Some of you may be aware that Al Capone ultimately went to jail for tax fraud. Guess the name of a cop-in-the-news who has been charged with tax fraud?
Chauvin charged with tax evasion
Discussing Chauvin and his wife the WSJ tells us
The pair are accused of underreporting their taxes by a total of $464,433 between 2014 and 2019, according to the complaint. They owe a total of $37,868 in back taxes and penalties.
That’s not chump change!
But the real kicker is in the first paragraph
Derek Chauvin, the former Minneapolis police officer charged in the killing of George Floyd, faces new allegations of felony tax fraud, including failure to report more than $95,000 over several years working as a security guard at a bar where Mr. Floyd also once worked as a bouncer.
It doesn’t say they worked there at the same time. But I can’t help but think if the two were acquainted, there is any hint of negative feeling, and the jury learns of this, that will color the jury’s view of other facts. I’d tend to say the color would tend to cast shade on Chauvin’s potential defense.
Some cynics are saying this is a prosecutorial version of belt and suspenders, implying that they’re not sure of getting a murder conviction, hence…
Thomas,
Well… yes and no. I suspect the state tax evasion may be a different prosecutor! Or not. (Any Legal Eagles know?)
But it would not surprise me if *someone* in the tax department didn’t decide to give his taxes a check when his name came up in the news.
.
I do think he may not end up convicted for murder, manslaughter or anything like that. I’m not going to plow through the details off Minn law on that to say what’s right on that law. I also think it was bad policing (and think so even that’s what the training suggested. Bad policing that results from bad police policy and training is still bad policing.)
.
But yes: any number of people might want to get him on taxes if they can’t get him on murder. If he and his wife really failed to report nearly $100K / year for five years, they deserve to have the tax authorities pursue them.
.
Lesson: If you feel the need to kneel on people’s necks to do your job, be sure to file and pay your taxes. Ok… your supposed to file and pay your taxes anyway. But really… if your going to kneel on people’s necks, you should pay your taxes. . .
The tax charges are probably Federal AND state. My guess is that prosecutors will strike a deal where his wife gets off with minimal prison time (or none) and he gets 10+ years on the tax charges. Add to that whatever he gets on the homicide charges, and it is safe to say he will be an old man before he sees the outside of a prison. Of course, if there is credible testimony showing that he had some bad previous interaction with Floyd, then he is absolute toast, and will probably never get out of prison.
.
The lesson is: cops shouldn’t kneel on the necks of handcuffed people who are pinned to the ground. The guy is a sociopath. Maybe other cops who are also sociopaths will learn from this example.
I’d seen a theory that this was murder because Floyd was spending counterfeits, and threatening the money laundering operation they had running.
It was known they worked at the same bar, but no info I am aware of they had any particular interactions there. It must be a state tax thing, you would likely owe >100K on not reporting that much money without penalties from the Feds.
.
I would say it is an almost certainty that some enterprising do-gooder at the tax office investigated this. I’m somewhat ambivalent on this, but he should be punished at the same level other similar people are for this transgression.
MikeN,
That the two had worked at the same bar suggests they may well have moved in the same circles. I’d guess the prosecutors are looking into that. I don’t know law, but based on what I’ve learned from tv-law, sometimes “motive” seems to be discussed in trials. We’ll see if the prosecutor brings up anything interesting as to motive when the time comes.
.
SteveF,
I expecte a similar thing. Go light on wife’s tax issues slam Chauvin. It might even be fair.
Conservative Treehouse suggested this was a CIA operation of some sort based on the shady paperwork for the ownership.
My understanding is the prosecution can’t really speculate on motive until the closing arguments. I don’t think you can even speculate on this without any supporting evidence even then. Unfortunately as we saw with Michael Brown there was a long line of people making up stuff so I wouldn’t be surprised to see some outrageous claims being made. The video is enough for negligence. It’s almost worse that the cop would do that to someone he barely knew anyway.
Tom Scharf,
I also suspect some enterprising do-gooder at the tax office decided to take a look-see at the tax forms of this man-in-the-news. Yes, he should be punished at the same level as other people. I have no idea what that level would usually be.
.
Because of Chauvin’s current notoriety, his tax issues are also now widely known which will subject him to some public disapproval. Ordinarily, if he got audited, very few people would hear about the issue. So the negotiation over the taxes and punishment would be a fairly private thing. To some extent that is a form of punishment, but not one actually inflicted by the law.
I’ll bet a whole lot of the private security guards, including Floyd, didn’t pay their taxes. Only way that that money was not taxed was if the employer didn’t report it on W-2s or 1099s.
Also, I will bet there is a huge tax liability of the bar — interesting to see if it is prosecuted.
JD Ohio-
If the bar didn’t report it, I’d bet they didn’t pay their share of SSN either. We’ll see what happens.
JD Ohio,
Thinking further, I suspect a lot of cops who have not paid their taxes are going to be audited after do-gooders at revenue offices start taking peaks.
Under the category of “good luck with that one”.
.
