. it is minnesota front and center as we come on the air. we are live in minneapolis with the derek chauvin murder trial about to pick back up. you see it on the left side of your screen, what could be the final day for the defence to make its case. just a few miles away, you have protesters packing brooklyn center for the fourth night. the former officer that shot and killed daunte wright, making her first court appearance later today, out on bail after second degree manslaughter. sorrow and anger on full display as people gather to remember the

20-year-old victim. >> look at him and say, oh, he needs to die. you took my brother's life for nothing. for nothing at all. >> i'm halle jackson in washington this morning. here to start us off, gabe gutierrez, morgan chess ski, former prosecutor and civil rights attorney david henderson and brittany cunningham, black lives matter and msnbc contributor. let me start with you. we are minutes away now from the defense getting ready for the final day here. what do you have about what the defense has planned? >> reporter: that's right, halle, we don't have the exact witness list, but we expect the defense to call another expert this morning. then the big question will be, will derek chauvin, himself, testify? many legal experts say it is highly unlikely. then again, this is a highly unusual case.

there are pros and cons to testifying. if he does, that opposite him up to cross examination and that could be something prosecutors would be looking forward to. on the other hand, we haven't heard his side of the story directly from him really ever scent e except for some snippets played in body camera video. that's still up in the air. after that happens, whether or not it happens, once the defense rests, the prosecution can call rebuttal witnesses. so that's all for something we are watching. the judge has indicated, though, that he would give the jury tomorrow off or part of tomorrow off. because he expects closing arguments on monday. but going back to yesterday's testimony, dr. david fowler, the former chief medical examiner from maryland, he took the witness stand. he is considered one of the key witnesses for the defense. he testified that george floyd did not die due to a lack of oxygen but for multiple other factors. take a listen to some of his

testimony. >> how did the heart and drugs contribute to the cause of death? >> they were significant. they contributed to mr. floyd having a sudden cardiac arrest, in my opinion. that's how i read it. >> reporter: of course,ing it was a very tense cross examination. the prosecution coming back swinging, trying to nail him down on several potential inconsistencies in his testimony. he also brought up that george floyd died due to multiple factors, including that drug use that he mentioned. the underlying medical conditions, but also potentially carbon monoxide .song during cross examination. the prosecution went after him for that he acknowledged that he didn't know that to be true. but we are waiting for defense testimony to resume here at this course house in just a few minutes. >> so david, as we what up for that to happen, can you give your sort of expert opinion

here, your analysis on the idea of bringing derek chauvin up? many experts that we've talked to said that probably would be something that they would recommend. we do know the defense attorney in this case has brought clients up to the stand in past instances. what's your sense? >> reporter: well, first, to be clear, what the defense is doing in terms of their presentation of this case has been ridiculous and also deeply offensive because they're directly playing on prejudices. it's hard for me to imagine calling him to the stand. if you do, it's just because you are trying to get another lone wolf juror something additional to hang their hat on the they're already inclined to acquit him or to hang this injury. the good news is if the jury hangs, at the very least, we can retry derek chauvin. with i have more fear of is the jury reaching a compromised verdict, like a manslaughter conviction where the punishment simply would not fit the crime. >> hold there for one moment, david, because i want to go to

morgan at brooklyn center where there is this concurrent situation happening, former officer kim potter set to appear in court this afternoon, talk about what we are expecting in that hearing and what have you seen on the ground there in brooklyn center? >> reporter: yeah, good morning. the one thing we expect to find out is of course the formal charges, we expect this to be a virtual meeting. we know that potter was initially turned herself in yesterday morning to the minnesota bureau of criminal apprehension. of course, that charge made official when he was filed yesterday afternoon of second degree manslaughter, carrying a maximum sentence up to ten years in the state of minnesota and as it stands right now, as far as the reception goes, we saw last night another massive protest right here in front of the brooklyn center police department. hundreds of people turning out, swelling in size until that 10-feet of curfew went into effect. we had national guard close in on this area, clearing it out

within a few minutes. one important note we didn't see last night that we saw on prior nights was the use of tear gas. it was yesterday the mayor of brooklyn center denounced the use of that, calling it inhumane when it comes to protests. so, right now, we have had a chance to hear from the family of daunte wright following those charges and they say that this isn't enough, especially in their eyes, they believe this is an intentional act whenever wright pulled that trigger filing that fatal shot killing daunte wright. >> morgan. thank you. brittany, today's court hearing, what in your view needs to happen to move forward if not in justice but to healing. >> the only thing is to prevent the things that cause us harm in the first place. we have to remember that everything we saw at brooklyn center last night happened and protesters showed up because daunte wright is dead, that there would be no need for to

