have described it is -- requires both sides of the neck to be compressed in order to render a person unconscious. correct? >> that is what we teach, yes. >> how much pressure has to be applied to both sides of the neck in order to render a person unconscious based on your training. >> it depends. >> on what factors? >> the size of the person, your skill, whether they're on narcotics or not, whether they're having an adrenaline rush, heart rate, general physical health. a lot of factors involved. >> okay. typically do you have to apply a lot of pressure to, let's say, a

healthy individual for a long period of time in order to render someone unconscious? >> i would say no. >> do you recall -- what is the percentage of pressure that you would generally expect to have to apply? >> i don't know if i can -- >> objection, vague. >> overruled. >> question again, sir? >> what amount of pressure do you have to apply typically in order to render someone unconscious? >> i don't know if i can answer that. it's very individual. >> okay. so you said factors such as controlled substance use play into it, correct? >> yes, sir. >> and does -- if a suspect is on a controlled substance, does that speed up the process of rendering someone unconscious or slow it down? >> i think my answers are that it speeds it up. >> and if someone has -- you said another factor is if someone has an adrenaline surge,

right? >> yes, sir. >> and if someone has an adrenaline surge coursing through their body, does a use of a neck restraint speed up or slow -- or does that adrenaline speed up or slow down the unconsciousness? >> objection, your honor. this is beyond the base of knowledge and the scope of direct. >> lay more foundation. >> your honor, i can refresh his recollection with his statement, if that recalls. >> well, your honor, could we have a side bar? >> no, proceed. >> would it refresh your recollection to review your statement relevant to adrenaline and the impact of how it speeds up or slows down a neck restraint. >> i don't believe i need to see that, i know the answer. >> what's the answer? >> the answer is the higher your blood respiration and heart rate is, generally the faster a neck restraint affects somebody. >> and how long based on your

training and experience does it typically take to render a person unconscious using a neck restraint? >> my experience is under 10 seconds? >> under 10 seconds? >> yes, sir. >> now, when a neck restraint is applied does the minneapolis police department specifically train people to be cautious when reviving or attempting to revive a suspect? >> i'm not sure i understand the question, sir. >> in your experience after a person has been rendered unconscious using a neck restraint is it possible for them to continue to fight after they come back to consciousness? >> it is possible, yes. >> have you experienced that personally? >> i have not experienced somebody fighting after a neck restraint. >> okay, but you're aware the minneapolis police department trains people that that is a possibility? >> yes, sir. >> and, in fact, sometimes they

can be just as aggressive, or even more aggressive after coming to consciousness? >> that is possible, yes. >> now, in terms of the use of a neck restraint specifically, there are circumstances, are there not, where an officer can continue to hold a persona neck restraint, after rendering someone unconscious? >> hold somebody? yes. >> and for a period of time? correct? >> yes, sir, you can have your arm around their neck for a period of time, yes. >> and there would be circumstances that would affect an officer's decision on whether the hold that person in that position for some period of time, correct? >> yes, sir. >> that would include maybe waiting for other officers to arrive? >> yes, sir. >> waiting for ems to arrive? >> i don't know about that. i wouldn't go that far, no.

>> okay. >> you also train in the training department officers on what are called the human factors of force, correct? >> yes, sir. >> and generally can you describe what the human factors of force are? >> yes, sir. it involves either a startled response to the officer or getting scared or having an adrenaline rush, or an adrenaline dump in their body and it affects your cognitive, physical abilities when you encounter stress like that. >> so it's fair to say that when an officer is engaged in a use of force incident, him or herself, they may experience a rush of adrenaline as well, right? >> yes, sir. >> you've experienced that yourself? >> yes, sir. >> and after a situation has calmed down to some degree the officer experiences an adrenaline rush or dump, excuse me? >> the adrenaline can continue to course through their body,

yes. >> and at some point it leaves? >> yes, sir. >> and that adrenaline -- officers are trained on this, correct? >> yes, sir. >> it's a part of the standard training for both recruit officers in the academy as well as veteran officers in service? >> that's correct. >> how frequently is the human factors of force taught to police officers? >> i believe we teach it about once a year, we discuss the human factors of force. >> you also train officers to be very much aware of their surroundings at all time, correct? >> yes, sir. >> and you were asked a series of questions about continuing to hold someone in a prone position when you use the term -- you could hold them there until the scene is code 4. do you recall that? >> yes, sir. >> and so it's fair to say that the minneapolis police department would train officers under certain circumstances to hold a persona prone position until the scene is safe.