280 WSJ employees recently sent your typical letter of concern to the WSJ’s opinion section. Amazingly it was leaked somehow. The WSJ responds as I would expect:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-note-to-readers-11595547898
.
A Note to Readers
These pages won’t wilt under cancel-culture pressure.
.
“In the spirit of collegiality, we won’t respond in kind to the letter signers. Their anxieties aren’t our responsibility in any case.”
“It was probably inevitable that the wave of progressive cancel culture would arrive at the Journal, as it has at nearly every other cultural, business, academic and journalistic institution. But we are not the New York Times. Most Journal reporters attempt to cover the news fairly and down the middle, and our opinion pages offer an alternative to the uniform progressive views that dominate nearly all of today’s media.”
“And these columns will continue to promote the principles of free people and free markets, which are more important than ever in what is a culture of growing progressive conformity and intolerance.”
Lucia: “Thinking further, I suspect a lot of cops who have not paid their taxes are going to be audited after do-gooders at revenue offices start taking peaks.”
I really doubt that. I suspect that many people know that cops don’t report substantial amounts of their extra-curricular income and don’t care.
As an example of how things like this often work. About 3 or 4 years ago, I was in traditional Chinatown in Los Angeles. (Really Vietnam town now). In any event, the merchants selling clothes all requested cash, so they wouldn’t have to charge or collect sales tax. Chinatown was roughly 1 mile away from the main Los Angeles County Courthouse. So, everyone had to know what was going on, but no one cared. The merchants were beating the sales tax in plain view and no one cared.
It seems that the Chauvin’s were pretending to be residents of Florida, so they would have been paying federal taxes, but dodging Minnesota taxes.
https://minnesotareformer.com/2020/07/22/derek-chauvin-charged-with-tax-fraud-in-washington-county/
Mike N
So maybe it wasn’t a do-gooder in the MN revenue agency that got this looked into! A cop found stuff.
Pro-tax dodger tip: If you don’t declare your on the side income, don’t keep records of the money you earned in your home.
And oh….. nooooo….
Of course, it might turn out Florida lets you register to vote there merely because you own property. I don’t actually know how they decide where you can vote if you kinda-sorta have two homes and maybe live in two places. (You can’t vote for president in both FL and MN… but I don’t really know for sure that he can’t register and vote in FL. Perhaps it’s allowed? Once again: legal eagles might know.)
But I think most people would think Chauvin ought to have his voting registration in MN where he works and (presumably) where he pays state income taxes.
They also have some tax-dodging balls of steel. They bought a car in Minnesotta and then presented documents saying they were FL residents to justify not paying the Minn sales taxes!!!!
Lucia,
I am reasonably sure you have to be a legal resident of Florida to register to vote. That means you must spend more than half your time in Florida each year, or at least a plurality of your time there if you spend time in multiple places (eg three different states). I don’t know what the penalties are for voter fraud, but surely not nothing. WRT not paying taxes in MN: how can a full time employee of Minneapolis claim he is a resident of Florida? He surely wasn‘t commuting every workday. I bet his state taxes on police income was being withheld. Maybe he told his part time employer that he was not a Minnesota resident to avoid state taxes on that income. Voter fraud, tax fraud, homicide…. this won’t go well for him.
I checked: registering to vote requires that you establish residency in Florida. Fraudulent registration to vote is a third degree felony, punishable with up to 5 years in state prison. I have not checked, but voting under a fraudulent registration is also likely a third degree felony. Felonies add up after a while. So when Minnesota is done with him, Florida may take over. There is a pattern here: wanton disregard of the law.
SteveF,
Penalties definitely exist.
WRT to taxes: Even if he was a “resident” of FL, I would have expected MN law would require him to pay taxes for income earned in MN. When I was in high school I worked in various states. Some had reciprocity agreements with IL, some didn’t.
If they don’t, you end up paying taxes in the state where you earn; then your state of residence has some provision for how much you pay your state of residence. (This has evidently changed by a 2015 SCOTUS ruling. https://www.thebalance.com/state-with-reciprocal-agreements-3193329 You only pay taxes in one state.)
If they do have a reciprocity agreement, you often pay state taxes only in your state of residence (which is less complicated for the person working out of state.)
I’m really not a big fan of piling on. Chauvin ought to be penalized for his apparent crime, but going through his life with a fine tooth comb to punish him in a way that others are not typically put under is inappropriate in my opinion. Perfectly legal I suppose. If Chauvin wasn’t reporting all his overtime then my guess is that practice is widespread in that area. Punish them all, or punish nobody. Selective enforcement leads to corruption. Let’s follow him around and make sure he signals correctly and makes complete stops at all stop signs.
.
Anytime somebody wants to look into illegal voting (such as Chauvin might have done) this is normally met with howls from the left of voter suppression. It’s actually controversial to purge voter rolls of dead people in some areas.
SteveF
Which if known by jury members would make it difficult for his defense attorneys to paint his behavior during the Floyd incident as “just following protocol/training/rules”. It’s certainly possible for someone to interpret Chauvin’s “diagnosis” of possible ‘Excited Delirium’ as merely a self-serving diagnosis by a cop who wants to grant himself permission to act the way he did and knows that would be seen as an excuse to do as he did.