protests if the police weren't killing us in the first place. so the only way to actually deal with the symptoms of this is to deal with the virus. what we saw in brooklyn center last night is precisely what we saw in ferguson six years ago, a militarized police force, occupying a residential area, treating black people like enemy combatants, even though they were simply at home in the neighboring apartment complex. i can tell you personally, that tear gas will continue to have long-lasting effects. it is a carcinogen. it can affect everything from your respiratory health to your men truly cycles and ability to get pregnant and stay pregnant. you ban tear gas in war. yet we see it on american streets simply because folks have the audacity to stand up to a system and institution that continues to render us dead. so the only way to actually heal this situation is to stop doing that. it should make perfect and clear sense to most folks.

i think that we need to recognize the brooklyn center is an example of why reform cannot be the solution only full transformation and the replace of the system that keeps harming us is the way forward. >> brittany cunningham, stand by for us. david hinderson as well. thank you. we will come back to this story. we want to get to two other news stories relevant in washington but also around the world on the foreign policy front. just a couple minutes ago, within the last couple hours this morning, the biden administration unveiled budget tough sanctions against russia in response to retaliation for moscow hack attacks, interference with our election, bounty payments to militants in afghanistan to kill american troops. in afghanistan this morning, you got a surprise visit from secretary of state tony blinken. less than 24 hours after president biden announced he is pulling back all troops there by february 11th. secretary blinken talking to reporters overseas just in the last hours. watch. >> there is a great deal of work

and planning to do in the months ahead to insure that the withdrawal is responsible, deliberate and safe. but that work is going to be matched by our enduring support for afghanistan, economically, diplomatically, politically. >> nbc is reporting on the developments. mike, on the russian sanctions, talk about what we are talking about who the targets are. >> reporter: that's right. these are significant sanctions announced by the administration after a month-long review of the russian behavior on a number of fronts. but with one important caveat they will get to in a moment. so what are we talking about in terms of the sanctions here? dozens of entities being sanctioned, including the expulsion of 10 russian officials in the u.s. embassy here as part of this. it also being addressed here, what is sometimes called the nuclear option of sanctions,

barring u.s. financial institution. that seems to be significant. now, you mentioned the range of issues here, the solar winds attacks, there are not sanctions on the russian bounty issues, a senior official we got off a call with them say because there is only low-to-moderate degrees of confidence in u.s. intelligence about that. they say that's a matter with ongoing decisions with the russians. the administration is sanctions are meant to be proportionate to russian behavior, not designed to escalate the situation. in fact, when president biden called president putin this week, he informed him of these sanction an sent him an invitation to meet in a european country to discuss the bilateral relationship going forward so perhaps maybe not helsinki but somewhere else we will see a historic meeting between the u.s. president and the russian

president. >> there is a familiar name mentioned, the fbi is asking for a reward leading to his arrest. >> that's right, $250,000 for information leading to his arrest. he is an important and central figure as these sanctions and the announcement from the administration say here in regard to the interference in our elections. that's a part of the disinformation campaign and also the alleged interaction between kilimnik and some officials linked to the trump campaign. so with what we have often heard from the democrats from the biden officials during the past years, certainly about the collusion or whether there was any, there an assessment of confidence he was behind a significant amount of that misinformation of that attempted interference in our elections. so a big name that jumped out to all of us for sure. >> indeed, live for us there, i know you will stay on too much of these developments, bring us anything as you get them.

appreciate it. coming up, more from minneapolis as he headed the 14th, potentially the last day of testimony in the derek chauvin trial. before that, a couple other things to get to. the inspector general set to testify hours from now for capitol police on his scathing report that shows police actually ignored security warnings ahead of the january 5th riots. plus, we are minutes away from a house hearing where dr. fauci and other top public health officials will talk about probably that pause in the johnson&johnson vaccine and what that means for millions of americans. you are watching halle jackson reports. don't go anywhere. ♪♪ where. ♪ place. my seminars are a great tool to help young homeowners who are turning into their parents. now, remember, they're not programs. they're tv shows. you woke up early. no one cares. yes. so, i was using something called homequote explorer from progressive to easily compare home insurance rates. was i hashtagging? progressive can't help you from becoming your parents, but we can help you compare rates on home insurance with homequote explorer.

