And the pressure that he was that was being caused by the body weight to cause positional asphyxia which could cause death. Is positional asphyxia a known risk in Law Enforcement . Yes, it is. Lounge have dangers of positional asphyxia been known . At least 20 years. Mr. Nelson brought up the surrounding neighborhood, bystanders and the neighborhood. Every time an officer responds to a call there is an inherent risk. Correct. A reasonable officer has to be prepared for that risk level to change . Correct. And our team is in place. Joining me now is Shaq Brewster in minneapolis, civil rights attorney David Henderson, chair of princetons Department African studies. Welcome all. Shaq, lapd officer jody steiger. What does the pool report tell you about how the jury is attending to his testimony on crossexam today . This was one of the first expert witnesses not from the Minneapolis Police department. We had several days of Minneapolis Police officers coming and testifying. According to the full reports, two reporters in the courtroom, according to notes from them, it seems the jury is more attentive today. That they are going in and out of taking notes especially when they heard conclusions that Derek Chauvin used excessive force. Yesterday the testimony seemed to drag on that you have one jor nodding off and several other jurors were looking around the room and becoming fidgety. One note that the reporter made was when we heard eric nelson play that sound of george floyd being restrained. Posed in a question was i ate too many drugs. You saw jurors taking notes. The officer said thats not necessarily what he heard or couldnt make out the words, but you are getting the sense that eric nelson is able to make some points as he questions this witness. Andrea . And David Henderson, the defense attorney also trying to focus on the individuals in front of cup foods during the incident. Hes calling them the bystanders, but an unruly group which is not at all what we saw on the videotape and the cut away pictures of the group. Only a handful of people there. This testimony is hard to watch because if a dog whistle is being blown during the trial, it is being blown now. Its offensive to listen to some of these questions, but what is more heartbreaking is these questions tend to work. If there is a racist person on the jury they will find the example persuasive. That eric he could have used more. Ridiculous arguments, but they can work in court. Hopefully the prosecution when they get a chance to question the witness again, can put these in proper context. This is definitely about race and perceptions. Both sides have to be very aware of that, the prosecution and the defense. There is an appeal to certain kinds of assumptions and stereotypes about black bodies and the criminalizing of this. There is this attribution of super human strength. They talked about continuous behavior when he was prone and handcuffed. That he poses a threat that if he comes out of the coma or being unconscious, he will pose a danger to Police Officers. These are whistles that appeal to stario types stereotypes. In looking at body camera footage, you cant tell if someone is tense or internally struggling. He said, no, i dont agree with that. From video you can tell if somebody is an extremist. I think thats absolutely right. You can tell if someone is struggling and can tell if someone is no longer moving. Every one is right in trying to find that little bit of reasonable doubt which is all the defense needs. Reasonable doubt in one juror. Its the prosecution that has to hit the home run. They are trying to create this narrative that is perceived as a threat, justified the use of force. The hardest part of the case is the minute after george floyd falls unconscious, when he is not moving or talking. The idea of keeping the same level of force during those minutes is going to be extremely difficult case to make. Of course not impossible. All you need is some reasonable doubt. I, too, was struggled knowing that the police force, the overwhelming idea is in a black men are somehow inherently dangerous, they are inherently super human, inherently ap threat. Everything about this is underscoring those stereotypes and difficult to watch. And he got steiger to point out he was not a threat once he was in a prone position. Thats right. When someone is in handcuffs in a prone position, a Police Officer should be able to keep control of them. They are about to go back in. I wanted to make a point, that maybe they are being too redundant and exhausting the patience of this jury, but they appear to be more alert today, according to Shaq Brewster. You would agree that over the course of time, it really became excited. They resorted to name calling . Correct. As that increased or as the time went on, the intensity of the crowd increased . Yes, they became more concerned. If we could publish 110. So this would be the use of force continuum or what the Minneapolis Police Department Call the defense and control training guide. Yes. This is a graphic illustration in terms of based upon the subjects behavior, how much force is used. The focus originally is on the behavior. Correct. And the response to that behavior. Correct. We dont look at a use of force in a vacuum, right . No. We dont look at it in a singular frames, right . Right. We look at the totality of the circumstances. Yes. A reasonable officer would take into consideration what would happen with the suspect a few minutes ago, correct . Correct. And try to use that information to try to inform what could potentially happen in