.
Jury members might be particularly included to see Chauvin’s statement as pulling a diagnosis out to fit what he wants to do since the descriptions of “Excited Delirium” cases generally involve someone who was exhibiting symptoms of of ED before the cops were called and not only that– the cops were called because of those symptoms.
.
Those symptoms are not “he passed a counterfit bill” oh and by the way he’s maybe “acting a little weird”. Nor is merely resisting arrest ED. Other than Chauvin’s say so, there really isn’t much evidence of ED.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3088378/
There was nothing bizarre about Floyd’s resisting arrest. In context of what was happening, it wasn’t aggressive– it was reactive. To the extent that it was violent– it was strugglign against restraint, which is rarely considered a “symptom” of some sort of mental disorder. He didn’t seem paranoid. As far as any outsider can see, there wasn’t any evidence of unexpected physical strength. If there was hyperthermia, you’d have to have been psychic to notice it (that goes for Chauvin.)
.
It’s not hard to see Chauvin’s “diagnosis” of possible ED as just a self-serving one. It may be one he’s used before. He (and possibly others) may “diagnose” possible ED in everyone who resists arrest since saying that is seem by some as justifying more aggressive police behavior.
.
That Chauvin has a pattern of disregarding laws– or just creative interpretation of laws– is not something his defense attorney is going to want to jury to be made aware of.
Perhaps the jury won’t learn of it since it might be seen as irrelevant at law. That’ would be something lawyers know but I don’t. I do know it wouldn’t be seen as irrelevant in other situations– like if you were trying to decide to hire him, have him as a friend, lend him money, accept his description of what happened at face value… yada, yada, yada…
Tom Scharf,
“Anytime somebody wants to look into illegal voting (such as Chauvin might have done) this is normally met with howls from the left of voter suppression.”
.
Sure, but it can still be prosecuted under Florida law. If he registered to vote in Florida without actually being a Florida resident (and it appears he clearly did), that is a third degree felony. I am not sure if his subsequent unlawful votes are additional felony counts, but I suspect so.
.
But the clear illegality is only part of the issue; intent matters. If his intent was to fraudulently establish Florida residency so that he could avoid some MN income taxes, then that is worse than a simple misunderstanding of the residency requirements for Florida voters. Chauvin doesn’t seem to be like some retired 75 year old grandmother who splits her time between Florida and New York and doesn’t realize she has to spend more time in Florida than in New York to vote in Florida.
Tom
And drumbeats of support by the right. I support looking into illegal voting and purging the dead from voter rolls. I’m not going to change my mind and say it’s ok in this case.
.
Sure, sometimes some crimes only come to light under unique circumstances. But if he committed one, I’m for his being penalized. I’m not swayed toward the notion that this should be ignored because other people wouldn’t have been caught.
.
As for penalizing for tax fraud: Of course the we can only penalize those who are caught. I do think that if the practice is widespread, it would be wise for the locals to pay attention to this and do a better job catching people who don’t declare their income. But I don’t think their not catching everyone is a reason to not penalize those who are caught even if the evidence only came to light because of very unusual situations.
Lucia,
I suspect the “I killed him because he was just too excited” defense is not going to work. The “I was just following normal procedure, so killing him was OK” defense is also not going to work. No defense is going to work; he will go to prison for a very long time.
.
He might be able to arrange for his wife to not got to prison on the tax charges and plead guilty to multiple felony counts, with an agreement with prosecutors to limit his prison term to ~15 years. Of course, he would be at constant risk of retaliation when in prison, so that might not be an attractive alternative.
Imagine for a moment that Chauvin is innocent, just an admittedly stretched hypothetical. Is he getting equal protection under the law at this point? Is this a fair process? I’m not sure if equal protection and selective enforcement are even legally connected.
.
What I object to is someone at the tax collection office (or other government agency) abusing their access to target a specific individual. If someone reports this to the government then I suppose it can’t be ignored. This could easily be arranged, however.
.
As for the information being found during a legal search, the question is whether this is a common practice to forward tax and voter information for further investigation.
.
I want people to be treated the same by the justice system, even if they are apparently guilty of crime which has gotten global coverage and has been tried by the public already. Chauvin is not the head of crime family. I agree it can’t be ignored at this point due to the publicity.
The wife has filed for divorce. So we’ll wait to see if he’s interested in helping her out on this.
.
I have to admit to being unable to predict what will sway juries. I know that before I took Chauvin’s ‘diagnosis’ of ED as remotely justifying what I saw, I’d want to hear Chauvin explain precisely what made Chauvin think Floyd was exhibiting ‘excited delirium’ and I’d want to hear an expert witness explain how and why we should believe there was any ‘excited delirium’. (Presumably, if the ED comes up, we’ll hear these things and hear other expert witnesses.)
.
Merely later finding some drugs in the system is certainly not enough. Lots of people who take drugs do not experience Excited Delirium. In fact, they usually do not experience ED.