guess what. the waiter doesn't need to know your name. guess what. kevin bacon here. you know me from six degrees of well... me. but it's time to expand. see, visible is wireless with no surprise fees, legit unlimited data, powered by verizon for as little as $25 a month. but when you bring a friend every month, you get every month for $5. so i'm bringing everyone within 12 degrees of me. bam, 12 months of $5 wireless. visible. as little as $25 a month. or $5 a month when you bring a friend. powered by verizon. wireless that gets better with friends. we started with computers. we didn't stop at computers. we didn't stop at storage or cloud. we kept going. working with our customers to enable the kind of technology that can guide an astronaut back to safety. and help make a hospital come to you, instead of you going to it. so when it comes to your business,

you know we'll stop at nothing.

in just the next couple minutes on capitol hill, dr. fauci, the cdc director and top officials will be in those chairs in front of a house subcommittee. you know that johnson&johnson pause will come up. it will stay on pause.

they say they need more time to look at the data after a seventh woman developed rare blood clots. seven women out of 7 million shots, a one in a million chance. the panel will not vote on a recommendation for at least a week. i want to bring in the dean of the new jersey school of health. great to be with you. good morning. >> good morning, thanks for having me on. >> you have i believe initially supported the pause. now you say the risk-benefit is all wrong. can you explain that and what your concern is as it relates to public trust? >> absolutely. so i did initially support the pause. i think when you don't have a lot of information, taking a moment communicating to the broader public saying we need to gather a little more data, that's all really reasonable. that's how the system works. yesterday, the advisory committee met, looked at all the data carefully, very openly, very transparently and then decided, you know what, we will punt on this another seven-to-ten days. i think that's irresponsible.

we have very clear data that they are in women 18 to 49. the part is thing would have been to say, that's the group, even though it's an incredibly low risk for them. that itself group to keep the pause on for a little longer until we gather more data. but for men and people over 50, to me, it's a no-brainer. there are lots of hard-hit communities that are not going to get a vaccine if we continue this pause. cdc/fda doesn't have to listen to this advisory committee. >> right. >> i am hoping the cdc director or the fda says let's resume vaccinating these people. >> that's my question, this is non-binding, what would that look like if they were to move on without waiting for the panel's advice? >> look, again, a lot of respect to the panel. very good people on the panel. but the fda and cdc certainly have it within their rights to say, we appreciate the input and sheer our recommendation.

they could make a more measured recommendation like opening it up for, unpausing it for men and people over 50. states also have a lot of flexibility here. states can move forward. i'd like to hear from the leadership about how they're thinking about this they're not bound by the acip recommendations. >> there are some new data from the cdc nbc news is getting this morning, identifying 5800 what are called break-through cases in this country. in other words, people who got covid after being fully vaccinated. that is far less than 1% of the 66 million who have been vaccinated. only 400 were hospitalized, 74 people died. talk to people. this seems like very good news, the low, low number of people having these break-through cases who have been vaccinated. >> yeah. there is more detail to be sorted out here.

this is very consistent with what we have seen from israel, which is a reminder these vaccines are terrific. there aren't 100%. you will see some break-through infections. >> it makes sense. i'm sorry, we have been pausing there. derek chauvin is right now being asked if he wants to take the stand. we will take you there live. >> we give you broad latitude to ask you questions. >> yes. >> we've had this conversation repeatedly, correct? >> correct. >> i have repeatedly advised you, there is your decision and your decision alone, right? >> correct. >> i have advised you and we gone back and forth on the matter would be an understatement, right? >> yes, it is. >> but after meeting last night, we had some time and discussion again? >> right. >> and have you made a decision today whether you intend to testify or whether you intend to invoke your fifth amendment privilege?

>> i will invoke my fifth amendment privilege today. >> mr. chauvin, i'm going to ask you directly because the decision whether or not to testify, let me take this off, is entirely yours. in other words, it's a personal right. mr. nelson makes a lot of the decisions in trial. but what he cannot make for you is whether or not you testify. he can give you had vice and you can take that advice or reject that advice. but the decision ultimately has to be yours and not his. is this your decision not to testify? >> it is, your honor. >> all right. do you have any questions about your right to remain silent or to testify in your own behalf? >> not at this time i don't. >> does anyone promise anything or threatened you in anyway to keep you from testifying? >> no promises or threats, your honor. >> do you feel your decision not to testify is a voluntary one on your behalf?

>> yes, it is. >> now, in addition to that, i am convinced then that this is your personal decision and that are you aware of your rights, but there is a jury instruction that may be read to the jury. this again is one you get to weigh in on. it's not for your lawyer to make the decision. again, he can give you had vice, i don't want to know what that advice s. but you can accept the advice or reject the advice as to whether or not to give this instruction. if you would like, i can read this instruction to the jury. it's titled, defendant's right not to testify. the state must convince you by evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty of the crime charged. the defendant has no obligation to prove innocence. the defendant has the right not to testify. this right is guaranteed by the federal and state constitutions. you should not draw any inference from the fact that the defendant has not testified in this case. do you understand that instruction? >> yes, your honor. >> would you like that read to the jury? >> yes, your honor.

