repositioning him, i think very likely would have also saved his life. >> was there a point in time, dr. rich, when mr. floyd was checked for a pulse when he was in the subdual restraint of mr. chauvin? >> yes. yes, was there. >> at the time that he was checked for a pulse and he no longer had one, in your opinion as a cardiologist, was there anything mr. chauvin could have done at that point in time that would likely have saved mr. floyd's life? >> objection. >> sustained. >> at the time that mr. floyd did not have a pulse, what is your opinion to a reasonable degree of medical certainty as to what mr. chauvin would have done that would potentially have

saved his life. >> objection. >> overruled. you can give an opinion. >> just prior to that point, i heard one of the officers actually ask -- actually, on two occasions if mr. floyd should be turned on to his side and the response was no. just leave him. and once the officer announced that he did not have a pulse anymore. i think he actually said "he does not have one" were the exact words, at that point the immediate response would be to not only relief him of the restraint, but at that point now you've got to start cpr and immediate chest compressions because we know that if you can get to a patient right away, even when they've lost their pulse, even when they've gone into a cardiopulmonary arrest, there is a significant opportunity to save a life, but

for every minute that transpires that you are not supporting cpr measures the literature would suggest in 10% to 15% of survival. it is why we pour so many resources these days into a community, education and training for bystander cpr because it is so effective and it works if the person can be tended to quickly enough. >> from your review of the video where you can see mr. floyd and mr. chauvin there on the ground, if mr. chauvin knew cpr, did you see any reason, from your observation that he could not have supplied cpr? >> objection. >> not within the opinion of -- medical opinion. so that is sustained. >> i'm sorry, your honor? >> sustained. >> all right.

>> so at the time that mr. floyd was put into the ambulance from the scene, in your opinion as a cardiologist, what would have been the prospects of resuscitating him at that point? >> objection. >> overruled. you may give an opinion if you have one. >> so at that point i think the chance for meaningful survival, unfortunately, was very low because i counted the number of minutes that he was on the ground pulseless without any cpr and by the time the paramedics rushed in to get him and to get him on to the stretcher and to the back of the ambulance at that point a lot of time had passed. i give tremendous credit to the

efforts of the paramedics and the doctors and nurses in the emergency room. they worked on him for what seemed -- >> sustained. this is nonresponsive. >> dr. rich, do you have a degree of medical certainty that mr. floyd would have lived if not for the 9:29 of the subdual restraint -- >> objection. >> overruled, if you have an opinion. >> i'll finish my question for you, dr. rich. do you have an opinion as to whether george floyd would have lived if not for the subdural restraint if not for the 9:29 on the ground? >> overruled. [ inaudible ] >> to a reason degree of medical certainty. >> yes, i believe he would have lived. >> last ye, dr. rich.

>> do you have an opinion as to whether a completely healthy, george floyd, that is any healthy human breathing would have survived the subdural restraint of 9:29. >> sustained as irrelevant to a person. >> my question, dr. rich is any person, a healthy person, would have survived the conditions that george floyd underwent during the 9:29 of may 25th of may of last year? >> same objection. >> sustained. >> no further questions, dr. rich. >> ladies and gentlemen let's take our mid-morning recess and let's come back at 11:25. thank you. >> good day. this is "andrea mitchell reports" in washington as the george floyd prosecution, including george floyd's

brother. protests north of the courthouse overnight after a police officer fatally shot a young black man sunday during a traffic stop in a nearby suburb, just ten miles from where george floyd was killed. we expect to hear from minnesota police shortly about this incident and we'll bring that to you live when it happens. the defense asked the judge for the jurors to be sequestered, and the judge denied that request. video was released showing an unarmed u.s. army lieutenant in uniform being held at gun point and pepper sprayed by police in windsor, virginia, last december. the black and latino lieutenant crying and pleading with police saying he's afraid to get out of the car. he put his hands out of the car. they can tell he's not armed and he has then sued the police

officers. shaquille brewster on duty outside the courthouse and also with former u.s. attorney joyce vance, former u.s. attorney and former fbi official and law professor and former nypd detective. the judge denying the request to sequester the jury in light of the shooting and the incident in the minneapolis suburbs. plus the cardiologist has yet to be cross examined, but tell us also about john rich's expert testimony. >> i'll start with that news this morning. the motion from the defense attorney toy is sequester the jury. the judge denying that motion. that's a motion that you have heard eric nelson and the defense team make repeatedly throughout this trial when they initially asked for the trial to be delayed and the judge saying that he understands that a jury may have heard this, but their