The jury is rarely allowed to know a person’s prior criminal history during a criminal trial. It’s not an entrance to heaven exam. This does become relevant in sentencing however.
The chances of Chauvin taking the stand here are probably zero. Correction, if I was his attorney the chances would be exactly zero. From what I can tell that wouldn’t go well on cross examination. Expert witnesses from both sides with long and immaculate resumes will say the exact opposite things. The video will turn the tide, he is going to jail.
.
He would also likely end up in protective custody in prison (instead of the general population) due to the danger from other prisoners. That’s not much fun. If he was in general population his law enforcement history would be kept secret.
Tom Scharf
My impression is they are. If it could be shown that the revenue service never goes after people who have failed to declare their taxes or only goes after people they want for other reasons, he might be able to make a case. I’m pretty sure he’d have a case for equal protection if he could show they only went after white cops and gave everyone else a pass. Only enforcing certain laws against Black and not Whites is classic failure to provide equal protection.
But, for example, Capone going to jail for tax evasion wasn’t considered “selective enforcement” even though it’s pretty likely the reason the IRS scruitinized him was lots of people wanted to nail someone known to be guilty of other crimes (which, as it happened, also cause him to have a source of income.)
I actually agree on this. And it may have happened. We don’t know yet because the story of how the suspected tax evasion came to light is incomplete. We know they got a warrant to search after Chauvin’s arrest. The warrant was to look for financial records relevant to taxes. We don’t know who, when or how the information required to justify the warrant was collected.
.
It’s possible a tax officer abused their office and took it on themselves to poke. If so, that officer may, himself, have committed a crime. I deem this “fairly likely”. If so Chauvin is being treated differently from other people.
.
It’s also possible a person who knew Chauvin and was aware of some irregularities reported things to the tax office. An officer may have been assigned to look into the complaint and found things. If so, this would be a consequence of the publicity. But as far as the law goes, Chauvin would be being treated exactly like anyone else. (I actually deem this as “highly likely”. Lots of people make enemies in their lives. In this case there may be quite a few people who dislike Chauvin and who would snitch give this ripe opportunity.)
.
OR it’s possible that the revenue agents were already looking into Chauvin. (I deem this pretty unlikely, just not impossible.)
.
There may be other possibilities.
.
The thing is: wrt to the story, one of the main reasons this needs to be treated seriously by prosecutors is the public actually has something of a right to know if Chauvin was a rampant rule breaker in other areas. Yes: he’s not the head of a crime family. But he also doesn’t appear to be the rule-following, procedure-respecting alter boy some of his supporters seem to want to claim.
.
There’s some reason to believe is what he seems: A bad cop.
Tom Scharf
Me too. We’ll see though.
Good luck with that one!!
lucia (Comment #188124): “OR it’s possible that the revenue agents were already looking into Chauvin. (I deem this pretty unlikely, just not impossible.)”
.
According to the County Attorney that is exactly what happened. The tax people had been sending Chavin letters for a year.
MikeM,
Well! There you go! I just figured it would be too much of a coincidence that the news blew up just when the tax people were about to move on him! But there you go. I was wrong.
.
If the County Attorney say it was so, then I believe that. Do you have a link? (In this particular case, I want to show my uncle! He’s one of the cynics who think this MUST be evidence that the prosecutor dug something up because the murder case is weak. If it’s true they were already looking into it, that sort of sinks that little theory!)
lucia,
It was in my local paper. Picked up from the Minneapolis Star Tribune, byline Paul Walsh.
I don’t think Florida cares about 6 month residency requirement for voting or claiming residency. They know people are taking advantage of their lack of income tax to cheat on their own state taxes, and are looking the other way. There are hundreds of thousands of people who live in Europe almost all the time many of whom claim residency in Florida. Democrats Abroad targets them to vote absentee every year.
Florida may go after Chauvin because of publicity. However, Minnesota will definitely go after him. It’s not clear how he could have claimed Florida residency while working a government job. They would have withheld state taxes to begin with, but perhaps the government is too incompetent to notice.
Symptoms of excited delirium was not just ‘acting weird’.
Gavrilo David analyzed it as 7 yes -3 no with 7 unknown.
https://medium.com/@gavrilodavid/why-derek-chauvin-may-get-off-his-murder-charge-2e2ad8d0911
The released video and charging document do not show it, but the transcript of bodycam shows they were unable to keep him under control in the squad car. That’s when Floyd decided EMS was better.
Perhaps this was all a calculated murder plot, but I think if that was the intent he could have arranged things differently instead of waiting for Floyd to get called in so he could do it on camera.
MikeN,
There is no 6 month time required for Florida. There is only the requirement that you spend the plurality of time when in the States in Florida. If someone spends 11 months in France and 1 month in Florida, that is good enough. Spending 1 month eanch in 10 other states and 2 months in Florida is OK as well. What is not good enough is someone who spends 11 months in Minnesota and 1 month in Florida. Claiming Florida residency when you are obviously a resident of Minnesota is fraud.
MikeN,
Yes. The call suggested he’s (a) passed a counterfit bill and was (b) acting drunk (which I changed to weird.)