>> have you had enough time to talk to mr. nelson about whether that's a good idea or not? >> i have, your honor. >> so i will read that to the jury on your request. >> thank you. >> all right. anything else regarding the defense case before we need to talk about rebuttal? all right. we'll have you rest in front of the jury then. we could actually take the microphone back. thank you. >> thank you. >> we'll have you rest in front of the jury, mr. nelson. with regard to the state's rebuttal, it is my understanding that the state is going to call a rebuttal witness. is that correct? >> yes. >> okay. whoever is going to speak to this, if we can kind of outline the topics and if you wanted to address formally the decision regarding this newly-discovered evidence?

[ inaudible ] >> sure. >>. >> there is a pause in the proceedings in the courtroom here. i want to bring back in, just for a quick moment, jack broouser, our nbc reporter and a legal analyst. david, significant, significant news there. there had been an open question hanging over the two weeks of this trial as to whether or not derek chauvin would testify. outside, legal experts suggested it might be best for the defense if he did not. what you shared is an exchange and there was a difference of opinion, they hashed it out over the course of many conversations, ultimately, chauvin has decided not to testify, to invoke his fifth amendment rights. david, your reaction.

>> you hit the nail on the head. that's exactly what just happened. i'm not surprised given the defense that they have chosen to mount, i think that it would have been unwise for chauvin to take the stand. you can't put your client up there. it has to be a part of an orchestrated child strategy, it's simply slinging mud at george floyd. we heard ridiculous testimony yesterday whether the exhaust from the vehicle might have contributed to george floyd's death. when he couldn't specify whether or not the vehicle was on. i am not surprised whether derek chauvin is choosing not to take the stand. the potential system would hurt him. i think the prosecution would eat him alive on cross examination. >> former prosecutor, now a civil rights attorney and kristen, it did seem like mr. nelson, the defense attorney was suggesting that perhaps

there was a difference of opinion of this. they talked about going back and forth many times. the judge made very clear as his process, he says, this is your personal decision. not a decision your defense attorney can make for you? >> absolutely. make no question. we saw throughout the trial, chauvin taking meticulous notes over and over again. a smart decision. it's very clear, he wanted to testify. it's notable. >> well, they're talking about what we understand is newly-revealed evidence and this is the prosecution now making its case. we want to listen to this. >> on may 25th of 2020. >> and when was it discovered? how was it discovered? why was it not disclosed earlier? >> it was discovered yesterday by dr. baker. and what had precipitated it, your honor, was a piece of new evidence. it was a disclosure that came

from the stand during the testimony of dr. fowler. i want to show you what it was. it was in one of the slides that your honor can see here, if i adjust the camera. and what i'm referring to, judge, is this very last meeting here on the bottom where from the stand and the slide that mr. nelson prepared was a statement that in seven minutes his hemoglobin could have increased 17%. that was a new opinion. the word does not appear in 31 pages of dr. fowler's report at all nor a discussion about the carbon hemoglobin in his blood. the concept of carbon monoxide was raised in the report, but not blood gas issues related to it. it was sort of discussed in the

same context of sort of taking drugs through the rectum and other things raised generally. not a specific reference to the content in mr. floyd's blood. dr. baker heard the testimony. had not, himself, every requested this, nor had the er physicians. they explain when somebody is brought in and blood gases are taken, there are a panel taken. the ones that get generated in the records would be the one there is a the er physicians actually request. nobody requested the carbon monoxide readings because they didn't see how that was relevant, frankly. and no one had until his testimony yesterday that was specific to the hyboxy hemoglobin said imt at 7 to 10%.

judge cahill, what everybody had access to would be the flipside of the equation. there was information on the arterial blood gascon tent that showed the blood saturation in mr. floyd's blood. the oxygen saturation was at 98%. which meant to the extent there was carbon monoxide in the blood, it was at most 2%. this was a take away dr. tobin had from this new disclosure. we disclosed that to counsel that dr. tobin could address on information everybody had available. dr. baker then addressed the flipside of it. was there a reading specifically on the carbon monoxide in light of this testimony from dr. fowler from the stand yesterday on the hemoglobin content and the slide he introduced. >> let me clarify one thing. when was the test actually gotten? >> it was run the night of may 25th when george floyd was

brought in. >> and you did subpoena all the records of hennepin county medical? >> we did subpoena the records. >> what they provided to you did not have that in it? >> that's right, your honor. >> did dr. baker call you to tell you there might be something deep? >> that's right. >> did you speak him out and ask him for his? >> we did not seek him out. he had heard the testimony and thought that this record might exist because he thought that while he was aware that there was a panel of the tests that are run by the machine and then those that would go to the er physicians would be the ones that they requested to see the values on. so. but we did not contact him. it was the other way around. >> and we're talking about carboxy hemoglobin readings. is there anything specifically about carbon monoxide concentrations?