the future. Agreed . Agreed. Thats what reasonable officers do. Yes. So if im a Police Officer and me and my two partners just two minutes ago were fighting with sunday, and he our efforts became futile, thats going to affect how we perceive might happen in the future with what we perceive might happen in the future with that person. Something to be concerned about, correct. Because in fact oftentimes people who become compliant after a struggle, start to struggle again. In certain instances, yes. It happens, correct . Yes, it does. Someone said almost like catch their wind again and start fighting again. In certain instances, but in most cases officers are trained they can only go by what the suspects actions are at the time. They cant say i thought they would do this. It has to be based on their actions. Thats the design, correct . In certain instances, correct. It has to be proportional. If i call you a name and i am a Police Officer, if i call you a name and you are a Police Officer, you cant pull your gun out and shoot me. Correct. That would be a disproportion at use of force to the threat i perceive. Yes. So the mere fact that force is being applied, it is not second by second. We have to look at it in a longer context, right . Yes, but you are constantly reassessing during that time frame. Constantly reassessing. Now i presume you have gone through Firearms Training. Yes. I assume you have had situations where you in your Firearms Training are confronted with multiple threats . Yes. And your training teaches you to deal with the most active threat, right . Or the closest threat. Closest threat or biggest threat. So you want to neutralize or contend with that potential threat before you deal with the lesser threat, right . Yes. In this cycle, the critical decisionmaking model, thats coming both in terms of what you are dealing with in terms of the suspect, that critical decisionmaking model is occurring. Yes. Its dealing with what is around you and what you are okay around you. Yes. Its dealing with other people there . Yes. Its dealing with using that same model to take your training and experience and things of that nature, too . Right. So theres literally hundreds if not thousands of decisions being made, every nanosecond, right . In certain instances, yes. Simply because a person is not fighting with you, if im not fighting with you, that doesnt mean you cant use some sort of force to control me, right . Depends on the circumstance. According to the Minneapolis Police department, if someone is passively resisting you, that means they are not fighting with you. Thats correct. Force can still be used, right . Yes, in certain instances, depending on the suspects actions. Including joint manipulation, holds or restraint. Yes. A lot of that depends on what the Police Response should be at that time. If its where the officers decided this person needs to go to jail, they are going to take him into custody, that comes into play. If its we are going to talk to you, it may just be verbalization. Obviously if we want to protect that person and we know the ems is on its way, we can continue to restrain that person for ems if they have a medical need for ems, right . Depends on the circumstance. Ultimately it is the reasonable officer per spekt . And the agency, the expectations of the officers performance and best practices. Ultimately under the graham versus conner, its the specific facts of the specific case. What the officer is seeing at the scene. When we are talking about force, correct. All right. You had an opportunity to review Training Department materials, some of which you found useful and some of which you didnt . Yes. Is it fair you were more focused on Defense Tactics and policy and procedure. Correct. I am assuming that the more recent materials would be more illustrative for informative to you in forming your opinions, right . Yes. Based on what was current at the time. You have seen the list that officer chauvin took . Yes. You are aware that officer chauvin took phase one defensive tactics in march of 2020 . Yes. Did you review phase one materials for march of 2020 . I believe i did. If we could take this down, your honor. Can you see what is in front of you, sir . Yes. Would you agree this appears to be the training materials for phase one of march 2020 . Yes. If we look at the presentation, this is a presentation that largely deals with demonstrations, protests, crowd control, right . Yes. Large crowds, small crowds, things of that nature . Yes. This would have been training that mr. Chauvin had roughly a month or two before this incident, right . Correct. Does this appear to be a true and accurate copy of what you would have reviewed . Yes. I have previously marked this as exhibit 1032 and i would move for its admission. Is this a single slide, counsel . The entire program. Any objection . Yes, your honor. Foundation. 