.
That article does not make a good case to suggest that Floyd was exhibiting ED. Those “symptoms” that he objectively had were consistent with merely “resisting arrest”. The ones that are unique to ED he did not exhibit. Some of the thing they list as “Y” should be “No”. The cops were not called because he was exhibiting “bizarre behavior”. They were called because he tried to pass a counterfeit bill. Yes, he also seemed drunk– but that’s not why the cops were called.
.
Listing “Lack of tiring” is a stretch. The episode was short and he clearly did ‘tire’.
.
The “evidence” that he had ED amounts to police — who may be self serving– saying they thought he might have ED. The checks on the list are pretty much consistent with “resisting arrest” and little else. I think it would be pretty self-serving in general if police were to claim they get to treat every person who resists arrest as “suspected ED”. That premise would certainly permit one heck of a lot of excessive force.
.
Whether Chauvin will get off on the murder charge remains to be seen. Perhaps he will. But honestly, I’m not seeing a strong case for there actually being ED and I recognize that it would be in the interest of self serving cops to claim to suspect it based on scant evidence. So the fact that they claimed it really doesn’t strike me as strong evidence the really thought it nor that it existed.
Thanks Mike M
https://www.startribune.com/fired-minneapolis-officer-derek-chauvin-wife-charged-with-tax-crimes/571864051/
““they were sending [Chauvin] letters last year†about no returns being filed, “and they got no response.â€
.
Not only is the guy a sociopath, he is crazy as well. Tax collectors don’t ever say “never mind”, unless you are dead and your estate has zero assets. Not filing tax returns for Minnesota when he was obviously living there was just bonkers. Maybe he can plead insanity in Floyd’s killing, or at least terminal stupidity.
SteveF, it may be a fraud, but I don’t think Florida would care about it.
Lucia,
“The cops were not called because he was exhibiting “bizarre behaviorâ€. They were called because he tried to pass a counterfeit bill. Yes, he also seemed drunk– but that’s not why the cops were called.”
.
Barring mind-reading, that’s impossible to establish. Passing bad money is in the same initial complaint as the seemed drunk:
—
Um someone comes our store and give us fake bills and we realize it before he left the store, and we ran back outside, they was sitting on their car. We tell them to give us their phone, put their (inaudible) thing back and everything and he was also drunk and everything and return to give us our cigarettes back and so he can, so he can go home but he doesn’t want to do that, and he’s sitting on his car cause he is awfully drunk and he’s not in control of himself.
—
There’s four different allegations here:
1) He gave us fake bills
2) He won’t give us our cigarettes back
3) He’s awfully drunk
4) He’s not in control of himself.
Number one was the first thing listed, but obviously not the most important thing to the caller — he was willing to let him go home if he gave the cigarettes back. But Floyd didn’t give them back, was “awfully drunk” and not in control of himself.
.
This exchange also preceded the Operator saying that squads would be sent:
—
Operator: On 38th St. So, this guy gave a counterfeit bill, has your cigarettes, and he’s under the influence of something?
Caller: Something like that, yes. He is not acting right.
Operator: What’s he look like, what race?
Caller: Um, he’s a tall guy. He’s like tall and bald, about like 6…6½, and she’s not acting right so and she started to go, drive the car.
—
Maybe it’s just me, but I think someone described as awfully drunk and starting to go drive the car represents sufficient reason by itself for the police to be involved.
.
“But honestly, I’m not seeing a strong case for there actually being ED and I recognize that it would be in the interest of self serving cops to claim to suspect it based on scant evidence. So the fact that they claimed it really doesn’t strike me as strong evidence the really thought it nor that it existed.”
.
Officer Lane was the first to bring up ED, and he brought it up after asking “should we roll him on his side?” It’s implausible that he was pretending he thought Floyd had ED as an excuse to continue keeping him restrained in the prone position, since he was suggesting moving him. Chauvin agreed with him on the ED possibility and gave that as a reason to keep it where he was — even if you don’t believe he was sincere and just using an excuse, it establishes that they brought it up *before* Floyd’s death, not as an after-the-fact claim to justify their behavior.
.
One point that’s worth remembering is that knee restraint was an allowed restraint by MPD for *actively resisting*, which Floyd was when they attempted to get him in the car. ExDS fears would explain why you would have multiple people holding him down, or why you would continue restraint when the subject is no longer conscious, but it doesn’t really have anything to do with whether the restraint technique is inherently unsafe to use, or if Chauvin and his fellow officers *believed* it was safe to use. The government complaint says “Police are trained that this type of restraint with a
subject in a prone position is inherently dangerous.” But the MPD allowed those trained in the technique to use it, and the University of Minnesota study (using MPD officers) claims to debunk positional asphyxia as a cause of death — pretty much the opposite of what the government complaint says. And of course, Floyd *didn’t* die of asphyxia, and *did* have a potential lethal overdose of drugs in his system. It hasn’t been established that Chauvin’s technique even *contributed* to Floyd’s death, let alone caused it.
“It hasn’t been established that Chauvin’s technique even *contributed* to Floyd’s death, let alone caused it.â€
.