job is to ignore outside influences, ignore the media and to make their decision based on what happens in the courtroom, but in his announcement we did get a sense of the timing of this trial. he said that we can be hearing closing arguments for this case beginning as early as monday, a week from today. that sets up once the prosecution rests their case which can come any hour now at this point, andrea, today or tomorrow. this could be in the hands of the jury by early next week. so we do have a sense of timing there. what we heard from today, the cardiologist and the testimony that was scheduled initially to be on friday as the prosecution was using the expert medical testimony to round out their points that derek chauvin caused the death of george floyd and not his underlying medical conditions or his drug use. you heard him testify and you heard that when he said george floyd died from a

cardiopulmonary arrest that was caused by the low oxygen levels. this is consistent with the other experts that the prosecution has put up and it again goes to them hammering the point that it was derek chauvin and his actions and the restraint that he put on george floyd, the prone position, the handcuffs and the knee on the neck and the back and the prosecution making it as clear as possible to the jury that that is the reason that george floyd died, andrea. >> i thought it was very important that there was no underlying heart condition, that if not for the restraints from derek chauvin that he would have survived and then importantly, right at the end there, if not for 9:29, he would have survived. the extent of time and the fact that he was not given cpr. briefly, if you can tell us about the suburb of minnesota only ten miles from where george floyd was killed.

what do we know about what's happened overnight in a very tense community? >> yeah, not only ten miles from where george floyd was killed, but ten to 15 minutes from where i am standing outside the courthouse. we are expecting a press conference to begin if it hasn't already and we'll hear the latest from officials there, but as we know the police officers and the police department say that they were effecting a traffic stop. at a certain point during that traffic stop they realized the young man had a warrant so they tried to take him into custody and he went back into the car and they say the weapon was discharged. we heard from his mother who was at the crime scene who is frankly distraught when you look at the video that was happening as the crowd was gathering. his mother says he called him -- or he called her, excuse me, on the phone when he initially got pulled over because this was a car she had just given to him in the past two weeks or so. he was pulled over because of

air fresheners in the rear-view mirror and he tried to give insurance information any he didn't know where it was and he heard the officers say stop running and she then got a call from the girlfriend which was in the car at the time and she told her that her son was just shot by police. that, of course, sparked lots of demonstrations and lots of reaction. there were some protesters who were nearby protesting a separate police shooting that happened a couple of years ago here in minneapolis. it underscores the tense nature that we're dealing with here in the city. of course, as this trial is going on, but also as there are still regular instances and regular interactions between police and the community and this one resulting in a fatality as this is all happening. one more point to know, andrea. the national guard which was already deployed and already on standby. about 2,000 members of the national guard were already on standby. that mobilization which was scheduled and the increase in

mobilization is only accelerated at this point, andrea. >> chuck rosenberg, i understand why the defense is requesting these requests to sequester the jury to create an appeals basis there, but what about the jury? how do they ignore all of these other incidents involving police just next door, you know, figuratively. does it influence the jury? >> well, that's a really important question, andrea. the judge instructs the jury to ignore other media and not to talk to people about the trial that they are sitting in or to use outside media to influence their decision making here. you have to presume that the jury, and this is true in every case in america, state and federal. you have to presume that the jury is going to abide by the instructions of the judge. so when something like this happens, the shooting in brooklyn center it might not be

unusual for the judge to talk to the jurors and say ladies and gentlemen, let me remind you of the obligation if anyone can't abide that, tell me. if anyone hasn't abided by that, tell me or i'll assume you're abiding by instructions and in my experience, andrea, as a former federal prosecutor jurors take this very, very seriously. they know that they have to listen to the judge's instructions on the law and they try assiduously to avoid an interference in their deliberations. one juror self-reported that they had accidentally seen something on television and gotten a text message from a family member. there were instructions provided by the judge, and if there is something that the judge has to address with the jury down the road you can always do so. >> i want to circle back to shaq briefly because you got a pool note from the pool reporter who

today is our own gabe gutierrez. what are you hearing? >> that's right. i'll just read a chunk of the pool report because gabe put it extremely well in the summary of what he was seeing. this is a jury that clearly recognized the key points and main parts of the testimony that the prosecution wanted to emphasize today. he pointed out whenever dr. rich gave a very direct answer in the sound bite form, multiple jurors would immediately jot it down on their note pad. last week it did not seem as though jurors seemed bored or distracted by this morning's more technical testimony. the time line that we know, andrea, we are expecting to hear from a family member from the spark of life family member. reverend sharpton last night on his show said that family member would be the brother of george mroid and we should be hearing from one more use of force