>> the carboxy he hemoglobin w have the concentrations. it would return a value for the carbon monoxide content and show whether or not that result is in the normal range or not. that would be the reading in the readout from the test results. >> and so specifically say carbon monoxide? >> it gives the letter symbols for it. so it would, if there is a clean copy. >> what specifically does it say, if you can read it off in the record. >> it says specifically in the occimetry values it says fco and then h lower case b, 1.5% and it gives the normal range of zero

to 2.0% as the normal range. it indicates on the record also a name for mr. floyd, it would last name bronze and first name tennessee. at the time the tests were run, they didn't know it was george floyd. >> i know on dr. fowler's report disclosed to the state in february that on page 15 at the top, it says, if there was a defect in the vehicle, this gas will be present or if a person is close to the exhaust. for completeness, mr. floyd's blood co levels should be tested. so the state received that part of dr. fowler's report in february. is that correct? >> that's correct, your honor. >> anything else mr. blackwell before i turn to mr. nelson? >> your honor, no, nothing further. >> mr. nelson.

>> mr. nelson. >> thank you, judge. yes, for the record in terms of rebuttal, a couple things i would like to address. first is this new information i received. i would for the record indicate i received these test results at 7:53 this morning. as i understand it, dr. fouler is on an airplane and having some difficulty reaching him at this particular moment. i have spoken with other people from the forensics panel. they are looking into these things. nevertheless, your honor, the point of this is that this issue was specifically raised as the court points out back on february 22nd, some 20-some odd days. in the or 40-some, 60 days, i don't even know how long it's been. i'm a little time-deprived at this point. the point being is that the state has had more than sufficient notice. dr. fowler is opining that this

could have played a role in his report. he says and suggests that for completeness, it should have been tested or should be tested. the state retained and continues to retain any blood samples. they are not within the control of the defense. the state has had ample opportunity to rebut any suggestion. as far as the -- as far as the information relevant to mr. blackwell references in terms of the oxygen levels, the 98% oxygen levels, what dr. fowler testified to yesterday was how you can't rely on the oxygen levels because it's the carbon monoxide binds to the oxygen and it can give a false reading. you need this hyboxy testing, so the bottom line is, is that this

is information that has been within the state's control. the state has had ample notice that this could have played a part of dr. fowler's testimony. it is incredibly prejudicial to the defense at this point now after dr. fowler has testified and left the state to bring forth evidence. again, the jury being the tryer of the fact, dr. fowler was pretty clear, he was not saying this was the cause of death. he simply is opining that it wasn't considered by the state and apparently it was considered to be a ridiculous concept by the state of minnesota that didn't, they didn't think to test it. since this trial has started in addition to this new evidence, the state has had multiple conversations with a city employee about the vehicle, itself. they've gone and taken pictures of the vehicle. again, all of this, they've had ample opportunity to do. but this is what they're doing in the middle of trial.

even though they've known for a long time that this was an issue. i do have, i did receive also last evening a summary of dr. tobin's anticipated rebuttal points that i, three of the four points do i not see as proper rebuttal. we can address that later. >> well, let's address that now. i'll ask the state to respond. >> sure. >> to something other than your carbon monoxide issue. >> yes. so last night i received a one-page -- a one-page memorandum referencing a conference that they had with dr. tobin. it's date stamped 50417. they identify four areas of potential rebuttal. the first being that dr. tobin will testify regarding the significance of the hyboxic changes from the physiology and

clinical standpoint, including his conclusion that the procedure is not indicative of a primary cardiac event based on the time line of significant events. i believe that dr. tobin has already extensively testified as to the -- his opinion of the significance of the anoxic seizure. that formed a large basis of his testimony and how he concluded that. now the fact that there is a differing opinion, that it's a cardiac event instead of a hypoxic event is, that's the nature. again, the state has had ample notice. this is not rebutting. it's just simply re-introducing what dr. tobin has already testified to extensively. >> well, my recollection of dr. fowler's testimony is that he agreed it's a hypoxic