So if the cops had gone to the wrong address, and Floyd disappeared before they arrived, you think he would have died anyway? The jury is not going to believe that at all; they will see the video, and that will be enough. The coroner appeared to state no clear cause of death at all…. I guess people just die for no reason…. especially with someone kneeling on they neck…. while they are unconscious… and while the crowd watching is screaming “get off him, you’re killing him!â€
.
The guy is a monster. He will not walk.
DaleS
OK: they called because of the theft. Not odd behavior.
.
The odd behavior they describe is also not consistent with ED.
Perhaps. But they would have let him go except for the cigarettes. And wrt the ED, his symptoms were not of ED. They were of being drunk (or high.)
.
So what if Lane was the first to bring up the possibility? Lane isn’t using it to justify putting his knee on his neck. He’s using it to justify treating him less harshly. It doesn’t mean Lane thought the probability of ED is high. Just one of those things that one might consider– in order to avoid killing someone.
.
Perhaps. But that would be irrelevant to the notion that Floyd had ED or that officers actually thought it probable. I don’t see it as probable based on the described behaviors. Maybe someone else on the jury would– but what we saw did not align with the descriptoin of actual ED.
.
“It hasn’t been established” is of course true of lots of things. That’s going to be a question for a jury. No trial has taken place, so we don’t know what a jury will decide on the answer to that question.
.
SteveF is quite right that the fact that those watching shouted that Chauvin was killing Floyd, Chauvin did not stop or change tactics and Floyd actually died is not going to go well for Chauvin. I’m sure Chauvin’s attorney will likely find an expert witness who will say that it’s “not established” (because one can almost never “establish” cause of death in many situations). If jury members are selected in an unbiased manner from the population, I doubt many would be swayed by “it hasn’t been established”. (They might end up with a hung jury– but likely most would not be persuaded.)
.
Jury’s aren’t selected randomly. I’m sure the defense will try to fill the jury with as many “pro-cop-heavy-enforcement” as they can.
.
We’ll see what happens.
Compression of the neck and chest is specifically discourage if you suspect ExDS.
https://www.emsworld.com/216063/ce-article-excited-delirium
If you suspect ExDS you are supposed to turn the person being restrained on their side.
.
So: Yes ExDS could be a reason (among many other reasons) why more than one cop might be involved in restraining someone. But the specific restraint used — compression of neck– is the opposite of what is recommended precisely because it is thought to possibly trigger positional asphixia.
.
The other obvious motivation for having multiple people restrain a large person who is resisting arrest is that it is a large person resisting arrest and having multiple people involved makes controlling them easier. (It’s actually no different with small kids and so on. It is easier for a much larger person to control a small person, and failing that, it is easier for multiple small people to control a small person. ) That multiple people were involved in restraining is “non-evidence” of ED. (It is even “non-evidence” of any actual need for extra people. It is simply a choice — and often a prudent one.)
.
In any case, if Chauvin or others really believed there was ED, the choice of pressure to the neck was the opposite of what is recommended. So either (a) bad training or (b) bad choice that was contrary to training. In the specific case of ED, pressure to the neck, is, in fact the choice of restraint that is thought to potentially result in death. So the defense of ED is not necessarily going to help because the prosecution will surely ask Chauvin why he applied a restraint to the neck if he actually suspected ED.
.
To justify the neck pressure or keeping Floyd on his front rather than side, Chauvin needs to claim he did not think it was ED. Alternatively, he has to claim Minnesota training includes advise that is contrary to that of other groups. The latter might work in his defense if the jury believes it. (He’ll probably have to show it’s true in that case.) But the former means that claiming he thought it was ED supports a verdict of guilty because he went ahead and picked a restraint method that training indicates one should not use precisely because it can cause death.
SteveF,
—
So if the cops had gone to the wrong address, and Floyd disappeared before they arrived, you think he would have died anyway? The jury is not going to believe that at all; they will see the video, and that will be enough. The coroner appeared to state no clear cause of death at all…. I guess people just die for no reason…. especially with someone kneeling on they neck…. while they are unconscious… and while the crowd watching is screaming “get off him, you’re killing him!â€
—
Do I think he would have died if the cops never showed up? It’s certainly a possibility. Floyd had 11ng/mL2 of Fentanyl and the mean in fatal overdoses in the NH study was 9.96 ng/mL2. (The medium article incorrectly states that this was the *median* value, but it’s actually the mean from a range of 0.75 to 113.00, so the median is likely lower than 9.96. 541 individuals in the study). Floyd had two heart conditions, and the arteriosclerotic heart disease was classified as severe. Floyd was saying “I can’t breathe” *before* he was in prone restraint. Floyd was described as “not in control of himself” and “not acting right” in the original complaint.
.
Let me turn the question around on you — are you saying that if the cops had never knelt on Floyd, there is no chance of him dying of cardiopulmonary arrest *unless the police did something to cause it*? I’m no medical expert, but I don’t think the cause of death is at all surprising given the underlying condition. Virtually all the non-eldery patients my wife sees in the cardiac unit are drug users; some don’t make it out of the hospital, and I suspect some never even make it to the hospital.
