George Floyd/Protests/Peace/Riots/Chaos

Joined
May 18, 2018
Messages
4,046
Every single death ends in cardiopulmonary arrest and asphyxiation. It’s literally the definition of death itself! You don’t get it. You’re either making up assumptions or parroting misinformation.
Ends in asphyxiation is different than caused by asphyxiation.
 
Joined
Apr 12, 2017
Messages
2,024
That's nice. Of course, that is not what doctor baker found caused George Floyd's cardiac arrest, but thats a cool little sentence
It’s because asphyxia is not necessarily even mentioned in cause of death even if it was a factor. It’s completely redundant. The cause of asphyxia needs to be mentioned instead, not just “asphyxia” alone with no cause given, such as drowning, choking, aspiration, a knee to the neck, etc. In many cases asphyxia goes without saying, for example when your neck is being compressed by someone’s knee.
 
Joined
May 18, 2018
Messages
4,046
It’s because asphyxia is not necessarily even mentioned in cause of death even if it was a factor. It’s completely redundant. The cause of asphyxia needs to be mentioned instead, not just “asphyxia” alone with no cause given, such as drowning, choking, aspiration, etc. In many cases asphyxia goes without saying, for example when your neck is being compressed by someone’s knee.
Hypothetically perhaps. But of course, that was not doctor bakers finding, hence he didnt mention it on the report and only in his testimony to say there was no symptoms found showing asphyxiation or death by lack of oxygen, and he didn't believe that caused his death.

The prosecution made a different medical case, which you seem to be switching to now, that he died because of asphyxia from the knee. However, we know this is medically and scientifically impossible because George Floyds blood oxygen saturation was at 98%, he hadnt depleted any of his oxygen reserves. So we're back to square one what I was talking about originally. Are we going to come full circle? Like i said, just stick to the emotions and name calling like you were before, thats what the prosecution did, and that is where the strength of the accusation is. Not the medical findings.
 
Joined
Apr 12, 2017
Messages
2,024
Hypothetically perhaps. But of course, that was not doctor bakers finding, hence he didnt mention it on the report and only in his testimony to say there was no symptoms found showing asphyxiation or death by lack of oxygen, and he didn't believe that caused his death.

The prosecution made a different medical case, which you seem to be switching to now, that he died because of asphyxia from the knee. However, we know this is medically and scientifically impossible because George Floyds blood oxygen saturation was at 98%, he hadnt depleted any of his oxygen reserves. So we're back to square one what I was talking about originally. Are we going to come full circle? Like i said, just stick to the emotions and name calling like you were before, thats what the prosecution did, and that is where the strength of the accusation is. Not the medical findings.
Here’s the thing... I tend to believe autopsy results over expert witnesses. Dr Baker was very clear that being restrained was the main factor that led to his heart and lungs stopping.

Also, the very same pulmonologist who testified about the 98% hemoglobin concentration also made it very clear that his opinion was that George had died from a lack of oxygen, and he only brought up hemoglobin concentration in order to refute the possibility of carbon monoxide poisoning from car exhaust that another expert had theorized about, so.... not exactly the clincher you think it is. Maybe you’re not getting accurate information. It seems like you’re just repeating the same misinformation as everyone else.
 
Joined
May 18, 2018
Messages
4,046
I tend to believe autopsy results over expert witnesses. Dr Baker was very clear that being restrained was the main factor that led to his heart and lungs stopping.
I completely agree. Dr Baker said that his heart gave out because of the stress of the encounter due to its predisposition to illness (having three independent issues which could cause sudden death on their own). Dr Baker did not agree with the other expert witnesses.
Also, the very same pulmonologist who testified about the 98% hemoglobin concentration also made it very clear that his opinion was that George had died from a lack of oxygen, and he only brought up hemoglobin concentration in order to refute the possibility of carbon monoxide poisoning from car exhaust that another expert had theorized about, so.... not exactly the clincher you think it is.
Listen man. I know youre probably not trying hard to understand this, youre just typing some stuff up for fun one afternoon which is why I keep repeating the same thing. Listen to me ok, actually read this.

-That witness spent his entire testimony claiming he died from lack of oxygen, asphyxiation
-He claimed to know from looking at the video the exact second that "George Floyd did not have one ounce of oxygen left in his body", exact quote.
-He came back to refute another expert who said carbon monoxide could play a role
-He said it couldn't have, because George Floyds blood oxygen saturation was at 98% when he died.
-Asphyxia, or hypoxia, death caused by lack of oxygen causes the blood oxygen saturation to deplete to 30%, in a matter of minutes, which causes death.
-He refuted his entire testimony and the case of the prosecution, because they wanted him to testify about some other results, but the judge wouldnt allow it. Last minute, thats what he said. It refuted the one point about CO, but also completely undermined the case of the prosecution.He did not die from lack of oxygen, but a cardiac arrhythmia. Hence his heart was affected and not his blood O2, and there was no signs in the brain of lack of oxygen, the first organ to show these signs

It corroberated with the rest of the medical findings. There were no symptoms of hypoxic changes in the brain, no evidence of death by lack of oxygen. He died with blood completely saturated with oxygen, which supports doctor bakers finding that his heart gave out due to being medically capable of surviving the encoutter.

