tv CNN Newsroom With Kate Bolduan CNN April 2, 2021 8:00am-9:00am PDT
you can see -- is this officer arriola here? >> yes. >> and he appears to be holding something? is that right? >> yes. >> is that the crime scene log? >> i believe so. >> so you testified at some point you learned that mr. floyd had died. correct? >> yes. >> and do you recall how you received that information? >> it was later on in the night, sergeant dale actually informed me that he had -- mr. floyd had passed away. >> was that pretty shortly after dale and zimmerman had arrived? >> yeah. yes. >> about 10:13 p.m.? is that right?
>> it was sometime after sergeant dale and zimmerman arrived. >> and after that point, were there arrangements made for transport officers to bring lane and king to city halper sunt to critical incident protocol? >> there were. >> did you watch that happen? >> yes. two officers responded to the scene and they were -- officer king and officer lane were transported taergted. >> publish exhibit 90. additional body worn camera footage. do you see officer -- sergeant ashoff in this photo? >> yes. >> would you take your stylist and draw a circle? and wolenski?
>> i don't see him in this photo. >> is this according to a time stamp 22:18:14. is that right? >> correct. >> okay. and that was around the time that the transport officers arrived and i'm assuming the transport would have happened shortly after that? >> correct. and they transported lane and king to room 100 within city hall? >> room 100. >> and was it about shortly after that about 15 minutes or so later that the bca took over the scene? >> yes. i was notified by lieutenant zimmerman that the bca is on their way and they'll be taking over the scene. so we requested -- me and my guys were requested to just stay put for scene security. >> do you recall when bca arrived? >> i don't remember what time they arrived, no.
>> show you exhibit 91. do you remember the name of the agent? >> yes. i believe his name was special agent fmichael phil. >> can you tell the jury what you see here in exhibit 91? who are these people? >> that appeared to be special agent michael phil standing alongside lieutenant zimmerman. >> okay. >> rite here? >> yes. >> and that's at 2300? is that right? >> correct. that's the proximate time then that bca took over the scene? >> approximately. >> you saw special agent phill have a conversation with lieutenant zimmerman after that conversation took place, did you have a conversation with lieutenant zimmerman? >> i -- i believe i had a conversation with both of them
afterwards. >> okay. >> brief interaction. >> when did -- did lieutenant zimmerman remain at the scene after the bca took over or did he leave? >> he came up to me and just told me pretty much that it's in the bca's hands now and thald be here and just to ensure that myself and my officers remained on scene for scene security until the bca tells us they're done with their job and that we can take down the crime scene tape and leave. >> publish exhibit 92. is this special agent phill? >> yes that, is. >> during the period of time you were speaking with him and getting instruction on what to do at the scene? >> yes. >> did he ask you to do anything
with squad 320? >> yes. >> what did he -- >> he told me that they were taking custody of both the squad and mr. floyd's vehicle. and we noticed that the squad was still running. he asked me to open it up and power it down. which i did. >> okay. did you remove anything from the vehicle? >> no, sir. >> now at this point in the bca has the scene and you're no longer taking any investigative steps or collecting evidence, is that right? >> correct. >> but did you make observations of other officers doing these things? watching the bca? >> such as -- >> such as anything with the vehicle? >> no. no. >> did you see -- >> i didn't see anybody doing anything with the vehicles.
any other officer if that's what you're asking. >> did you see other officers taking photographs, looking at the vehicle. >> no, sir. >> did you see any forensic scientists or people you recognized to be forensic scientists come on to the scene? >> just the team of people that special agent michael phill had with him. >> and those -- >> those are several bca people there. >> those are the folks allowed in the scene, is that right? >> yes. >> at some point, did you watch the -- mr. floyd's vehicle be actually towed away by the bca? >> yes. ultimately, special agent phill had both the squad car as well as mr. floyd's vehicle towed from the scene. >> and you watched them do that. >> yes, i was still on scene
then. >> publish exhibit 94. all right. is this an image of the bca towing away squad 320? >> yes. >> and they'd already towed the suv at this point, is that right? >> i believe so. >> can you tell the jury then what you did with the scene after the vehicles were towed away? >> after the bca had the vehicles towed away, it wasn't very long after that special agent michael phill told me that they were all finished now and we could take down the crime scene tape and leave. >> did do you so? >> yes, sir. >> publish exhibit 95. this is at 3:34 and 54 seconds. what does this image show?