.
” The jury is not going to believe that at all; they will see the video, and that will be enough. ”
.
The video demonstrates clearly that the *bystanders* thought Floyd was dying of suffocation due to Chauvin’s actions. But the autopsy reveals that he didn’t die of suffocation, and the bystanders weren’t aware that Floyd was saying he couldn’t breathe before being restrained. The video provides no physical evidence of cause of death at all. It certainly looks terrible, but the bystanders may have been unaware, as I was, that kneeling on the neck is an actual formal restraint method some officers are trained to do, and that some consider to be safe when done properly. There’s no end of things that *if you knew nothing about* you could watch and assume incorrect causation, including CPR and defibrillation.
.
The jury will receive information that the bystanders did not know and in some cases could not know. There is absolutely no reason why the jury should set aside that information and judge *solely* on the information contained in the video.
.
“The coroner appeared to state no clear cause of death at all…. I guess people just die for no reason….”
.
Cardiopulmonary arrest is a clear cause of death. Your heart stops and stays stopped, you die. Cardiac arrest is one of the ways Fentanyl overdoses kills people (respiratory arrest is another). What’s *not* clear from the coroner is *how* the kneeling mechanically contributed to the death, if at all. The charging document from the preliminary report says:
—
The autopsy revealed no physical findings that support a diagnosis of traumatic asphyxia or strangulation. Mr. Floyd had underlying health conditions including coronary artery disease and hypertensive heart disease. The combined effects of Mr. Floyd being restrained by the police, his underlying health conditions and any potential intoxicants in his system likely contributed to his death.
—
In the final report the title only mentions the police angle, “complicating law enforcement subdual, restraint, and neck compression”. These are all potential stressors, and stress *does* make heart attacks more likely. I imagine that they do no good at all if you’re already having a heart attack also. But that the neck compression *specifically* stressed Floyd more than just being arrested and handcuffed already had is not something the autopsy can show. What it *could* show is physical damage caused by the kneeling, or evidence of restricted bloodflow to the head. Either of those could prove that Chauvin wasn’t just providing the light-to-medium pressure the MPD approved, but was *actually harming* Floyd by kneeling heavily on his neck. Is that in the autopsy report?
.
It is not. The blunt force damage was found on the forehead, face, lips, shoulder, hands, elbows, legs, and wrists. Of the parts of the body where the officers were known to have restrained Floyd, all show detectable signs *except* the neck. And there’s no sign of aphyxsia, or any life-threatening injuries — and it’s clear they were looking for them:
—
“No injuries of anterior muscles of neck or laryngeal structures.”
“No chest wall soft tissue injuries, rib injuries (other than a single rib fracture from CPR) , vertebral column injuries, or visceral injuries.”
“Incision and subcutaneous dissection of posterior and lateral neck, shoulder, back, flanks, and buttocks negative for occult trauma.”
—
How did Chauvin’s kneeling *cause* Floyd’s death without leaving any physical impression at all? Why should I ignore the physical evidence in favor of:
“someone kneeling on they neck…. while they are unconscious… and while the crowd watching is screaming “get off him, you’re killing him!—
.
Looks terrible, but *how* did it kill him? Even if it was the mental stress of being restrained that contributed to the heart failure, once he’s unconscious that goes away. It was probably too late at that point — but it may well have been too late when Chauvin started kneeling.
.
“The guy is a monster. He will not walk.”
.
Well, the tax evasion case seems pretty open and shut, so I agree he will certainly convicted of *something*. But your insistence that the video *alone* is sufficient reason to call him a monster and put him away even when the physical evidence isn’t there at all to support kneeling as a mechanical cause of death reminds me of the movie Silverado. “We’re going to have a fair trial, followed by a first-class hanging.”
DaleS
It is a form of restraint that is specifically to be avoided if the person being restrained is exhibiting ED.
Yep. They will. Consequently, Chauvin or or his defense will need to explain why he claimed he thought Floyd was exhibiting ED and then used a restraint that should not be used in these circumstances because it is thought to have an excessive risk of causing death.
Well… yes. And if you punch an old lady, knock her over and cause death, her frailty will likely “contribute” to her dying from the injuries your actions cause. Her frailty is not a defense to your having killed her. So Floyd’s underlying health conditions aren’t really going to help Chauvin here. Even the drugs likely won’t since almost no one is going to believe he would have died at that particular moment in time from his heart condition and any drugs.
.
The only part in this that could remotely be a defense is the claim that it might have been too late before Chauvin had him on the ground, on his face and started kneeling. If Floyd died of the mental stress of being restrained…. then Chauvin killed him.
If, in fact, Floyd was already having a heart attack that could not be stopped before Chauvin began to deal with him, Chauvin’s police mistake is, of course, to treat someone who says they are having trouble breathing in that way, but it might not be murder.
But also in thise case, Chauvin and others need to explain their theory that Floyd was already having a heart issue but that instead of letting him stand while calling the EMT’s they decided to manhandle him, bring him to the ground, and put a knee to his neck.