correct? >> there are circumstances where that is appropriate, yes. >> and some of those circumstances would -- could be the reaction of bystanders. correct? >> that may be a factor, yes. >> it could include where you're physically located in terms of a geographical area. correct? >> yes. >> all right. where you are in terms of other hazards that may present themselves to an officer, or to the suspect, right? >> yes, sir. >> being in a busy street in the middle of a busy street versus being in a park or a yard or something? >> yes, sir. >> now, you also described the minneapolis police department's policy in terms of rendering medical aid as best you can, right? >> yes. >> an officer is required to do that, correct? >> yes, sir. >> but there are certain

circumstances, correct me if i'm wrong, where an officer has to consider whether it's safe for the officer to do so, correct? >> yes, sir. >> and, in fact, the training that minneapolis police officers receive requires it to be safe for an officer to render medical aid. agreed? >> generally, yes. >> okay. and one of the considerations an officer has to make in determining whether the render medical aid is whether or not the suspect is uncuffed, cuffed or uncuffed, right? >> that may be a factor, yes. >> there are circumstances where you've been fighting with a person, and they are hand -- you've gotten them hand cuffed and you have to decide is it worth the risk to take these h handcuffs off to give this personal medical aid. >> yes, sir. >> once you unhandcuff a suspect, they could become resistant again, correct? >> that's correct.

>> you have to decide is that a risk you're willing to take? >> yes, sir. >> you also described the recovery position. correct? >> yes, sir. >> and the recovery position could be rolling someone on their side, sitting them up or standing them up, right? >> yes, sir. >> and again, there would be circumstances you can envision circumstances where you would not put a person into the recovery position. correct? >> yes, sir. >> and, again, all of those factors that we've kind of talked about in terms of partner safety, personal safety, safety of the subject, safety of the crowd, all of those things are going through that critical

decision-making model process, right? >> yes, sir. >> now, in terms of the -- use of body weight to hold a suspect, right, you have -- you train officers to use their knee across the back or the shoulder to the base of the neck of a subject. correct? >> yes. >> that is something that is specifically trained by the minneapolis police department whether it be for handcuffing purposes or simply prone control of a subject. >> yes, sir. >> so if a person is being handcuffed officers are specifically trained to put a knee across the shoulder blade

of the suspect to the trapezius, is that what it's called? >> trapezoid, yeah, sure, i'm not a medical -- >> that's trained by the minneapolis police department both in terms of the academy as well as -- as well as in service? >> situationally, yes. >> and simply because a person is handcuffed there would be other circumstances where you would use that body weight, that prone control technique to maintain control of a subject. correct? >> yes. >> and in terms of - - if we

could publish exhibit 17, your honor? if we could publish exhibit 17. you were asked a series of questions about whether this is -- appears to be a trained minneapolis neck restraint. >> yes, i was asked that. >> and you said no. >> no. >> correct? >> correct. >> but you hedged a little bit and said it may be some other training. >> perhaps. >> what would that training be? >> using body weight to control.

however, i will add that we don't -- we tell officers to stay away from the neck when possible and if you're going to use body weight to pin, to put it on their shoulder and be mindful of position. >> if we can take this down and just to the witness i'd like to display a couple of -- this is page 41 of exhibit 126. just show this to the witness. can you see that, sir? >> not yet. >> sorry. it's -- this is already in evidence. but in this bottom corner here -- >> yes, sir. >> do you see a photograph of an individual demonstrating how to

handcuff a person? >> yes, sir. >> and that knee is across the neck of that individual. correct? >> the knee is on his far shoulder. >> across the base of the neck. >> the shin would be from his toes up to the knee, yes, his shin is across the back of the neck. >> all right. so that's when we're talking about prone handcuffing, this is the specific kind of photograph that demonstrates the placement of a knee as it applies to prone handcuffing. correct? >> correct. >> and ultimately if that person were to be handcuffed, and circumstances dictated, the officer would be permitted to continue to hold his knee in that same position. agreed? >> i would say yes. however, we've cautioned officers that be mindful of the neck area, and to look for the shoulder for placement. >> okay, perfect. we can take this down. can we take that down, your honor?