expert to come in and testify today. so more testimony, but we are still getting the sense based on the comments on the judge and based on the layout of the prosecution's case. we can be hour away from the prosecution resting their case and we can start hearing from defense witnesses. >> and bert, i want to get your reaction to this incident in windsor, virginia, where an army officer, a lieutenant, is suing police after he was pulled over. we are seeing the video for the first time. he was pepper sprayed and pulled over for not having a license plate. they didn't see that he had a temporary plate posted in the car, in the vehicle and he continued to drive until a short distance, we are told, until he got to a well-lit gas station and was crying and fearful and putting his arms out to show he had no weapon. you're a former nypd officer and a law professor now, criminal

law professor. tell us your reaction? >> the moment to focus on because he is a victim, to be quite honest and he places his hands outside of the vehicle and this was a sign to the police that he was no longer a threat. and he certainly was not a threat and as they walked up to the vehicle they could see this. people hurt you with their hands and not with their eyes and not with their words and the use of force continuum de-escalation and so forth in this particularly ongoing trial. this could have been de-escalated and what do we see? we see actually an escalation of force and the repeated pepper spraying and so forth and the police telling him, you should be worried. you will have a problem and that is really somewhat horrific to watch in that this is the point where police did take control

and perhaps turn this into a moment where this person would not have had such a negative interaction, such a horrific interaction, but it went absolutely the other way. this became some form of power struggle. so it was difficult to watch. the question is always, can you train this -- all you have to ask, can you train this away or perhaps is this someone that might be untrainable with regards with policing our society. this certainly just seemed to be no reason for thisses clagsz, this use of force and this anger that we saw exhibited by the police officer. >> that gets to the very basic issue, kirk, as to whether we're recruiting the right people to be police, that there should be another kind of test, you know, all kinds of efforts before people get recruited to wear the shield and the gun.

joyce, rather, let's talk about what we know from today's schedule, the closing arguments will be as soon as monday. does that give you any sense of the defense strategy and the big question, of course, whether or not they're going to call derek chauvin to the stand? >> it doesn't help us figure out what the defense will do. it is very likely that the defense is still debating that strategy internally. it's extremely risky to put a defendant, particularly one in chauvin's position on the witness stand. he'll be subjected to a grueling cross-examination, and he can open the door to some of his own prior excessive force incidents that the judge has excluded from testimony so far, but the real problem that the defense has is that they're staring at this murder three charge that all of the charges depend on chauvin's state of mind, but this murder three charge depends on proving that he had a depraved mind, and

the jurors have seen the videotape and heard from witnesses. the defense has to do something to dispel the image that the video leaves in the juror's mind and the best way to do that is through chauvin himself, but awfully risky. plenty of witnesses that they can put on and i think we'll have to wait and see if the defendant himself is one of them. >> and, joyce, when the defense does take the stand, they -- their key argument was that he did not die because of the use of force and how do you have dr. rich and the preceding medical testimony that we've seen so far? >> so it's always a mistake to evaluate a witness before you see how that witness holds up on cross-examination, but that said, dr. rich is an outstanding explainer of really difficult medical concepts in a way that even someone like me who went to

law school, not medical school can readily grasp and he had a strong impact on this jury, there's this exchange at the very end where the prosecution is trying to elicit an answer to this question. would a normal person, a healthy person, have survived the incident that george floyd went through and the judge repeatedly sustains objections to that question. i'm not sure he even waited for the defense to make the objection. he may have just been sustaining before it was even out of the defense lawyer's mouth, but even without hearing dr. rich's answer to that question, the jury having heard his testimony certainly intooted the answer which was in the doctor's opinion which he had sustained and substantiated george floyd died because of the incident with former officer chauvin and for no other reason and it was very compelling testimony on direct. >> joyce vance, thank you very

much. shaq brewster and thank you all. stay with us. we'll have a lot more coming up, starting now. today the royal family in the uk continue to mourn prince philip who died on friday, of course, at the age of 99. both prince pill yam and prince harry releasing statements today remembering their grandfather. the brothers set to reunite this week as harry arrived back in london for the first time in a year, back in london for his grandfather's funeral to be held under very strict covid conditions. that's set for saturday. joining us with details is keir simmons at windsor castle. keir, we have brand-new statements from prince william and prince harry on their grandfather's death and this from prime minister's call to bury the hatchet, if you will. tell us what is the latest? >> that's right, andrea. the former prime minister john major urging the two brothers