This is why it is medically impossible that george floyd died due to the reason the prosecution claimed, lack of oxygen and asphyxiation. They needed to make this the cause because it was the only way to say Chauvin was liable. However, it is medically impossibel due to the findings. Dr bakers findings and testimony were true and derek chauvin was not guilty for the charges of murder. Of course, this not so subtle nuace makes no difference to a jury who are listening to loudspeakers outside saying vote guilty or we burn this city down. Its a lot easier to side with the emotion.

So again, the emotion is what has accusatory strength for the future. If you want to argue this with others somewhere else, thats where you should focus, given that I know that facts wont change your mind. Just stick to emotions, namecalling, grandstanding, that works really well for this case. The medical findings, not at all
 
Joined
Apr 12, 2017
Messages
2,024
Dr Baker was very clear that he did not suffocate. This doesn’t mean that slightly low oxygen did not cause his heart failure. Do you understand that blood oxygen is extremely important for someone with a multitude of heart problems? 98% for someone like George is more dangerous than it is for someone with a healthy heart.

His blood flow was already restricted by a bad heart, which means his organs were already struggling to receive enough oxygen in the first place. What happens when you restrict the blood flow even more via neck compression? His heart was obviously going to fail due to not receiving enough oxygen way before he ever had a chance to suffocate.

His heart failure still would be technically caused by insufficient oxygen reaching his organs, however. Dr Baker was very careful, and made sure to speak precisely. It doesn’t mean what you think it means.
 
Joined
May 18, 2018
Messages
4,046
Do you understand that blood oxygen is extremely important for someone with a multitude of heart problems? 98% for someone like George is more dangerous than it is for someone with a healthy heart.
98% is above normal. 95% is normal. It’s incredible seeing you be able to just make stuff up out of thin air
His blood flow was already restricted by a bad heart, which means his organs were already struggling to receive enough oxygen in the first place. What happens when you restrict the blood flow even more via neck compression? His heart was obviously going to fail due to not receiving enough oxygen way before he ever had a chance to suffocate.
There was no signs of anything you just said in dr bakers report, you are just speculating. I know you will never accept the medical facts as they are, you need to twist and turn to figure out how someone with 98% oxygen could have suffocated without any signs of suffocation while the medical examiner wrote on the report that his heart simply gave out because it was medically incapable of continuing due to stress, hypertension, severe arteriosclerosis and drug use and didn’t say anything about lack of oxygen. I understand man, I feel for you. I hope you find a way to rationalize this to yourself, sadly, it’s not going to be through medical findings. I proposed sticking to emotion and name calling, I’m not sure what else you can try.
 
Joined
Apr 12, 2017
Messages
2,024
Maybe @lightseeker would like to explain why a second degree murder conviction is inappropriate?

The judge even clarified the second degree charge: “It is not necessary for the state to prove the defendant had an intent to kill Floyd. But it must prove that the defendant committed, or attempted to commit, the underlying felony,” (the felony being third degree assault)
98% is above normal. 95% is normal.

There was no signs of anything you just said in dr bakers report, you are just speculating. I know you will never accept the medical facts as they are, you need to twist and turn to figure out how someone with 98% oxygen could have suffocated without any signs of suffocation while the medical examiner wrote on the report that his heart simply gave out because it was medically incapable of continuing due to stress, hypertension, severe arteriosclerosis and drug use and didn’t say anything about lack of oxygen. I understand man, I feel for you. I hope you find a way to rationalize this to yourself, sadly, it’s not going to be through medical findings. I proposed sticking to emotion and name calling, I’m not sure what else you can try.
Nope. 95% is low. Normal hemoglobin percentage is 14 to 18 g/dL for an adult male. That converts to 100% to about 125% I don’t know where you’re getting your information, but it’s not accurate.
 
Joined
Apr 12, 2017
Messages
2,024
Besides, 98% oxygen level isn’t necessarily sufficient for someone with multiple heart conditions. My grandmother was put on oxygen supplementation after an emergency surgery just to keep her oxygen over 112% at all times because her organs would struggle if it dropped any lower.
 
Joined
May 18, 2018
Messages
4,046
Maybe @lightseeker would like to explain why a second degree murder conviction is inappropriate?

The judge even clarified the second degree charge: “It is not necessary for the state to prove the defendant had an intent to kill Floyd. But it must prove that the defendant committed, or attempted to commit, the underlying felony,” (the felony being third degree assault)
here is a logical step by step process
1) George Floyd dies while Derek is pacifcying him with a knee hold.
2) Is the pacification method approved by the police and was taught to Derek in the Police accademy? Yes it was, and it is prefformed by other policemen. The ethics of this method ARE NOT a factor here at the moment.
3) Was the pacification method preformed incorrectly? No, it was not.
4) Did the pacification method cause the damage to the person leading to his death? (suffocation , neck injuiry?) This is the MOST importnat question and based on the coroners report the answer is no.
5) Was the death influenced by the pacification method? Unclear - you very easily argue that the cardiac arrest happend due to the stress overall not the particularity of the method, which is of course the medical finding. But even if the method was a factor - if 4) is true - this is irrelevant.
 