2020 use of force in service, large crowd management overview. And your objection continues . It does, your honor. May we just have one moment . Yeah. As they do the sidebar, David Henderson is still with us. I wanted to ask you about something that almost immediately at the top of this eric nelson crossexamination i think they are back in. Hang on a second. They are back. We will come right back to you, david. I am showing you what i believe is slide 39 of this. And i would ask permission to publish. This is the Minneapolis Police Department Training materials on dealing with large crowds. Officers are taught that crowds are dynamic creatures. You would agree with that . In large crowds. But even if you have 10 or 12 crowds, crowds are dynamic. Yes. And they can change suddenly, right . Yes. Just a second, your honor. And i agree that this deals with larger crowds and larger protests. Yes, the training was for force. I am familiar with this training. Officers may experience this training and taught never underestimate a crowds potential. Right. And, again, crowds being unique to the particular circumstances of a tirk case. Yes. Ultimately when an officer is on scene and making a decision to use force and a crowd assembles, whether they are peaceful or not peaceful, a reasonable officer has to be aware of what they are doing, right . Absolutely. And that can distract an officer . In certain instances, yes. And as people start trying to communicate to the officers, that can take even if its just peaceful. Hey, officer, or hey, sergeant steiger, lets talk, thats distracting that officer from what he or she is doing. Yes. It can. And an officer has to be prepared for the unexpected, a reasonable officer does, right . Yes. They are always mitigating the risk. And i understand that part of what an officer has to do is assess the words someone may be saying and comparing it to the tone of how they are saying it, right . Yes. Thats what a reasonable officer does. If i say hello sergeant steiger versus hello sergeant steiger there are two different tones and my tones convey meaning. If i start calling you names, that conveys a meaning, right . Yes. And saying things like you are a [ bleep ]. That conveys a particular intent. I wouldnt say intent. It a reasonable officer could see that perceive that as a threat . Name calling . I would say it depends on the Officers Training and experience. But an officer, a reasonable officer could perceive the words people are saying and the tone it is being said in, as a threat or risk to the officers safety, agreed . A risk, possibly, but officers are typically trained when it comes to verbal threats in and of themselves, you cant use that to justify force. Now you have had, again, an opportunity to review Minneapolis Police departments training materials. If we could take this down. Can you see what is in front of you, sir . Yes. Yo reviewed as part of your analysis the crisis intervention manual. Yes. I am not seeking to admit this, but officers are trained to look for potential signs of aggression. The Minneapolis Police department trains its officers how to potentially perceive an aggressive behavior of a person, correct . Correct. And that includes raising voices, right . Yes. That includes people tensing muscles, right . Yes. Exaggerated gestures. Pacing, right . That can be a sign of an aggressive behavior. Yes. Typically those are dealing when you are dealing oneonone with a particular subject or specific call for service. Thats typically when when the training is given its for that, when its more oneonone, when you are doling with a subject oneonone. Thats the training, but in terms of you are an officer and engaged with the suspect, right . And somebody else is now pacing around and watching you and calling you names, this could be viewed by a reasonable officer as a threat. As a potential threat, correct. When that happens, if you look at the slide in front of you, how a person is talking to an officer, if they are mimicking them or rageful, officers are specifically trained to try to predict future behavior based on that, correct . Yes, to prepare themselves. When someone starts threatening you, its a possibility that an officer could view that as a potential assault that could happen. Thats what they are trained . Yes, thats what they are trained. Says what the persons behavior is likely to be. Now you testified did you listen to every single thing that the crowd or people were saying . I attempted to, yes. Some of it you cant make out, but, yes, for the most part, yes. And you would agree that if someone were to say if you were to touch me like that i am going to slap [ bleep ] you, right . That could be viewed as a threat . Yes. Reasonable officers need to have a higher level of awareness of a situation, dont they . Yes. And a reasonable Police Officer, you would want a reasonable Police Officer to be more situationally aware of everything happening around him or her than an average bystander, right . Yes. Usually that comes with training and experience. Now there were some yes about the actual force applied. It is your professional opinion, is it not, that this appears to have officer chauvins knee on the neck of mr. Floyd. Yes. And you concluded that is a deadly use of force, right . Yes, based on mr. Floyds actions, or lack of action. So in that context you believe the knee was on the neck and applying pressure to the carotid artery . Not necessarily on the carotid area, but it was in the neck area and the back. As a Police Officer you are trained in prone handcuffing, correct . Correct. You are trained in Ground Defense, correct . Yes. And Ground Defense includes the prone restraint technique. Yes. There are other terms. What would you call that, the prone restraint technique . It means what context you mean. The prone control technique . Yes. Is that a specific term you are familiar with it . Yes. Lets not talk over each other. Sorry. Next question. You have heard the phrase head controls the neck and body. Correct. In the context of Ground Defense or in handcuffing or continuing to restrain a suspect, control the head and body . Yes, when they are resisting. And these concepts are widely accepted throughout Law Enforcement in the United States . Yes. And so, again. In the