>> that's at 3:34 a.m. and that's me -- those are my hands helping take down the crime scene tape. >> okay. and so at this point the crime scene was clear, no longer needed to be secured and you would be able to exit the area, is that right? >> correct. >> all right. thank you very much. i have no further questions, your honor. >> thank you. cross? >> good morning, everybody, we are in day five in the trial of derek chauvin. we have been watching the testimony of sergeant jon edwards, a minneapolis police sergeant who came to the scene in the moments and hours following at the death of george floyd. i want to get our panel, laura
coates to come in here and weigh in with charles ramsey to get their take on what they just heard and the impact, if any, from jon edwards' testimony. laura, what did you take away? >> well, it might seem like a very sort of benign or, you know, ab tus thing going on. but what the prosecution has to do is make sure they're meticulous about presenting evidence. what happened all the way through the end of it being a crime scene? they speak to witnesses? any witnesses compromised? anything tainted on the scene? they have to lay it out. they don't want the defense to be able to articulate at later time that something was awry in the investigation or development of the case or that there were some evidence or something that is important to their defense. >> chief ramsey this is the first time i believe we have heard from a police officer throughout this testimony this week. anything stand out to you from what we just heard from sergeant edwards? >> well, there is prosecutoral
difference differences that are different from dealing with these things that they do in minneapolis. for example, officers king and lane were still on the scene when the sergeant arrived. >> excuse me. i'm sorry. chief ramsey, we are going back to another witness. hold your thought. >> mr. frank? >> thank you. can you please tell the jurors what you do for a living? >> i'm a police officer with minneapolis police department. >> how long you have been a police officer? >> since june 3rd of 1981. >> and all that with minneapolis? >> no. the first four years from '81 to '85 i worked for the fullmar
county police department in southeast minnesota. i was a patrol deputy responding to 911 calls. >> and so then it was, 1985 that you xastarted with minneapolis? >> yes, i had the weekend off and started in minneapolis june 5th of 1985. >> and are you a licensed peace officer in the state of minnesota? >> yes, i am. >> whether did you first obtain your license? >> i'm sorry? >> whether did you first obtain your license? >> june 3rd of 1981. >> and as a police officer, having that license, are you required to do certain things to maintain that license? >> yes. >> what kinds of things do you have to do? >> we have to do continuing ed, like any other professional license. and we have to do 40 hours of different education, professional education. in a certain time period.
i'm not sure if it's one or two years. >> if you don't, somebody's going to let you know, right? >> yes, they will. >> and so since 1981, have you done all that has been required to maintain your license? >> yes, i have. >> when you started with the minneapolis police department in 1985, what was your job? what were your duties? >> i was a patrolman. i worked the north side precinct, 4. and i worked the third precinct, called precinct 3, of course. and then the permanent assignment is the fifth precinct which is lake street, hennepin avenue. >> so when you work as a patrol officer, what do you do? >> well, we respond to 911 calls. we, you know, deter crime or try
to deter crime, i should say. and yeah, that's kind of what we do. traffic control. that kind of thing. >> out on the streets every day? >> yes. >> at least every day you work, right? >> yes. >> and so then did your job duties change eventually? >> yes. in 1990, i cracked and became prevalent in the early 80s so i joined the crack team in the fifth where there were four officers and a sergeant. and we would, you know, do search warrants looking for drugs, that kind of thing. >> and so what year was that? i'm sorry? >> pardon me? >> what year was that? >> 1990 to 1993. >> and what did you do then in 1993? >> i took the sergeant exam and
passed it and was assigned to the adult sex crimes unit. >> so what does it mean to be promoted to sergeant? >> well, you take a series of tests and once you're promoted, you express your interest as patrol or investigations. and so i talked to the lieutenant in charge of the sex crimes unit and expressed my interest. >> so you mentioned having to take an exam? >> yes. >> just like sitting down and like we do in school, taking an exam? >> yeah. it was a written exam. once you passed that phase, then you take an oral exam. and then you were given your scores. >> and so you became a sergeant. did some supervisory
responsibilities come with that? >> yes. >> can you just describe for the jurors like what supervisory -- what kinds of responsibilities a sergeant takes on? >> well, as an investigative sergeant, you know, you're assigned a case to follow up with the victims. and you do search warrants. and when you do search warrants, you have officers that assist you. so you'll assign them duties that, you know, such as, you know, assisting with the search warrant. >> so you have to make sure that they're properly trained? >> absolutely. when i do search warrants, i would explain to the officers that we don't want anyone to get hurt. either the officers or the subjects.