reaction, but it's just a mechanism. i think we were talking about the mechanism due to tra terrible asphyxia versus cardiac arrhythmia. i think they all agreed it was a seizure as a reaction to hypoxia. >> agreed, your honor, the mechanism of what dr. tobin has extensively testified to right. and the fact that dr. fowler had a different opinion, this is not proper rebuttal because it's already been testified to at length. what the mechanism of the seizure was has already been omeaned by dr. tobin. >> okay. >> the second area that dr. tobin has indicateds he said dr. tobin will testify regarding the scientific research supportive of his analysis that showed thousand hypopharynx has

been narrowed. i believe he testified as to the narrowing of the hypopharynx. whatever this research is, i have been provided with a single journal article relevant to the treatment of covid patients that was provided to me last night as well. if it's limited to that single article, i guess that concan be construed to be every day. again, dr. tobin extensively testified to his view of the narrowing of the hypopharynx. >> you have been listening to the defense attorney eric nelson go through several of the pre-trial motions ahead of the defense resting the case once the jury comes into the room. let's recap here and make sure we're on the same page in the last ten minutes. the most significant piece of it, derek chauvin saying he is going to choose not to testify.

he will invoke his fifth amendment right. you heard the prosecution wants to bring somebody back up to the stand to discuss something brought up yesterday when one of the defense witnesses testified about the potential, the carbon monoxide may have played a role in george floyd's death, really the first time in this entire trial, this subject or that notion has been brought up. is that is what this book and forth centers in on now. i want to bring in our analysts and experts here. shaq broou brewster. what is the defense trying to do? it seems they are making their case, a rths to the judge? >> that's exactly right. if you want someone to drop the mic in this case, you want it to be dr. tobin or the exceptional experts that the state has called to present evidence to the jury in this case. the defense does not want that

to happen, understandably. here's the real problem that led to this here's what you do when you don't do your home. derek blackwell is used to questioning industrial hygienists, tocologyists and doctors. he's used to cross-examining them. you get someone like fowler on the stand and he spouts out information that's not correct or inaccurate, blackwell will be able to pick up on it and rebut it. so nelson is craming scrambling to prevent that from doing so. he's wise to do so. >> as to the evidence they want to introduce here. what jerry blackwell is saying that the hennepin county, somebody works for the hennepin county medical office, dr. baker, he performed the autopsy on george floyd, reached out after watching the testimony from dr. fowler yesterday to say you might want to take a look at

something here. do you think based on that, that that will be persuasive to judge cahill? >> i think it's going to be tough. remember, a prosecutor is only allowed to put in rebuttal evidence if it is new evidence, a new witness that will contradict the defendant's evidence. they can't retry their case all over again. and that's kind of why the judge was looking to expert report. did the prosecution have ample notice that this issue could come up or dr. fowler could have testified such that they could have initiated it initially. i think it will be tough based on the way the judge is responding to some of the arguments made by mr. nelson. i do think it's worthy to bring up. as david alluded to, dropping that mic on dr. tobin would be a phenomenal way for the prosecution to rest and close

out the trial. >> is there any speculation in your mind that perhaps the carbon monoxide argument was persuasive to the jury? there was a lot of back and forth yesterday. i know it's central to the newly introduced evidence that jerry blackwell would like introduced? >> absolutely not. i think david alluded to this earlier. i think blackwell did a phenomenal job cross examining dr. fowler on this point. he didn't know if the car was running. there was no testing to see whether or not carbon monoxide was in mr. floyd's blood. more importantly, it was chauvin who placed mr. floyd there such that if there was any oxygen jeppry vacation that would have resulted from such exhaust, it would certainly look like that was a contributing factor put in place by claump. >> mr. blackwell calling it, in

his line of his cross examination of dr. fowler yesterday. shaq, let me go to you on next steps here. the pre-trial motions, it's technical. we want to make sure what is happening next. the jury, it's important for people to know. the jury is not not room? they're going to come in later once these pre-trial motions are over. a in that case, the defense will rest in front of the jury. >> that's exactly right. we should score derek chauvin will not have the looming question we went into today with, that we are wondering whether or not derek chauvin will take the stand. we got an answer early this morning, that he will not take the stand. we got the idea the defense will rest their case. we knew yesterday, there was one more witness they were planning to call. the judge said there was one more person there after a sidepar because it would have run over time, they pushed that

person to this morning. we are not going to see from that witness or hear from that witness based on what we heard from the judge and from eric nelson today. so there is something can be read into that. after calling dr. fowler yesterday, there was some level of confidence you see there in him not calling the witness scheduled to testify yesterday. we also know this idea of the new evidence and this goes to that long conversation in both direct examination and in cross examination yesterday over the carbon monoxide. the idea that when george floyd was pinned to the ground by the exhaust of the car, that he some how much was poisoned, somehow that was a contribute to his death. based on the report, that was something jurors did take note of. it was something relatively new and that specific of an accusation to come from a defense witness or any witness

