First defense witnesses testify in Chauvin trial
Witnesses included a retired officer who had arrested George Floyd in 2019 and a use-of-force expert.
MINNEAPOLIS – The prosecution rested its case Tuesday and the defense began calling its witnesses to the stand in the murder trial of former police officer Derek Chauvin, charged in George Floyd’s death.
Barry Brodd, a former police officer and defense use-of-force expert who trained officers for 35 years, told jurors Chauvin was “justified” in his use of force – the first witness to make the statement.
“I felt that Officer Chauvin’s interactions with Mr. Floyd were following his training, following current practices in policing, and objectively reasonable,” Brodd said.
Several Minneapolis police officers, including the police chief, along with local police trainers and national use-of-force experts, have testified for the prosecution that Chauvin’s actions were not justified.
The defense argues Floyd’s hypertensive heart disease and ingestion of meth and fentanyl, together with the struggle with police, led him to suffer from heart strain and die during the arrest in May. Prosecutors countered by openly discussing Floyd’s health problems as well as the drugs in his system.
Chauvin is charged with second-degree murder, third-degree murder and second-degree manslaughter.
Acted with ‘reasonableness’
Brodd, the use-of-force expert, provided a counterpoint for the jury after several prosecution witnesses. “I felt that Derek Chauvin was justified, acting with reasonableness,” he said.
Brodd testified in the 2018 trial of Chicago Police Officer Jason Van Dyke, who was charged in the shooting of 17year-old Laquan McDonald in 2014. Brodd testified that the use of force against McDonald was justified. Van Dyke was later found guilty of seconddegree murder.
People under the influence of drugs “may not be hearing what you are telling them to do,” Brodd said. They may go from compliance to extreme noncompliance “in a heartbeat,” he said.
Brodd said it was “objectively reasonable” for Chauvin and the other officers to use the level of force they exerted when they tried to put Floyd into the back of the patrol car because Floyd was resisting. He said he based his opinion on his study of various videos.
The law enforcement definition is that two or more people constitute a crowd, Brodd testified. He said the crowd watching the police struggle with Floyd grew in size and became more vocal. “I could see that Mr. Chauvin’s focus started to move from Mr. Floyd to the crowd,” Brodd testified.
He said the level of force the officers used to place Floyd on the ground was also “objectively reasonable,” though he added: “I don’t consider a prone control as a use of force.”
“It’s safer for the suspect and the officer to keep him in that prone control,” even if that person were under the influence of drugs or other substances, he said. He said such a person could aspirate and choke if placed on her or his back.
Brodd acknowledged the Minneapolis Police Department trains officers to move suspects from the prone position to a side recovery position as soon as possible to avoid breathing difficulties.
During cross-examination, prosecutor Steve Schleicher got Brodd to acknowledge that the combination of Chauvin’s knees, body weight and police gear “could” cause pain and be considered a use of force. That answer contradicted Brodd’s testimony under direct examination.
Schleicher also drew acknowledgement from Brodd that a reasonable police officer would follow the training of her or his police department, and that a suspected passing of a phony $20 bill would be considered a low-level offense regarding police use of force.
“You can’t use force on someone just because they’re large, true?” Schleicher asked. “Correct,” Brodd said.
Prosecutors return to video
Brodd repeatedly responded “yes” when Schleicher asked whether a reasonable officer should take note that a suspect appeared to have passed out, stopped breathing and did not have a pulse, then adjust his or her use of force accordingly.
Schleicher’s line of questioning allowed the prosecution to replay, yet again, audio and video of Floyd struggling and saying he could not breathe. Brodd acknowledged that Floyd’s cries “could” mean he faced a threat of positional asphyxia.
“And in that context, a reasonable officer would at least acknowledge and consider that possibility that what they’re doing is causing a problem, wouldn’t they?” Schleicher asked.
“It appeared to me with that video that he was still struggling,” Brodd said.
“Struggling or writhing?” Schleicher asked.
“I don’t know the difference,” Brodd said.
Minneapolis Police Officer Nicole Mackenzie, a previous witness for the prosecution, gave defense testimony to show what the officers who arrested Floyd had been trained to do.
Mackenzie said training about excited delirium is given to officers in the Minneapolis Police Academy. But there was no evidence that Chauvin, a veteran officer, received such training.
Mackenzie said trainers teach that someone who has excited delirium may be incoherent or removing their clothing because they are hot and sweating. She also testified that the person may be confused, unable to respond to commands and exhibit far higher than normal strength. The training recommends that emergency medical service assistance should be requested early for such a person.
She said police officers typically may need to “get more resources.”
Prosecutor Matthew Frank weaponized the cross-examination. He drew Mackenzie’s agreement that the officers failed to do cardiopulmonary resuscitation or turn Floyd from his stomach onto his side so he could breathe more easily – as taught in the Minneapolis Police Department’s training for someone who may be exhibiting excited delirium.
Earlier Tuesday, retired police officer Scott Creighton testified so the defense could show Floyd’s behavior during a police stop in 2019. The defense introduced video that showed Floyd resisting Creighton’s commands to show his hands and keep them on the dashboard. Floyd repeatedly asked officers not to shoot or beat him up, the video showed.
Creighton and other officers ultimately got Floyd out of the car. Responding to cross-examination questions by prosecutor Erin Eldridge, Creighton said Floyd seemed incoherent.
“It’s safer for the suspect and the officer to keep him in that prone control.”
Barry Brodd
former police officer