>> and so justining with your history then, you went into the sex crimes unit as a sergeant and subsequent to that did your responsibilities change? >> yes. >> can you tell the jurors about that? >> yeah. in 1995, the homicide unit was expanding. because of the amount of murders that were occurring in minneapolis anin 1995. so they brought in myself and one other guy from the robbery unit. and we were assigned partners in the homicide unit. >> and which unit do you currently work at? >> 1995. >> and which unit do you currently work in? >> oh, yes, i'm sorry. the homicide unit. >> so from 1995 to today you've been in the homicide unit? >> yes. >> and did you at some time during that period receive another promotion? >> yes.
i took the lieutenant's exam. that is a series of, again, written tests. and oral -- if you pass that phase then you go on to the oral interview phase. and you're notified of your results. >> and so you were promoted to lieutenant? >> yes, i was. >> how did that change your responsibilities, your job duties? >> well, usually when you're promoted, you're assigned to a different unit than you worked. but they ask me to stay in the homicide unit because of my experience. and so i took over the job in 2008, november of 2008. and the duties are -- i get called for every death,
suspicious death, deaths where, you know, clearly a homicide. deaths where officers have any question about how a person may have died. i go out to the scenes. >> and do you also supervise other officers? >> yes, i do: >> just describe for the jury your responsibilities and supervising other officers? >> yes, we have, right now we have 12 detectives in hom size. they're on a rotation basis for being on call. they're on call monday through monday. and when a team is on call, i go tout a scene, assess, you know, what the death may be involved and i'll call the on call team to come in and start working the
case. >> so you still respond to scenes? >> yes. >> but you also supervise the work of the investigators? >> yes. i -- every morning when i come in i -- i'll pull up -- it is called pulling up the cases. and we pull up every death report in minneapolis. and i'll look through each report and i'll assign a case that i might have some questions about. and i'll talk to the detectives, explain why i think this needs to be looked into. and that's monday through friday kind of thing. >> and so are you their direct supervisor then? >> yes. >> so you started with minneapolis police department in 1985. >> yes. >> do you know where you are in terms of seniority in the minneapolis police department? >> yes. >> where is that?
>> i'm the number one officer in seniority. i hate to say that. but i am. >> understood. were you called out to a scene on may 25th of 2020? >> yes. >> and do you recall -- well, why you were called to that scene? >> yeah. homicide response -- or i respond to critical incidents. and a critical incident can be anything from a death to a serious injury of either officers or the public. and so i was called in on this one. >> the were you technically on duty at that time? >> i was at home. and i was notified by my commander of the incident that happened at 38th and chicago.
>> and so then did you respond to that scene? >> yes. >> and do you recall about what time it was you arrived at the scene? >> it was a little bit after 9:00 p.m. >> and the location of 38 rth a chicago, were you familiar with that location at that time? >> yes. >> fair to say no stranger to calls of violent incidents at that intersection? >> yes. absolutely. >> when you arrived, can you just describe for the jury what you first saw when you arrived at that location? >> i arrived on 38th street and i parked on southwest corner on 38th street. i saw yellow tape up. it is crime scene tape around the intersection.
i saw sergeant edwards who i know from work on his cell phone. and i saw two officers. he was like in the middle of the scene kind of. and then i saw two officers standing on the southwest -- or the southeast corner of the intersection. >> and did you then approach those two officers? >> yes. sergeant edwards appeared to be busy on the phone. so i jut walst walked up to the officers. >> and i'm going to show you -- well, we had an opportunity before court to show you a piece of body cam footage, shows you approaching the scene, krcorrec? >> yes. >> and that was a true and accurate approach to those two officers? yes. >> and it reflects the time as well? >> yes. >> your honor, i offer exhibit 96. >> any objection?
>> no objection. >> 96 is received. >> and we'll publish 96. >> pause here for awe m moment . >> this is the intersection of 38th and chicago? >> yes. >> it looks like the time reflect reflected here is 21:56. for those of us difficulty with that math, what is the real time? >> yeah. it's four minutes until 10:00. >> so a little closer to 10:00 when you arrived? >> yes. >> and there is an individual. it's dark and hard to see. do you know who the individual is in the cross walk there? >> i don't know. >> okay. all right. let's continue .