training materials you have reviewed, can you see there are photographs, correct, of officers employ a knee to the head, right . I didnt see an officer with a knee to the head. No. To the neck . Neck area, yes. The specific technique you are trained is for an officer to put his knee into what would be the trapezius area. At the base of the neck. That is standard protocol, Standard Police practice in every Single Department you are familiar with . Yes. And you are trained that way . Yes. And there is the immediacy of the handcuffing, correct . Correct. And there is the need to continue to control the suspect, correct . If they are resisting. Yes. And then there is simply Holding Someone or restraining them to decide what your next steps are going to be. Yes. In most cases, however, especially in the last 20 years, officers are trained once you handcuff the person, even if they are resisting, you want to put them in a side recovery position or sit them up. Even if they are resisting. Yes. Or even as a possibly. Would you agree that the Minneapolis Police department are trained that when a person is handcuffed and then rendered unconscious, that officers need to use caution in handcuffing them to revive them . No, i am not familiar with that. Did you as part of your Analysis Review any training materials regarding the use of the lateral vascular neck restraint . Yes. Just looking in front of you, did you look at this training material . Yes. Officers are trained that if cpr is needed to remove handcuffs first right . Yes. And to use caution because the suspect may revive agitated and ready to fight. Correct. You have had that training, too . Yes. You have had that experience where someone was rendered unconscious, revived and fights you more . They passed out and then came to, yes. And then they fought you more . Yes. Looking at what is already in evidence, the 2019 use of force manual. At slide 41 this is what we are talking about in terms of prone arm control . Yes. You see an officers knee across the shoulder blades, the head and neck area of the person. As he is attempting to handcuff a person. Your honor, not an objection, but could you i have a listed as 1031. Thats the 2019 2019 use of force. I am referring to bates stamp sorry, could we take a brief pause . Once we take this break, David Henderson, i wanted to follow up on something earlier. We were talking about implications and racial overtones. Almost immediately he asked about whether the bystanders were getting excited. He said i wouldnt say excited. I would say concerned. Isnt that a classic case of what we are referring to . Absolutely. I would hope people would be concerned about witnessing someone be killed in front of them. The bigger concern it sounds like we are coming back. I am so sorry. Thanks for noting that, david. This after officers knee appear to be across the neck and head. Correct. Officers are always cautioned to try to stay away from the neck as much as possible. We can take that down. Now you were shown a series of competitive photograph. I dont have a copy of that. I believe it was 2174. 254 . There was one photo would it be possible to publish that . The photo, if we could publish this exhibit in this upper right hand corner. Right . Yes. Mr. Chauvin, the right shoulder is down lower, right than the Left Shoulder . Yes. And that would be consistent with more of his weight being on his right side, correct . Yes. We can take that down. And, again, when we look at still photographs, what we miss is sort of the dynamics of what is happening, right . Yes. So weight can be shifting from side to side at times . Correct. If an officer is generally speaking, on his toes, the majority of the weight is going to be in the feet, right . Thats what you are trained . Yes, thats how officers are trained. So if his left leg, his foot is off to the side, he has less weight on that side of his body because his foot is off to the side, right . Yes. If his right foot the toes are tucked under, that would be consistent with having the majority of the weight on the right side . Yes. Again, in uses of force you have reviewed or used yourself, oftentimes these are used on a suspect. Right. If a weight of a human being was placed in a particular area, based on your training, you would expect there would be objection, your honor, lack of foundation. Overruled. You may answer. Not necessarily. No. But obviously medical doctors may be able to answer that better, correct . Correct. You would agree on may 25 of 2020 the Minneapolis Police department authorized the use of neck restraints . Correct. And the conscious neck restraint was not considered a lethal use of force. Correct. So i would like to show you a series of photographs that were introduced yesterday starting with exhibit 1045. So before we go there, you would agree that some of the problems with photographs are that, again, it doesnt capture a single photograph isnt going to capture the dynamics of whats happening, right . In some cases, yes. Weight can shift . Yes. In a video versus a still photograph. Yes. And positions can change, right . Yes. And those things can happen throughout the course of the time of use of force, right . Yes. I would like to show you and publish exhibit 1045. I dont know if you have seen these, but these are stills from the body one camera. Sorry. Its a little difficult to see through the glare, but maybe you can see it better on your screen. Feel free. In this area here it appears that you can see officer chauvins left leg . Yes. And that officer chauvins shin appears to be parallel to