Last edited:
Joined
May 18, 2018
Messages
4,046
Besides, 98% oxygen level isn’t necessarily sufficient for someone with multiple heart conditions. My grandmother was put on oxygen supplementation after an emergency surgery just to keep her oxygen over 112% at all times because her organs would struggle if it dropped any lower.
It does not matter. If the death was caused by low oxygen, there would be certain symptoms which would follow, showing that was the cause of death. There was not, meaning this is pure speculation and nothing else
 
Joined
Apr 12, 2017
Messages
2,024
Was the death influenced by the pacification method? Unclear - you very easily argue that the cardiac arrest happend due to the stress overall not the particularity of the method, which is of course the medical finding. But even if the method was a factor - if 4) is true - this is irrelevant.
That’s generally not considered legally sufficient for an acquittal of second degree murder charges. The fact remains that Chauvin’s actions led to Floyd’s heart stopping, as Dr Baker made very clear.

The only relevant question is this one: Did Chauvin attempt to commit third degree assault? That’s the only thing that needed to be proven, and absolutely nothing else matters in the eyes of the law. If this can be proven, then the second degree murder charge is applicable.
 

justjess

Superstar
Joined
Mar 16, 2017
Messages
11,510
When they start changing the subject, I know i've won that topic. its already happened on about 4 topics so Im way up on the scoreboard. Not that this is some competition. Its a political lynching of an innocent man and is the destruction of justice and truth in america led by nitwits who dont have the interest of actually examining the evidence and who feel good about their little justice campaigns against people they dont know, and media who needs clicks and loves stoking on the mob
YOU changed the topic, I responded to your pivot. Nice try.
 
Joined
May 18, 2018
Messages
4,046
That’s generally not considered legally sufficient for an acquittal of second degree murder charges. The fact remains that Chauvin’s actions led to Floyd’s heart stopping, as Dr Baker made very clear.

The only relevant question is this one: Did Chauvin attempt to commit third degree assault? That’s the only thing that needed to be proven, and absolutely nothing else matters in the eyes of the law. If this can be proven, then the second degree murder charge is applicable.
He didn’t commit assault because he stayed within the police policies, and police testified that he was justified in using more force than he did. Some boomer prosecution cop said he could’ve punched him in the face. He could’ve used a taser. He was justified in using a “conscious neck restraint”. So no, it’s not assault for an officer to do what they are permitted within the bounds of the law.
as to the second point, he needed to be a substantial cause in the death, while knowing he could inflict great bodily harm. Is an officer intending to afflict great bodily harm if they called an ambulance? If this restraint is taught to them as a non lethal form of defense? If it’s been peer review studied, and there was not found a single case of prone restraint causing death? If in another study, they found there was no danger in that method? That charge is for someone shooting into a crowd, or driving on the wrong side of the road, knowingly doing something that they know could kill someone. Chauvin didn’t know that Floyd had hypertension that could kill him, arteriosclerosis that could kill him, fentynol that could kill him, he didn’t know what was going on, he arrived on the scene where rookies couldn’t get ahold of Floyd, so they restrained him and called an ambulance, his heart unfortunately gave out before it got there. So no, the charge does not fit at all, in either sense. And for the charge to fit, every single article of the charge must be proven beyond s reasonable doubt. Even if one was proven, if another line or word does not fit, it’s a not guilty verdict under the law.
 
Joined
Apr 12, 2017
Messages
2,024
He didn’t commit assault because he stayed within the police policies, and police testified that he was justified in using more force than he did. Some boomer prosecution cop said he could’ve punched him in the face. He could’ve used a taser. He was justified in using a “conscious neck restraint”. So no, it’s not assault for an officer to do what they are permitted within the bounds of the law.
as to the second point, he needed to be a substantial cause in the death, while knowing he could inflict great bodily harm. Is an officer intending to afflict great bodily harm if they called an ambulance? If this restraint is taught to them as a non lethal form of defense? If it’s been peer review studied, and there was not found a single case of prone restraint causing death? If in another study, they found there was no danger in that method? That charge is for someone shooting into a crowd, or driving on the wrong side of the road, knowingly doing something that they know could kill someone. Chauvin didn’t know that Floyd had hypertension that could kill him, arteriosclerosis that could kill him, fentynol that could kill him, he didn’t know what was going on, he arrived on the scene where rookies couldn’t get ahold of Floyd, so they restrained him and called an ambulance, his heart unfortunately gave out before it got there. So no, the charge does not fit at all, in either sense. And for the charge to fit, every single article of the charge must be proven beyond s reasonable doubt. Even if one was proven, if another line or word does not fit, it’s a not guilty verdict under the law.
Intent is not necessary for a second degree murder conviction. You’re thinking of first degree.
 
Top