i'm going to show you what has been introduced as exhibit 56 already. can you see that, sir? >> yes, sir. >> it appears to be -- >> you can stand up. >> sure, yes, sir. >> it appears to be the paramedic checking the carotid pulse of mr. floyd? >> yes, sir. >> in your experience this is already admitted as exhibit 56. in your experience would you be able to touch the carotid artery if the knee was placed on the carotid artery? >> no, sir .

>> sir, i'm showing you what's been marked for identification purposes as exhibit 1045, can you just generally take a look at that. >> yes, sir. >> now, in terms of -- do you recognize that this appears to be a still photograph taken from the body worn camera of one of the involved officers? >> that's what it appears to be, yes. >> there's a time stamp on it that indicates may 25th, 2020 at 20:23:32. >> yes, sir. >> and can you see two officers in this area here holding mr. floyd? >> yes, sir. >> and if i can clear this. here, does that appear to be the placement of one officer's knee

and leg? >> yes, sir. >> does that appear to be across the shoulder blade to the base of the neck? >> the shin appears to be across the shoulder blade. i don't know if i can tell you where the knee is. >> so we'll just -- i would offer 1045. >> any objection? >> foundationally, your honor, to identify -- no objection, your honor. >> 1045 is received. >> permission to publish? can we clear that? so what we're seeing here, again, this is at 8:23 and 32 seconds, correct? >> yes, sir. >> and obviously this is taken from one of the body cameras and here you can see down in that area the leg placement of the officer.

correct? >> yes, sir. >> and based on your observation of this photograph it appears that the shin is coming from the top of the shoulder across the shoulder blade, correct? >> yes, sir. and it appears to be at an angle pointed in towards the squad car. correct? >> yes, sir. >> all right. if we can take this down, your honor. i think i accidentally closed. hang on one second .

sir, i'm showing you what's been marked for identification purposes as 1046. does that appear to be a similar angle? >> yes, sir. >> and i apologize, it was actually officer lane's body worn camera. >> is that 1045? >> 1045 and 1046. again, can you see what appears to be the placement of the leg of one of the officers at the shoulder blade of mr. floyd? >> it appears so. >> you can see in this area here what appears to be the back or the calf area coming across the shoulder blade, correct? >> yes, sir. >> again, the time stamp is 10:26:40. >> yes, sir. >> and does that knee placement

appear to be similar to how a minneapolis -- excuse me, similar to the placement in the previous exhibit? >> the last exhibit, sir? >> yes. >> yes. >> and that was roughly a couple of minutes after. right? >> yes, sir. >> okay. i would offer exhibit 1046. >> any objection? >> clarification, did you say 10:26:46. or did you mean 8. >> 8:26:40. >> no objection. >> received. >> permission to publish? >> you may. >> so again, it's a little hard to see in this particular photograph but if we look in this general area here, correct, you can see the placement of the knee. correct? >> i can see the general area of the placement of the knee, yes. >> and again here we have what appears to be the shin coming over the top of mr. floyd's shoulder blade.

>> that's what it appears, sir. >> and that would be angled in towards the squad car, correct? >> correct. >> take that down, your honor. >> sir, i'm showing you what's been marked for identification purposes as exhibit 1047. does that also appear to be a still frame image taken from a body worn camera, of a minneapolis police officer? >> yes, sir. >> time stamp being 8:27:49. >> yes, sir. >> 20:27:49. correct? >> correct. >> it appears that the officer wearing this body worn camera has now stood up, correct? >> it's a different angle, sir, yes. >> from higher to lower, correct? >> lower to higher, sir? >> it appears that the camera is at a hig