or over mr. Floyds Left Shoulder blade, agreed . Its hard to tell. It could be his neck or shoulder blade. In this dip right in here, the area between the two shoulder blades, he is handcuffed, that causes his shoulders to come back. You stated his left knee, correct . Right. His left knee, based on the photograph i am looking at, appears to be near the neck area of mr. Floyd. In between the shoulder blade here and what would be the shoulder blade behind his hand . Above it. I wouldnt say its in between it. It appears to be more above the shoulder blade than on the shoulder blade or below. Almost resting on the shoulder blade . Above. I would say above. But it appears to be angled in towards the cruiser, correct . Yes. Showing you that being at 20 23 32, right snt. Yes. Into again, can you see mr. Floyds shoulder blade more pronounced . Correct. It appears to be above the shoulder blade excuse me mr. Floyds shoulder blade is more pronounced and mr. Chauvins calf appears to be above the shoulder blade, correct . Yes. Angled in towards the squad car . Slightly, yes. Showing you 1027. This is at 20 27. It appears to be different angle . Yes. You can get a clearer view of the placement of mr. Chauvins knee . Yes. Again, here you have the shoulder blade, shoulder blade, mr. Chauvins knee is at the base of the neck. Correct, i would agree. And looking finally at exhibit 1048. You can see mr. Floyds head in this picture, correct . Yes. It gives you a depth perception of the placement of mr. Chauvins knee relative to the neck of mr. Floyd . Somewhat, yes. If we could take this down, your honor. I would like to show you what has been introduced into evidence as exhibit 1020. Which on the lefthand side of the screen that appears to be the bystander video in. Yes. On the righthand side is from mr. Kings Body Worn Camera . Yes. You would agree at this point based on everything we have seen in the same photographs, on the lefthand side it appears that mr. Chauvins knee is on mr. Floyds neck . Yes. Or at the base of the neck. And from officer kings Body Worn Camera, it appears that it was more at the base of the neck in between the shoulder blades, correct . Yes. And in fact, as you review some of the videos while mr. Floyd was on in the prone position, there are points in time at which mr. Floyd picks up his head and moves it. He attempted to early on, yes. He was saying he couldnt breathe so i assume he was attempting to try to breathe better. But he was able to lift up his head at some point and turn it slightly. Yes, he attempted to. I have no further questions, your honor. Redirect . Thank you, your honor. Sir, to clarify a little bit to clarify a little bit on the risk you testified to as far as positional asphyxia, is the risk related to the pressure on the neck or pressure on the body . Pressure on the body. Any additional pressure on the body complicates breathing more so than if there was no pressure at all. So the placement of the knee, even if there can be shifting between the neck, base of the neck, the point is that both of the defendants knees were on mr. Floyds body during the entirety of the restraint period, is that right . Yes. I want to ask you some questions about what was apparent to the defendant when he first got on the scene. You were asked questions about being dispatched and you know the term code 4, correct . Correct. Were you aware prior to the defendant arriving on the scene that officer lane had called code 4. Yes, i believe so. And reviewing some of the documentation and things of that nature. What does that mean . That means that everything is okay, that we have the suspect in custody. So at least at the time the defendant arrived, he would have been aware, based on the totality, that code 4 had been called. Yes. I would like to direct your attention to the moment in time he would have arrived. You can pull exhibit 43 which is for the record officer lanes Body Worn Camera. I would like you to begin displaying at 20 17 20. I am sorry, i cant hear you. Hold on. I apologize. 47. Well, we see that you can leave it at where it was. We see the still frame. For the record the time stamp is 20 17 20. We see officer thao arrive . Yes. I would ask to begin publishing to the jury. I am not trying to win. I am not trying to win. [ inaudible ] im claustrophobic. Work with me. I am going to pull you out can i get in the front . No, out of the car. Oh, my god you can take that down. To distinguish between the standard or comment on the standard of objectively reasonable force. Is it your opinion then to a degree of professional certainty that the force that you identified as applied by the defendant during the restraint period was it objectively reasonable or not objectively reasonable . It was not objectively reasonable. And does that then the basis for saying it was excessive . Correct. You were asked about different techniques for deescalation and the telling of someone to relax. I would like you to kmebt on the way that mr. Floyd was told to relax by the defendant. It appeared he was told to relax as he was stating that he was in a medical distress. He couldnt breathe and that he was in pain. Again the woshdz of the defendant versus the actions when youre telling them to relax when youre on top of them, is that an effective deescalation technique in your opinion . Objection. Overruled. Not necessarily. As to an officer, a reasonable officer reassessing and reevaluating the situation, they also have to take in information related to a subjects potential medical condition. Is that right . Yes. Would you agree with the statement