who he knows very well, urging them to use this moment of grief to resolve their differences, if you like, and i think in these two statements you see how similar they really are. after all of the bitterness and the recriminations in the past few months these statements are really heartfelt and one from william. i will never take for granted the special memories my children will always have of their great-grandpa coming to collect them in his carriage and seeing for themselves his infectious sense of adventure as well as his mischievous sense of humor. really bringing out their joy and pleasure at their grandfather's style and sense of fun, and prince harry, who in many way, you can see prince harry and the late prince philip saying to me, like many of you who have lost a loved one or a grandparent over the pain of this past year. he was my grandpa, master of the

barbecue, legend of banter and cheeky right till the end. statements from william and harry and from many other members of the royal family through the weekend. i think, andrea, what you are seeing is this end of an era, this shifting of the generations of the royal family. these children and grandchildren making statements, written statements also on camera speaking for the queen who we haven't seen and uniting around her, despite the divisions that we have seen over the past few months. >> do we think that william and harry will walk and follow the coffin and the procession as we all remember they did, of course, for their mother? is that actually taking place? i know you know more details about how they can have only 30 people in this service other than the officiants when they have such a large family, considering the children, grandchildren and spouses.

>> yeah. there will be plenty of military pageantry. it's the guests that are limited to 30. in some ways, i think, the queen and prince philip decide what they would have wanted. prince philip didn't want any fuss. yes, i think william and harry will walk behind the coffin as we saw them do with their mom princess diana years ago and it was prince philip walking alongside them, giving them strength on that occasion. so what a day it will be. such a contrast from the last time the spotlight was on windsor castle here for the wedding of harry and meghan, and a day in perhaps the most difficult for the queen has ever had to go through, in which the queen will be the center attention again, but in a completely different way, andrea. >> after such a long marriage and a long partnership and what a love affair.

keir simmons, thank you for all your coverage. >> and former president donald trump in a profanity-laced blast at both mitch mcconnell and mike pence this weekend and sticking to the lie that he had won the election and alarming donors at the rnc dinner who are trying to focus on winning the midterms. trump curses mcconnell as son of a blank and criticizing elaine chao for quitting the day after the attack on the capitol and criticizing mike pence for not stopping the electoral college certification. joining me is michael steele, former chairman of the rnc, imagine you're the chairman of the rnc and holding it in a different hotel and commanded to come to the trump hotel where donald trump has raised more money for himself and his political action than has the

republican itself. >> yeah, and again, people in the room were paying for trump. they weren't paying to support party organization and operations relative to the upcoming elections this november in the states of new jersey and virginia where we have two important governor's races on the line and of course, setting in motion the efforts to win in 2022. mcconnell would like to be the majority leader again. mccarthy would like to be speaker on the house and they're on the verge of that, but trump is still in the way and the thinking that donald trump is going to be the lynchpin to open up the -- that political opportunity at the ballot box is a big risk at this point, andrea. it really is, and the donors in the room listening to the takedown of mcconnell and other party officials, they paid for that. the rnc spent $100,000 for that event and i'm curious as to what they thought about it. >> michael steele, i think we have to wrap.

the judge is back on the bench. >> okay. >> we will return to the trial. cross-examination now, we believe, of dr. jon rich, the cardiologist. >> just to confirm you are not a pathologist yourself, correct? >> i'm a cardiologist. >> and the vast majority of the patients that you treat are in a clinical setting, correct? >> correct. >> meaning they're alive generally when they see you? >> yeah. >> all right. can we agree that it is a pretty common occurrence that people die who have arteries that are 90% blocked? >> no, sir. well, everyone dies eventually, but not from a 90% blockage. >> people die every day from a 90% blockage. >> people die from heart

attacks. >> heart attack and heart failure are two completely terms. >> people who have a 90% blockage may have a cardiac event and may die. >> as a hypothetical? >> yes. >> hypothetically, there are undoubtedly people who have died from coronary events with 90% blockages or without blockages. >> and people may not experience pain as a result of arrhythmia? >> correct. >> sometimes people have a 90% blockage of a right artery and a 70% of the left descending artery and they die, right? >> again. not this case we're talking about? >> exactly. hypothetically? >> in a hypothetical case,