>> how you doing, lieutenant? >> what's going on? >> all right. you can take that down. >> so it appears that you came to the scene in street clothes, right? >> yes. >> all right. and that's the moment where you walked up and talked to the two officers? >> yes, i did. >> did you recognize those two officers? >> yes -- no, i didn't. >> and you appear to be on the phone. do you recall who you were talking to? >> i don't know fit was my commander or a deputy chief. i'm not sure. >> okay. so then when you arrived there, those two officers -- >> we're going to briefly break into the trial of derek chauvin and go to the white house where president biden is delivering remarks on the economy and jobs report for march. >> i'm looking forward to it.
good morning. this morning we learned that our economy created 900,000 jobs in march. that means the first two months of our administration has seen more new jobs created in the first two months in any administration in history. but we still have a long way to go to get our economy back on track after the worst economic and job crisis in nearly a century. but my message to the american people is this, help is here. opportunities coming. and at long last there is hope. so for so many families, credit for this progress belongs no the to me but to the american people. hard-working women and men who have struggled through this pandemic, never given up and determined to get the country back on track. as well as their families. but i think it's also reflection of two things we're doing here. first, the new economic strategy
we launched, one focused on building from the bossttom up a middle out and one that puts the government on the side of working people. and that rewards work not wealth. when we invest in the american people, it's not just those at the top that make our economy grow. they're the ones that make it grow. ordinary americans. we saw the economy gain traction in march as the american rescue plan moved and got past bringing new hope to our country. we're going continue to implement that law in the weeks ahead. by april 7th, next week, over 130 million households will have gotten their $1,400 per person rescue check. funds are on their way to local communities to put educators, health care workers, home health care aides, police, firefighters, sanitary workers back on the job. they're getting more aid for
small businesses. we're also going to hang on open sign again on the door to rehire folks that had to be let go. and in the months ahead, a new childcare tax credit will cut taxes and provide help to millions of families with young children. there's nothing, nothing -- i know you're tired of hearing me say this -- there is nothing the american people cannot do if we give them a chance. the american rescue plan does precisely that for hard-working middle class folks at long last. secondly. today's report also reflects the progress we made on my other key priority, getting the american people vaccinated. we've turned around a slow moving vaccination program into being the envy of the world. yesterday we set an all time record for thursday vaccinations. ending a seven day period that was the first ever where we administered 20 million shots in
seven days. that's 20 million shots in a week. no other country has come close to doing that. so we made significant progress on that front. but the fight is far from over. we know that vaccines are safe and effective. we're vaccinating more people than any other country on earth. we also have progress on jobs and progress on vaccinations. but in the face of this great news, i need also to make this clear and direct statement to the american people. the progress we've worked so hard to achieve can be reversed. the rescue plan is temporary by design. it is a rescue plan. but as we get the economy back on its feet, we need to do the hard work of building back better for good -- not just for a while, but for good. not just a short term, but for
good. that's why i propose american jobs plan on wednesday in pittsburgh. it's an eight-year program that invites -- let me put it another way. i've heard from everybody all across the country about the need for infrastructure. how many times have we heard this is -- this is infrastructure week the last four years? about every second week is infrastructure week. but no infrastructure was built. this is an eight year program that invests in our roads, bridges, broadband, airports, ports, fixing our water systems. it's going to repair our va hospital as cross the country. many of them are more than 50 years old and are in real need of help. it will invest in research and development to outcompete china and the rest of the world. independent analysis shows that if we pass this plan, the economy will create 19 million jobs, good jobs, blue collar jobs, jobs that pay well.
that's long term jobs for pipe fitters, health care workers, those that work in the steel factories and cutting labs as well. the new report out this week shows that nearly 90% of the infrastructure jobs created in the american jobs plan can be filled by people who don't have a college degree. 75% of those good paying jobs don't need an associates degree. it's a blue collar blueprint for increasing the opportunity for people. this is an economic opportunity for those that helped build the country and have been ignored or neglected much too long by our government. it's a once in a generation investment in our economic future. a chance to win the future. paid for by asking big corporations, many of which do not pay any taxes at all, just to begin to pay their fair share. and it won't raise a penny tax on a family making less than $400,000 a year.