in your custody in your care . Yes. What does that mean . That means once you take someone into custody, then youre responsible for their care. And can you as an officer simply opt not to believe them . No. You have to consider the context, correct . Correct. And obligated to in most cases. Im sorry, can you please repeat that . Im sorry, your honor. Youre obligated to. Its part of why you are duty. And in the context you saw here in which the mr. Floyd was manifesting some distress, do you believe the defendant had had an obligation or at least take that into consideration in the totality of circumstances when considering to continue the type of force he was applying . Absolutely. As the time went on, clearly in the video you could see that mr. Floyds medical his health was deteriorating. His breath was getting lower. His tone of voice was getting lower. His movements were starting to cease. So at that point as an officer on scene, you have a responsibility to realize that, okay, something is not right. Something is changed drastically from what was occurring earlier so, therefore, you have a responsibility to take some type of action. Sir, you were shown training materials that showed photographers of officers in positions in which they would have their legs on a subjects back and base of the neck. Is that right . Yes. And in the photograph, with you are shown that subject was not yet handcuffed. Was he . No. He was not. And the purpose of situating ones self on a subject is to gain control in order to handcuff the individual. Yes. And what is the officer supposed to do after they handcuff the individual . Immediately sit the person up or put him on the side recovery position. You were asked to comment on the no egs that some things that Law Enforcement do, have to do. Uses of force. Are not attractive to the public. Is that right . Correct. And in fact, you were asked about a presentation that you had given relative to that called the awful but lawful . Yes. And to be lawful, the force must be objectively reasonable. Correct . Correct. And if it isnt lawful, then whats left . The whole premise of the presentation was that in certain situations, based on a policy or a particular law, even though the situation may be deemed lawful in the communitys eyes, in the use of force is awful. So it was stating that, hey, in these situations, you can have a situation where by law it looks horrible to the common eye. But based on the state law, it is lawful. But if its not objectively reasonable and its not lawful, then its just awful . Correct. Nothing further. You were not personally there that day, correct . The day of this ins zment. Correct. Correct. And you would not have known how people were feeling, correct . Correct. You would not know how they felt in terms of their perception, correct . Correct. You would not know how mr. Floyds body felt at that moment, correct . Only what he was verbalizing. Im talking about in terms of the stiffness or tension of his body . Correct. And again, in terms of your use of force reviews in at the past, you were a peer reviewer, how many reviewers look at an incident in terms of use of force . From start to finish . Numerous. In Los Angeles Police department, it starts with the sergeant who is doing the investigation. And then from there it will go to the watch commander who happens to be typically a lieutenant or another sergeant and the training coordinator. Then they make recommendations and then they send it to the captains of the division. And at that point the captains would then send it to the bureau and thats where i was at one point. And then the bureau makes recommendations and then gets sent up to another unit and they make the final recommendation. In regards to more serious ones where i was a peer member, it goes from the investigators to the use of force review board when is a five member board. Four command staff and a peer. And that peer review board, the five people, they make recommendations to move up the chain, right . Yes. So they make recommendations. Im sorry. No. I was scratching my face. They make recommendations to the chief of police and the chief of police reviews it and he makes recommendations to the Police Commission and the Inspector Generals Office also reviews all the evidence as well and they make recommendations. In most cases, they conquer with the chief. In some cases they disagree. Finally a presentation is made to the Police Commission and the Police Commission at that point makes the final decision. So theres layers of review . Yes. So in terms of the one youre describing, are the decisions always unanimous . No. As to whether or not it was a reasonable use of force . No, its not. And sometimes those five people, they may disagree with each other . Right . Yes. And we have a something what we call a minority port. I wrote a couple of those myself. Yes if, one person or a number of people on that board will disagree, then that the ones that disagree, the minority, have to do a report basically telling what their case is and why they disagree. Right. And so even within that process, there is five potential Police Officers who can disagree with each other . Correct. I have no further questions. Sergeant, i appreciate your time. Youre excused. One more witness at least start. The state calls special agent James Reyerson to the stand. Raise your right hand, please. If you feel comfortable doing so, take off your mask. Lets start with you giving your full name and spelling each of your names. James reyerson
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.