someone who has any extent, anyone could potentially die. sure. >> and again, they may have no pain associated with a fatal arrhythmia, right? >> fatal arrhythmias often are not associated with pain, in fact. >> you would agree that mr. floyd did have coronary artery disease? >> absolutely. >> how is that normally in a living person, how is that normally diagnosed? >> so usually the patient has symptoms. so they will have chest pain or they're exercising. if you're an active person you shouldn't have chest pain. something is not right. every time i try to exert myself, the elephant on the chest is the classic description. so that would be one of many possible ways that you would

diagnose coronary artery disease in someone that is alive. >> they also do a stress test? >> sometimes. >> a blocked right coronary artery, that can contribute to a fatal arrhythmia? any -- anyone can have a fatal arrhythmia with or without coronary artery disease. >> and so if a blood vessel is blocked and blood is not getting through that vessel what happens? >> well, it depends, but i'd like to answer that for you. so in the case of mr. floyd what has most likely happened based on our understanding of coronary physiology is precisely because he had a narrowing of up to 90% and it had calcium in it. we know that that developed

gradually, and the heart is fascinating in what it does. it develops what we call coronary collaterals which means the body makes additional blood vessels so if there is one artery that's narrow it recruits and builds many more blood vessels to supply blood to the heart. it is actually why you are more likely to die from a heart attack if you started with a lesser narrowed artery and the plaque ruptured and blocked the vessel than if you started with a more severe narrowing because of all these unbelievable coronary collaterals and adaptive responses that the heart does when that happens. >> what is a safe dose of methamphetamine? >> prescribed? >> illicit. >> i would never consider any illicit drug to be, off the

street, that's not prescribed by a physician to be safe. >> and methamphetamine and a vasoconstrictor, correct? >> it often can acts as a vasoconstrictor. >> that means it constricts blood vessels. >> that's what vasoconstriction means. it narrows them down more. >> do you understand based on medical records that there's prior evidence of methamphetamine use by mr. floyd? >> yes, sir. >> and methamphetamine can cause some changes to the heart in and of itself, correct? >> correct. >> in fact, it sort of ages the heart more, right? >> i've never used that terminology. >> okay. how would you -- what does it do to the heart over prolonged use? >> every case is different, and it depends on what we mean by prolonged use. so one day, one week, 25 years,

like most thing, if you use something for -- if you smoke cigarettes for 50 years you're going have more problems than if you smoked a cigarette or a pack every once in a while. >> in terms of what does -- what does methamphetamine do to the heart itself? >> so methamphetamine, if used over a long period of time, can sometimes contribute to the development of coronary artery disease as we've been discussing. it can constrict blood vessels, as you mentioned. it can have a host of an effect on different parts of the body including the heart. >> there are things that can make the heart work harder and faster, right? >> sure. >> methamphetamine being one of them. >> yes. >> vigorous activity in one of them? >> sure. >> adrenaline? >> yeah.

we all right now have a lot of adrenaline flowing through our system. adrenaline is needed for life, for sure. >> increases in adrenaline can cause the heart to work harder and faster? >> yeah. so adrenaline, which is the lay term for catakholomine is to get it to pump more blood and the purpose of adrenaline is so we can run and jump and we asked heart to allow us to do that. correct. >> and have you in your practice worked with someone who has had a paraganglioma. >> i've had phiochromal cytoma? >> had the hip? >> no, it is in the adrenal gland near the kidneys, but these paragliomas can pop up in

different places. >> how are they typically identified. >> if they are pertinent, that's how i have identified. the classic finding is the person saying i'm always having headaches and why am i always having these headaches or i'm always sweating and you say i wonder if something is releasing a hormone that could be contributing to that. other times, in my opinion, like in the case of mr. floyd you pick them up incidentally, like, say an autopsy. they are often identified because a person contributes to high blood pressure. >> that's right. you can. >> you've agreed that you've reviewed the medical records of mr. floyd, correct? >> correct. >> and he has a pretty significant history of extremely elevated blood pressure, right? >> yes. >> i think the one you referenced that the top number was over 200? >> yeah. >> on more than one occasion.

>> on more than one occasion. >> and the lower number of the blood pressure was also likewise elevated. >> right. >> did you observe in the medical records of mr. floyd that he was taking prescribed medications to control his blood pressure? >> i saw in the records during an emergency room visit that he was prescribed high blood pressure medication. what i could not see is whether he was taking them or not, but it did look like at one point there was a prescription and it was a channel blocker or hydrochlorothyiadide.