no federal tax. no addition. when congress comes back after this easter break, i'm going to begin meeting with democrats, republicans about this plan. i spoke to republicans on the phone. i'm looking forward to meeting therapy. they all have their ideas about what it will take, what they like and what they don't like. that's a good thing. that's the american way. debate is welcome. compromise is inevitable. change to my plan are certain. but inaction is not an option. the american people have been promised action infrastructure for decades. they've been promised that after leaders would take our country and make it more competitive. i made my plan to address this long overdue need and it's clear. polls already show strong support for infrastructure investment from the american people whether democrats or republicans or independents. much congress should debate my plan. change it and offer alternatives
if that's what they have to do. but congress should act. likewise, on the virus, our program there too can be undone. as fast as we're moving, more adults remain to be vaccinated in april, may, and june than have already been vaccinated in february and march. we are not even half way done yet. too many americans as acting as if this fight is over. its not. i told people if my administration did the hard work of getting shots to all americans in the next few months, if the american people continue to do their part, mask up, practice social distancing, we can have a more normal july 4th. but this is still april, no the july. not july. we're not there yet. so cases are going up again. the virus is spreading more rapidly in many places. deaths are going up in some states. so i ask, i plead with you.
don't give back the progress we've all so -- fought so hard to achieve. we need to finish this job. we need every american to buckle down and keep their guard up in this homestretch. wear your mask. keep safe distance from one another. wash your hands. get vaccinated when it's your turn. that's how we're going to beat the virus. cast off the weight of the pandemic that is holding our economy back. while the earliest signs from this job report -- announcing today, our promise to the american rescue plan is starting to make a real difference. today's report also reminds us how deep a hole we started in. after a year of devastation, there are still 8.4 million fewer jobs today than there were last march.
8.4 million. we created 900,000 again. but 8.4 million jobs fewer today than last march. so too many americans have been unemployed for longer than six months. too many women have been forced out of the workforce. unemployment among people of color remains far too high. yes, we made progress by starting to build an economy from the bottom up in the middle out. and, yes, the american rescue plan is laying the foundation for that economy. but we still need the american jobs plan to build on that foundation to build this country back and better. so the bottom line is this -- today's report is good news. today's report shows that the country -- what kit do when we act together to fight a virus and give working people the help they need. we still have a long way to go. but i know that we're going to get there. we're going to get there together. may god bless you all and may you have a happy easter and a
holy easter. thank you. >> and you have just been listening to the president touting and embracing a really strong jobs report for the month of march. let's listen in to some questions he may be answering. >> raising taxes will not slow the economy at all. asking corporate america to pay their fair share. it will not slow the economy at all. it will make the economy function better and create more energy. >> this whole process is going to fight your administration every step of the way. what is your reaction to that? >> if the republicans argue that we don't need infrastructure, think of been talking about the need for it for years now. if the republicans decide that we need it but not pay for it, it's just going to increase the deficit. if the republicans say the next
phase of my plan we don't need to invest in va hospitals and keep the sacred obligation we made to so many americans, if the republicans say the 400,000 holes in our schools and daycare centers that have lead pipes, lead pipes delivering water to their doors, if they say we shouldn't be doing that, what do you think would happen if they found out all the lead pipes were up in the capitol and every time they turned on a water fountain? i think, look, i think we're going to have -- i think the republicans voters are going to have a lot to say about whether we get a lot of this done. >> and the president there addressing some of the challenges that he will be facing. obviously, touting this very impressive and strong jobs report for the month of march, 619,000 jobs were created, the
best monthly jobs report we've seen since august. the unemployment rate has dropped to 6%. but the president says as hopeful as this, there is still a lot of work to be done. for more on that, let's bring in john harwood at the white house. so, john, on the one hand you have a very strong jobs report. on the the other hand, you have a president saying a lot of this is due to vaccines increasing. we're leading the world now in vaccinat vaccinations but this is temporary if more money is not applied to the economy longer term. >> this is a new president in an exceptionally fortunate position. he's got the wind at his back both on progress on vaccinations, which is going to bring the pandemic under control and on progress on the economy. but what he's trying to do is make the case which is not always easy for politicians to make when conditions are improving, that on both fronts you need congress needs to keep its foot on the gas. he wants to make sure that the
american people continue to be safe so we don't backslide on the pandemic. and more importantly than that from his point of view, is this long term plan billed back better, jobs plan he outlined for physical infrastructure this week, the fourth coming family plan to build up human capital. he's making the case we don't just get back to an low unemployment economy of the economy we had before. we want to build a different economy that is a more equitable economy and trying to keep democrats together behind that plan. no indication that it's going to get republican support. but he's trying to push to keep democrats unified and not have the good news that we're experiencing now sap the energy for action going forward both to raise the taxes needed and to do the spending that he has called for. >> right. preemptively addressing the issues that republicans have been raising now for weeks. john harwood, thank you so much. we want to take you back now to the trial of officer derek chauvin.