that has taken the stand. so it seems to have had some impact in terms of jurors noting that. you see the defense trying to introduce this new evidence based on what they said was a call from the medical examiner dr. baker. a call from the medical examiner saying they had some evidence, some of that blood essentially that showed readings that there was a carbon monoxide concentration not as fatal or dangerous as dr. fowler is suggesting. this new evidence is argued for submission. so a lot of new things happening. as you mentioned the judge or the jury is not in the courtroom. they are not seeing any of these proceedings. but these proceedings are important. because it determines what the jury will see once they are called back into that courtroom. >> we should note the prosecution is arguing a rebuttal witness, dr. tobin.

let me bring you into your reaction to what we have been seeing. >> i think it's important to always have these conversations, to your point, halle, in context and the context of what we are seeing in this courtroom and what we have seen for the last few days in brooklyn center was the killing of daunte wright bears needing to understand that context. in 2013, the state invested $12 billion and put new members, including black law enforcement on that board to insure police across the state were better trained in dealing with people of color. if you go back even further than that, the concept of community policing has this idea that trust can be built between communities of color, black communities in particular and the police. just last year in 2020, the star tribune in minneapolis, wrote about brooklyn center as a quote

model for police reform across the state. because they were doing things like investing in community liaisons and multi-cultural affairs liaisons to build yet again that trust. trust was never the insure. black people are not trusting. the issue is that institution is irredeemable and not performable. so all the money and time that they spent in dealing in trying to report this institution still resulted in the deaths of floyd, and daunte wright. the context is no matter what ultimate happens in this courtroom, there is still a separate issue to deal with. so whether you are a lawyer or not and understand these details or not, there is a greater sconce stux at hand and george floyd took from us to be taking on. [ inaudible ]

. >> brittany cunningham, thank you. we want to listen into the discussion over this rebuttal witness goes on. it seems the judge may be getting close to ruling here. let's listen. >> all right. first of all in dealing with these lab test results, i find that dr. fowler's report gave sufficient notice the carbon monoxide that potentially was in george floyd's blood could have acted cause of death. i read page 15 of his report, which i don't have at my fingertips at this point, that basically they said, dr. fowler came out and said it should be tested. that gave the state notice with sufficient time in february to either test the samples that are still there or to dig a little deeper. it's just by serendipity that dr. baker calls the city and

says, oh, by the way, it does exist. it should be in there. it seems to me very odd. i'm not calling any bad faith on the state's part. it seems me odd when the hennepin county medical record when they are asked to turn over the records, they don't include records that are deeper. i think their response to the subpoena was probably insufficient in and of itself. they should check their standard operating procedure so in the event this happens again that they will supply all the information they have. in any case, the defense gave notice this was going to be an issue and specifically talked about testing the sample. the state had sufficient time to investigate and disclose to even if it's just because dr. baker called and said, we can find this at 8:00 this morning, when the state -- or the defense expert is done testifying, has

left the state, it's untimely to give the notice. it prejudices the defense. the late disclosure has prejudiced. dr. tobin will not testify as to the lab results. if there's anything as far as environmental factors. but if he hints there are test results the jury has not heard about, it's going to be a mistrial. pure and simple. this late disclosure is not the way we should be operating here. in that case, dr. tobin may testify as to carbon monoxide if he sticks to the environmental factors and as a pulmonologists and looking at the videos.

all those factors you can talk about environmentally and what the likelihood is it would affect his carbon monoxide concentration in mr. floyd's blood, that's fine. but nothing about the lab test results that were disclosed 8:00 a.m. this morning after the defense expert is done. with regard to -- i have a little concern that we're having a pumonologist opine whether it's an enlarged heart or not. given his background, which as i think mr. blackwell stated, is a cardiopulmonary system, it's a system and i think he has some expertise in the function of the heart and its relation to the lungs, and so i think it is appropriate that he be allowed to opine whether or not the heart was enlarged or not, based

on those studies. specifically, responding to those studies. as far as the scientific research, the defense did bring up as a new issue whether or not narrowing of the hypopharynx is supported in the literature. dr. fowler said he didn't find anything. i think it's permissible dr. tobin be allowed to say, since dr. fowler's testimony, he's done his own search or he relied on this and there is literature and he can talk about the literature in a summary fashion. with regard to the hypoxic seizure, it was clear from dr. tobin's testimony that he had an opinion that there were movements of george floyd's legs, that those were seizures due to the lack of oxygen. dr. fowler did not really dispute that. he also indicated that it was a lack of oxygen to the brain that causes such seizures.