>> you agree they were in his medical records. >> i don't know when he started to see medical professionals. for all i know the first instance in the medical records was the first time he started to see medical professionals. i'm not sure. >> so how many years of past medical records did you review? >> i believe three or so. the beginning of 2018 is when i think they started. >> are paragangliomas ever removed from a person. >> the paragangliomas if they are causing the sweating, et cetera, a surgeon will sometimes remove them. >> would you prescribe an amphetamine for someone who has a 90% blockage of the right coronary artery and a 75% blockage of the left anterior

descending artery? >> so, first of all, i don't typically prescribe amphetamines. i have many patients who have coronary artery disease that are on stimulants, okay, for a variety of medical conditions. so i just don't prescribe them, but i do have many patients with coronary disease who are on stimulants. >> would you recommend to someone that they use methamphetamine with that degree of coronary artery disease? >> i would never recommend that anybody take methamphetamine off the street for any reason. >> are you aware of the research showing that deaths where both methamphetamine and fentanyl are found and occurs at a much higher incident? >> can you repeat that question, please? >> are you aware of the research

of the deaths of those who have used methamphetamine and fentanyl -- that they're higher than meth or fentanyl alone or the combination. >> objection, your honor, for lack of foundation. >> as to assuming facts, that is overruled. assuming that it's at the scope of his foundation, since the state did ask him for toxicology opinions. >> in reference to the medical articles none of which anyone has seen. >> overruled. you may answer if you know. >> i am not familiar with the breadth of the literature looking at all of the different combination of drugs and which combination worsens or improves that level. >> you testified that mr. floyd, based on your review of the video, did start complaining of shortness of breath prior to being placed in the prone position, right? >> yes.

i heard on more than one occasion he'd say the words i can't breathe. >> and if mr. floyd had simply gotten in the backseat of his squad car, do you think that he would have survived? >> objection, your honor. he's called for medical testimony. >> he may -- if you have a medical opinion as to that. >> overruled. >> so had he not been restrained in the way in which he was i think he would have survived that day. i think he would have gone home or wherever he was going to go had he not been subjected to the prone and positional restrain that he was. >> so, in other words, if he had gotten in the squad car he'd be alive? >> i think my answer remains the same. anything other than that scenario that he was subjected

to i have no reason to think, from a medical perspective, that he would not have survived that day. correct. >> and in terms of the prone position you would agree that the prone position is not in and of itself inherently dangerous? >> in an ordinary individual, if we were to take away everything else that was going on and we -- and someone was just simply lying in the prone position, while there are many patients that would be inherently dangerous, the average individual, i would agree with you, probably just lying flat in that situation generally wouldn't be dangerous. >> even in the icu, there are circumstances where people have serious medical conditions where they're maintained in the prone position, agreed? >> in the icu, when patients are put into the prone position it is when it is a desperate attempt to save someone's life where their lungs have actually

developed what we call acute respiratory distress system or ards, and they have a ventilator in to make sure that the amount of air that they get no matter their positioning, will always be enough. and so it is a funny thing to think about putting someone in the prone position in the icu with a respirator, but because of the respiratory physiology, sometimes that will help open up certain segments of the lungs that are needed for oxygenation, but it is very important to keep in mind that they are on a respirator every single time to open up those lung airways and they're usually on sedation, as well, to keep them comfortable. >> and my last question, doctor. after someone -- someone's heart stops, is it possible that they continue to respire? >> it is -- well -- i'm not sure

i can answer that with certainty other than to say there are these things that are called agonal breaths. so when i am with a patient that is dying and they go into cardiac arrest, once in a while you will see them take one or two extra breaths. i'm not sure the exact mechanism or the physiologic trigger for that. so you could potentially see some extra breaths for a short period of time. >> by short period of time -- up to a minute? >> in my experience. if the heart has completely stopped, i would not expect to see the breathing continue for up to a minute, but i might expect it to be seen for several seconds. >> no further questions, your honor. >> any redirect? >> thank you. your honor.