we're in fifth day of testimony now. let's resume. >> -- his well-being sean your responsibility. >> once you handcuff somebody, does that affect the amount of force that you should consider using? >> absolutely. >> how so? >> once a person is cuffed, the threat level goes down all the way. you know, to -- they're cuffed. how can they really hurt you, you know? and -- >> certainly there could be circumstances when a cuffed person could still be combative? >> oh, absolutely. yeah. yeah. but you getting injured is way down. >> what do you mean by that? >> well, you know, if if you're -- you could have some guy try to kick you or something. but you can move out of the way. that person is handcuffed.
you know? and they -- the threat level is just not there. >> so by handcuffing somebody, you've taken way some of their ability to harm you? >> absolutely. >> and if somebody who is handcuffed becomes less combative, does that change the amount of force that an officer is to use under the poll i >> yes. >> how so? >> if they become less combative, you may just have them sit down on the curb or -- the idea is to calm the person down. and if it they are not a threat to you at that point, you try to, you know, to help them so
that they're not as upset as they may have been in the beginning. >> in your 30 years of training with minneapolis police department and your experience, you have been trained on the prone position? >> yes. >> and what has your training been specific to the prone position? >> well, once -- once you secure or handcuff a person, you need to get them out of the prone position as soon as possible because it restricts their breathing. >> when you handcuff somebody behind their back -- well, as part of training, have you been handcuffed behind the back? >> yes. >> and have you been trained on what happens to individuals when they're handcuffed behind the
back? >> yes. >> so when somebody is handcuffed behind their back, how does it affect them physically? >> it stretches the muscles back through your chest. and it makes it more difficult to breathe. >> if you put somebody in the prone position -- well, it is well known, the danger of putting somebody in the prone position? >> objection. >> sustained. >> how long have you had training in the dafngers of the prone position as part of the minneapolis police department? >> for -- since 1985. >> and is it part of your training regularly to learn about keeping somebody in the prone position? >> yes. >> and what has the training been with regard to the prone position? >> once a person is cuffed, you need to turn them on their side or have them sit up. you need to get them off their chest. >> why?
>> because of the -- as you mentioned earlier, your muscles are pulling back when you're handcuffs and if you're laying on your chest, that's constricting your breathing even more. >> as a trained police officer, are you provided with training on medical intervention? >> yes. >> i assume you're not, you know, taught to be paramedics, but you receive some level of training? >> yeah. we're first responders, i think is what our category would be. >> isdoes that include doing cp chest compressions? >> yes. >> how often is that part of your training? >> cpr, it's like every other year or so. as part of your training within the minneapolis policies, is
there an obligation to provide medical intervention when necessary? >> absolutely. what is the general teaching that you get with regard to medical intervention? >> well, again, it's been that you need to provide medical care for the person that is in distress. >> and would that be true even if you have called an ambulance to come to the scene? >> yeah. absolutely. you know, the ambulance will get there in whatever amount of time and in that time period you need to provide medical assistance before they arrive.
>> why don't we take our mid morning break? ladies and gentlemen, we'll take our 20-minute mid morning break. the attorneys and you will deal with an issue while you're on break. and lieutenant, you may step down if you would. >> and the court is going to be taking a 20-minute break now. day five of testimony in the trial of officer derek chauvin. i want to bring in it our experts and our panel right now to discuss what we have just been listening to. laura coates, while we were away and taking the president's commentary, i want to tell our viewers what we heard from minneapolis police officer and veteran police officer for over 40 years lieutenant richard zimmerman. this was really telling. the lawyer, the prosecutor asked are there different kinds of force that officers can use? you have ever been trained to kneel on the neck of someone handcuffed in prone position? the police officer, lieutenant zimmerman said, no, i haven't. would you consider that force?