the only difference between the two was the mechanism. did the lack of oxygen -- was that caused by positional asphyxia versus cardiac arrhythmia? as i recall, dr. tobin excluded cardiac arrhythmia as the cause of the lack of oxygen. since he has excluded cardiac as the cause of the lack of oxygen, that evidence is in the record. i don't have to remind both sides that the purpose of rebuttal evidence is not to restate what has been testified to. it's to bring up new evidence to rebu something that came up in the other side's case. as to the hypoxic seizure, that's not going to be allowed. scientific research supporting hypopharynx narrowing will be allowed. lab tests are not allowed to be

discussed. dr. tobin can talk about carbon monoxide and the likelihood of a high reading based on environmental factors if he wishes. that was gone into great extent. finally, the reports. he may opine whether in his opinion george floyd's heart was enlarged or not. do we have the ground rules set? >> your honor, one question for clarification. on the carbon monoxide, there were test results that existed before the ones that are at issue from last night/this morning. what dr. tobin -- these relate to the oxygen saturation. that was known before last night. i haven't talked to dr. tobin this morning about what he is going to say or when. i might ask the court for a few minutes before we start. what he was able to come to last

night without seeing anything at all related to the test results at issue was we had the results already. both sides do. on the oxygen saturation in his blood from may 25, 2020. >> let me ask you this, is his opinion that when the oxygen saturation levels are this high that precludes this because a high carbon monoxide reading would depress the saturated oxygen? >> that's correct. they would be inversely related. high oxygen saturation -- >> would indicate a low carbon monoxide? >> yes. >> mr. nelson? >> your honor, as i understood dr. fowler's testimony, at lower levels of carbon monoxide, because the pulse oxioximeter -

>> this is the cherry red testimony? >> right. >> i think it's appropriate cross. if that's dr. tobin's opinion that the oxygen saturation reads which have been disclosed earlier would indicate a low carbon monoxide reading because they are inversely proportional, it's appropriate to say those readings are based on pulse ox, color of the blood and color of the fingernail and the cherry red, it's appropriate cross. it does not preclude the state from recalling dr. tobin for that purpose. >> that's the clarification, your honor. thank you. >> that would be permitted. anything else before -- you want a few minutes to talk to dr. tobin? >> if i may, your honor. >> why don't we start at 10:00? i assume he is close by. you can do it quickly, mr.

blackwell. >> i was hoping for a few moments. >> i think since the defense is going to rest and you will proceed to dr. tobin -- are you calling anyone else? >> no one else. if we can have until 10:15. >> 10:15 it is. 10:15, we will reconvene. thank you. >> you have been watching the judge make a ruling on some of the motions, some of the proceedings brought up in the murder trial of derek chauvin. we know, just a couple of minutes before 11:00 eastern time, that the -- derek chauvin will not testify. he has chosen not to testify. in 15 minutes, we will see the jury come back in the room and proceedings begin again. the defense will rest. prosecution will bring in a rebuttal witness, dr. tobin, to testify to some of what was brought up by the defense's expert witness as it relates to carbon monoxide and the suggestion that that may have contributed to the death of george floyd. let me quickly bring back in

kristin who is joining us along with david. both people with expertise in the legal field. what do we expect when the jury comes back in the room, when the witness testimony begins, how effective do you think dr. tobin's testimony could be? >> this is a huge win, i think, for the prosecution. the state may have lost some of the battles in that argument, but they certainly won the war. they're going to get the last word with their very best witness, dr. tobin, who was absolutely effective, very credible and his testimony will be limited. the state will end with a bang. >> david, 30 seconds. final thoughts to you. >> tobin gets to drop the mike. he's to be careful what he says before he says it. the reason this happens is because this group of experts is the dream team. they are allowed to watch the trial, unlike other witnesses. they have been watching. they gave blackwell advice. he took it.

what you heard is true. they won the day with regard to closing out this case. >> thank you both so much. i appreciate your time. we have more coverage starting right now as we wait for the jury to come back in the room in 15 minutes with my colleague jeff bennett picking it up right here on msnbc. good thursday morning to you. i'm jeff bennett if for my friend craig melvin. we have have been watching what could be the final day of testimony in the murder trial of derek chauvin. this may be the most momentous day in this high profile trial. right now, a 15-minute break. there have been three substantial headlines. first and foremost, derek chauvin will not testify in his own defense. before the jury entered the courtroom, he announced he is invoking his fifth amendment right. second, the defense is resting its case.

third, judge