>> dr. rich, you were asked several questions that had to do or had at least as a premise a blockage of mr. floyd's arteries. is blockage a proper medical term to you as a cardiologist to describe the narrowing in mr. floyd's arteries? >> so when we try to use terminology that is not medical terminology, right, to explain these phenomena, the term blockage, i tend to use when the blood vessel is completely blocked. there is a blockage. i will usually describe, if i have a patient like mr. floyd who has coronary artery disease like this, i will usually use the term narrowing because the blood is still getting through. in fact, the blood is still getting through just fine.

there is no level of narrowing, in fact. even a totally blocked artery -- this is what's fascinating, that develops over time, the territory of blood that that blood vessel was supposed to supply can still be getting enough blood because of those collateral vessels that develop. so i would use the term with mr. floyd as narrowings. >> you were asked questions about perigangliomas. and i think you told us that those are usually preceded by headaches of some kind. >> classically correct. >> one of the symptoms. >> is that right. >> did you hear the serious complaints that mr. floyd had about pain, did you hear any of them being a headache? >> no. in fact, when i saw there was a periganglioma as an incidental

finding when i went to the medical records and i used the control-f function to make sure i didn't find headache. i didn't find headaches at any point. >> when you referenced periganglioma being an incidental finding in the autopsy would you tell the jury what is meant by incidental? >> sure. all of us have things in our bodies that aren't cause anything medical problems, but if they discover -- let's say someone gets a ct scan for one reason, they might find that there is a cyst in the kidney in the kidney or the liver and sometimes benign tumors and we consider those as incidental finding. that is an incidental oma. we don't think it has clinical relevance, but it was not found in the imaging, but in the

autopsy. >> are you familiar with the data as to how many people in the united states have died as the periganglioma as the primary reason for that? >> to be honest, i don't know the exact numbers. i just know that they are very low. >> now, you were asked questions about high blood pressure, the role or impact of methamphetamine, periganglioma can any of those in and of themselves cause someone to die without first entering the heart? >> can you repeat the question? >> yes. what i am trying to get at whether we're talking about high blood pressure, methamphetamine, periganglioma and the impact on the adrenals, the narrowing of the arteries, can any of those things by themselves cause a person to die without first impacting the stoppage of the

heart? >> well, the reason i asked you to ask the question again is that i want to make sure that i'm precise and clear here. high blood pressure can cause death in manners outside of the heart. for example, it can contribute to a stroke which we know mr. floyd didn't have, and the other thing that can occasionally happen is the aortic dissection that can cause death. so i want to make absolutely clear, these conditions can cause death on occasion in areas not involving the heart, but most of the time if death is going to occur by them, it will be caused because of their impact on the heart. >> and did mr. floyd have an aortic dissection? >> no. he didn't based on the autopsy. >> did he have a stroke? >> he did not have a stroke. >> to be clear for the jury with

the discussion of the narrowing of the arteries, et cetera, was there any damage at all observed to mr. floyd's heart muscle? >> based on my review of all the evidence, the ekgs, the autopsy report, i found absolutely no evidence at all of heart damage in mr. floyd's heart. >> thank you, dr. rich. [ inaudible ] >> on re-direct you were asked a question about the various the periganglioma and the coronary heart disease, high blood pressure, if any one of those can cause death independently and you answered relevant to the high blood pressure, right? but you would agree that when you combine a lot of that -- you would agree that the body is -- a lot of things are happening at the same time, right? >> yeah. >> and in combination, if you

have a periganglioma and you have an increase in the fight or flight kind of response, you've got coronary heart disease and you've got high blood pressure, all of those things could cause death, even if there was not a physical restraint? >> well, there's -- the likelihood that his paragangleoma was releasing hormone is highly unlikely. >> in terms of the combination, the drugs, high blood pressure, the increase in adrenaline from a struggle with officers, all of those things combined together, even in the absence of prone restraint, could have resulted in death, yes or no, sir? >> upon my review of the evidence and facts of the case, i found no evidence to support that.

>> fair enough. thank you. >> thank you, doctor. >> thank you. >> you are excused. >> thank you. >> we have our next witness at 1:30. we have two witnesses this afternoon. members of the jury, counsel and i have to finish up legal issues. we will break until 1:30. >> our legal panel is with us. we heard the conclusion of dr. jonathan rich's testimony. let's go first to chuck rosenberg. how did he do? how has the prosecution done as they are getting ready to finish their case today? >> i thought he did exceptionally well. he said there was, and i quote, absolutely no evidence of heart damage. one interesting thing for your viewers perhaps, andrea, when it comes to witnesses, the prosecution does not pick the witnesses who are bystanders. if a bank is robbed, the tellers

are witnesses or the people on the street corner who see the getaway car are witnesses. the prosecution is stuck with them for lack of a better word. those are the people who saw the event. they are called to testify. when it comes to experts like dr. rich, the prosecution can go anywhere and find anyone. in this case, they went to northwestern medical in chicago. they found a cardiologist who is smart, credible, experienced and articulate. you saw all of that when he was on the-- expert witnesses like that can be important. they are hired, sometimes they work for free, but they are often hired by one side or the other to tell the jury what they know. in this case, to answer your question, i thought did he an exceptional job. he did a great job on direct and he did a great job on cross.