what level of force he was asked? that is top tier. the deadly force. why? zimmerman says, because if you kneel -- if your knee is on somebody's neck, that can kill them. that sort of lai ys out exactly what we saw for 9:29. what was your take on that? >> wow. that was astounding testimony. really the most compelling law enforcement testimony we heard in this trial to date. because, of course, common sense would dictate. you tell a child don't kneel on neck of another child because you would know of the risk. the to hear this coming from a veteran officer who says that he's known about the danger of being able to breathe in a handcuffed prone position since 1985, he's been trained on this issue, talking about this as a use of deadly force. the it blows out of the water any notion that the officer was trained to sustain this level of force on somebody once they were no longer posing any conceivable
threat. i don't know how you're going to cross-examination on somebody who is a 40-year veteran on this issue of training combined with kmons k common sense. its no about the whether he can use force. it's whether the sustained use of force transformed from reasonable use of force from an officer to felony assault underlying the second-degree murder charge. i mean it's blowing me away to think about the idea of this officer so matter-of-factly saying what common sense has dictated. a knee on somebody's neck could kill them. sustaining that knee on the neck even after force is even reasonably required, where do you go from here as the defendant? >> and, chief ramsey, you have been talking about appropriate force and what isn't considered appropriate force for us throughout this trial. right now we have heard from two police officers, two minneapolis police officers give their take on what they view in particular
with lieutenant zimmerman on what he viewed was appropriate force andwhat's not appropriate force. would you concur with the testimony that you heard from him? >> yeah. and i'm not surprised at his testimony. because what he's doing is he's simply -- he's simply referring to his training and also his knowledge. you remember this guy is in homicide. he deals with death on a regular basis, unfortunately. and so he knows exactly what he's talking about. everything about that was wrong. he talked about the prone position. restrictive breathing. we call it positional asphyxia. and if you have a person in that position which you may well have to put them in that position to get them under control. but you get them out of that position as soon as you can. again, they talked about that critical decision making model. you have to constantly reassess. is the threat still there? is the resistance still there? if the answer is no, then you stop. there is no reason to continue and there is not a department in
this country that has as part of their training after your resievance stops continue to use the same level of force you used before. it makes no sense. that is not in our training. >> yeah. lieutenant zimmerman said "once a person is cuffed, you need to get them off of their constrictioning breathing even more. he was also asked about cpr training. he said that training is conducted and reevaluated every few years. they have to go under certain protocol to make sure that they are still certified to provide that training, and he said that you are under the obligation to provide medical intervention when necessary when a person is in distress, even after an ambulance has been called. how damning was that given what we know transpired the night of george floyd's death? >> well, i mean, very damning. officers are given cpr training and you have to get recertified every couple of years.
officers now in many departments, i know in the ones i led, have learned how to use tourniquets, how to apply direct pressure to an open wound on the chest. you're not an emt but you get some level of training to be able to assist an individual until the proper medical personnel can arrive at the scene. he's absolutely right, all they have to do is go back in chauvin's history and show he's had that level of training and is certified, the same with the other three officers, all of them should have been cpr certified, certainly and that would have been appropriate to use that particular technique under the circumstances once it became apparent that he was no longer breathing. if i can just add one -- i started to say something earlier, if there's time. >> yes. go ahead. >> there's minor procedural things that to me it's not so minor but i don't know the protocols in minneapolis. but you had four officers on the scene of that incident.