>> joyce vance, from your experience, what is the burden now on defense? i know that the burden of proof is, of course, on the prosecution. as we have seen the drama, really, of this case, what does the defense now have to do? >> the defense can do two things here. what they would really like is to get an acquittal. that would require a unanimous jury to find that the government hasn't met its burden of proving former officer chauvin guilty. that's a heavy lift here. what also helps the defense would be what's called a hung jury. that would be one or more jurors who refuse to vote for guilt when the remainder of the jury has decided that the evidence is sufficient to do that. if the jury hangs, there's no conviction. the government can go ahead and try its case a second time. in that sense, it just kicks the can down the road for chauvin.

that would also be a better outcome for them than a conviction. but you know, chuck is absolutely right in his assessment of this expert. he has made the defense's job a lot more difficult. in that final question where he was asked to speculate a little bit about cause of death and he had to make a decision, he could have responded to the defense by saying, yes, that's theoretically possible. instead, he didn't do that. he did what a smart witness would do and he said, i examined the record and in this case, that didn't happen. cause of death is essentially asphyxiation. he was a lynchpin witness for the prosecution. >> i want to bring in meagan fitzgerald joining us now. she's been in brooklyn center which is about ten miles away. that is, of course, where we have had protests overnight, a terrible police shooting, which could or could not impact this case, this jury. they have been warned not to have anything outside influence them.

what are you hearing from police there? >> reporter: you know, i can tell you right now, to set the scene, we're outside the brooklyn center police department where we are awaiting a press conference with the police chief as well as the mayor to get more information about exactly what happened here. the situation is tense. you can see behind me here, there are police in riot gear here. some protesters have gathered. remember, this is the location where those hundreds of protesters gathered last night to protest the police-involved shooting of 20-year-old donte wright. people saying that they are tired. they are frustrated. they want to understand how a traffic stop turned into another black man being shot and killed by police. we are standing by here. any moment we are expecting to get more answers from the police chief as well as the mayor of brooklyn center. andrea? >> thanks so much. we will bring you as much of that as we can. we have been talking earlier

about the impact of these other incidents and whether or not it does create an atmosphere that the jury would consider, no matter what the warnings. chuck rosenberg said earlier that they take the warnings very seriously. what is your experience? >> i think they do take the warnings very seriously. the folks who serve on juries do take this as a civic duty. they think about it. however, does this have some impact? they are human. however, that impact goes beyond the scope of the recent incidents. these jurors have seen everything else unfold in this country since the death of george floyd, a little before and up until this point. it's just really impossible to shelter people from all this controversy regarding policing and the over policing of people of color and so forth. could it have an impact? it could. but i do believe jurors do take this as their civic duty. you think about the two incidents as opposed to -- i

agree with my colleagues -- the testimony that these jurors have been inundated with, the emotional testimony and specifically the expert witnesses, i think that testimony will outweigh any of the other outside influences. they have another week's worth of testimony, at least, to hear. i don't necessarily see a danger in that the jury will be unduly influenced. are they human? absolutely. will the judge take this into account when he charges the jury? absolutely. >> thank you so very much. thank you all. that does it for this edition of "andrea mitchell reports." follow the show online on facebook and twitter. the trial will continue, of course, this afternoon. kasie hunt will be in the chair for chuck todd up next with "mtp daily." we will see you tomorrow.

mm. [ clicks tongue ] i don't know. i think they look good, man. mm, smooth. uh, they are a little tight. like, too tight? might just need to break 'em in a little bit. you don't want 'em too loose. for those who were born to ride there's progressive. with 24/7 roadside assistance. -okay. think i'm gonna wear these home. -excellent choice.

however, the young man died at the scene. our brooklyn center officers do wear body cams. so there is body camera footage of the event. we do plan on releasing the body camera footage today. in fact, we plan to do so here. but, you know, i want to say

that our hearts are aching right now. we are in pain right now. we recognize that this couldn't have happened at a worst time. we recognize that this is happening at a time when our community, when all of america, indeed all of the world is watching our community. that we are all collectively devastated, and we have been for over a year now by the killing of george floyd. and that we continue to be distressed as we go through the derek chauvin trial. so having a police-involved shooting happen in our community and killing a young man is heartbreaking and just unfathomable. so our entire community is filled with grief at