we never would have left them there. you separate them. you get them to either internal affairs, i guess they got a room 100 in city hall or whatever. but when sergeant edwards got there, two of them were still in the car together. that, to me, is a process or a procedure that the department needs to look at because that's not typically what you would do. and the other thing, and this really goes to laura being an attorney, i found it curious when they continued to -- the defense continued to allow the prosecution and the witness to refer to it as the crime scene. at the time it had not been determined that a crime had been committed. normally we would simply call that a critical incident scene, not a crime scene. and if i were a defense attorney i wouldn't want that word being floated around to the jury too often because i'm there arguing it's not a crime, that the officers did nothing wrong. i was just kind of curious about that, laura. >> laura, do you want to weigh in? >> i do. the thing about, if you were --
if there's a conviction, and there were to be an appeal, the appellate court would look to see whether an objection has been weighed in this area here, if you don't object you can oftentimes lose the ability to bring that up later on but here's another example of why the defense, in questioning why the defense has allowed a number of things to go on. normally if you have a very emotional witness, if you've got the witness testifying, they're crying, i vocevoking a lot of sentiment and resonating with the jury you do everything you can to derail the monologue. they haven't done that a number of times and allowed a lot of things to linger in the air. they will have to reflect on the consequence of that. the defense case is in the future and they're never required to actually bring one. it's always the government's burden to actually prove beyond a reasonable doubt. there are some lapses in judgment, you're obviously seeing here but i have to note what charles is talking about. these other officers are due to stand trial if the future. now, of course, they're accessories, calling them,
accomplice liability so a lot of their convictions might be contingent on what happens in this particular trial but the idea they're kept together i want to know are we going to hear the body cam footage what they said right after george floyd was taken away? how about after they were notified he died? remember the sergeant edwards said when i got on the scene i told them turn on your body cams if they aren't already on. so was there a lapse in time to what they knew? we're talking about cpr training and all these things. if you right now, if you were told take your pulse, move your knee, think of the minimal efforts required, you'd need not be cpr trained, you don't have to be an emt, you would put your fingers to your neck, on your wrist, move your knee. that's the minimal effort we're talking about here to get to the life saving measures that needed to be taken, or as the paramedic said, to give him a second chance of life. they could have precluded this by very minor actions.
the question still remains for these jurors, why didn't derek chauvin do that? it's antithetical to training. it just simply belies common sense. he still has explaining to do. and as of yet the defense has not been able in any case to answer that question. >> yeah, as you said, antithetical to training because as we had seen from those witnesses who had not been police officers though one of them was an emt, so trained to attend to somebody who's in distress, their instinct was to help them. right now that we've heard from veteran police officers is that is in fact what the protocol is, you have to wonder how damning that is and what impact that's going to have on the jury. before we go in this last moment, laura, i want to get your sense, was it weird or not the defendant didn't cross-examine the first police officer? >> i think it was odd in the sense they're trying -- they didn't address that issue of the officer on the scene. but these defense attorneys are not worried about the other
i had this hundred thousand dollar student debt. two hundred and twenty-five thousand dollars in debt. ah, sofi literally changed my life. it was the easiest application process. sofi made it so there's no tradeoff between my dreams and paying student loans. student loans don't have to take over for the rest of your life. thank you for allowing me to get my money right. it doesn't happen often. everyday people taking on the corporate special interests. and winning. but now, the for the people act stands on the brink of becoming law. ensuring accurate elections. iron-clad ethics rules to crack down on political self-dealing. a ban on dark money. and finally reducing corporate money in our politics. to restore our faith in government. because it's time. for the people to win.
is now a good time for a flare-up? enough, crohn's! for adults with moderate to severe crohn's or ulcerative colitis... stelara® can provide relief and is the only approved medication to reduce inflammation on and below the surface of the intestine in uc. you, getting on that flight? back off, uc! stelara® may increase your risk of infections, some serious, and cancer. before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you have an infection... flu-like symptoms, sores, new skin growths, have had cancer, or if you need a vaccine. pres, a rare, potentially fatal brain condition, may be possible. some serious allergic reactions and lung inflammation can occur. lasting remission can start with stelara®. if you've been financially impacted by covid-19, janssen may be able to help.
we're carvana, the company if you've been financially impacted by covid-19, who invented car vending machines and buying a car 100% online. now we've created a brand-new way for you to sell your car. whether it's a year old or a few years old. we wanna buy your car. so go to carvana and enter your license plate answer a few questions. and our techno wizardry calculates your car's value and gives you a real offer in seconds. when you're ready, we'll come to you, pay you on the spot and pick up your car, that's it. so ditch the old way of selling your car, and say hello to the new way at carvana. pain hits fast. so get relief fast.
only tylenol rapid release gels have laser-drilled holes. they release medicine fast for fast pain relief. tylenol rapid release gels. hello to our viewers in the united states and around the world and welcome to "inside politics," i'm john king in washington, it's a consequential busy friday news day. we're in a break, fifth day of witness testimony in the derek chauvin trial in minneapolis. again we're going to break for ten more minutes after very significant law enforcement testimony in that trial this morning. remember, it is a formeric