That would mean four officers seriously screwed up and either (a) couldn’t tell that was happening but mistook it for something else or (b) knew it was happening but decided to use physical force on a person who was in the process of having a heart attack.
I bet we won’t hear Chauvin’s team bringing forward this defense… but who knows?
I think the main reason Chauvin may not be convicted of murder has to do with how MN laws describes the elements of murder. But all the theories that he was just somehow doing the right thing, following training or that his behavior didn’t contribute to his death in a way that most people call “killing Floyd” really don’t hang together.
lucia (Comment #188177):
All of that is counterfactual. That only shows that somebody several years ago would have disagreed with the way the cops handled the situation. Recommendations vary and have been rapidly evolving.
.
That should not be a problem since MPD documents, cited previously here, say exactly that.
——–
SteveF (Comment #188165):
Yes. That is the nature of that condition.
——-
lucia (Comment #188169):
.
True, but entirely irrelevant. The crowd were not medical personnel. They probably have no idea what excited delirium is. Or that in dealing with a person in the throes of excited delirium, the correct action is often the opposite of what common sense would prescribe.
Lucia,
The 2017 article you linked to specifically discouraged prone restraint for ExDS, but its recommended restraint method is tying all four extremities to the cot — the target audience for the article is EMS, not policemen. It does say that prone position, hog-tied and pressure to neck or chest restricts pulmonary function and is dangerous to ExDS even if it’s fine for healthy individuals, but the link is to 1997 study on positional asphyxia, and we know MPD officers were involved in a *2019* study testing knee restraint and finding “no significant changes in cardiovascular data” and debunking positional asphyxia *entirely* as a cause of death.
.
We know that in 2018 MPD distributed a pre-hospital sedation report with an attached document specifically on ExDS. This *does not* recommend against prone position in any way, here’s what it says about ideal restraint:
—
In subjects who do not respond to verbal calming and de-escalation techniques, control measures are a prerequisite for medical assessment and intervention. When necessary, this should be accomplished as rapidly and safely as possible. Recent research indicates that physical struggle is a much greater contributor to catecholamine surge and metabolic acidosis than other causes of exertion or noxious stimuli. Since these parameters are thought to contribute to poor outcomes in ExDS, the specific physical control methods employed should optimally minimize the time spent struggling, while safely achieving physical control. The use of multiple personnel with training in safe physical control measures is encouraged.
—
Prone neck restraint probably fits the description of minimizing the time spent struggling while “safely” achieving physical control. HOWEVER, the medium article somehow missed the very next paragraph:
—
After adequate physical control is achieved, medical assessment and treatment should be immediately initiated. Indeed, because death might occur suddenly, EMS should ideally be present and prepared to resuscitate before definitive LEO control measures are initiated.
—
I’ll grant this says “ideally”, but I think you could make a case that if they suspected ExDS they should’ve waited for EMS to arrive before fully restraining them. However, I looked in vain for any directive in the main body text that MPD officers should wait, or that they should avoid the prone position. Indeed, the “Common Practice Case” for ketamine injection cases in the *main text* was described as follows:
—
“The individual was quickly detained by several officers who pinned the individual to the ground until EMS arrived.”
—
There is *absolutely no indication* that this is inappropriate in the main text. The document also reveals that MPD officers assisted (by restraining the patient) in 88% of cases, they were handcuffed in 85% of cases, they were hobbled in 15% of cases, restrained by EMS devices (stretchers/straps) in 43% of cases, and had a spit shield in 33% of cases. In Floyd’s case we have handcuffs and also restraint while EMS is there, which was the case in a minimum of 73% of ketamine cases.
.
Given the lack of *any* recommendation against prone restraint in the MPD document and the fact that prone restraint was referred to as the common case, I think it will be *very* difficult to establish that Chauvin should’ve known better than to use that restraint method if he suspected ExDS. I also doubt the “science is settled” on this at all, especially since the very *existence* of both ExDS and prone asphyxia is still doubted.
.
I do think that if Chauvin believed that prone neck restraint was more likely to result in death and used it *for that reason* he’s morally guilty of murder, even if it didn’t *actually* physically contribute. I don’t think that should be the default assumed and that Chauvin needs to prove he thought it was safe; it should be the state’s reponsibility to prove that Chauvin should have known it was *not* safe. In the similar Lewis case, neither side of the lawsuit even alleged that the kneeling officer thought it was unsafe.
The article to which Dale S and I have been referring is here:
https://medium.com/@gavrilodavid/why-derek-chauvin-may-get-off-his-murder-charge-2e2ad8d0911
It specifically addresses MPD procedures.
——
Dale S (Comment #188184): “I think you could make a case that if they suspected ExDS they should’ve waited for EMS to arrive before fully restraining them.”
.
The article does not seem to explicitly address that point, but I read it as being understood that restraint should be applied immediately and maintained until EMT’s have sedated the subject. The reason being that a person with ExDS behaves irrationally and is a danger to himself and others, unless restrained.
Lucia,
“The only part in this that could remotely be a defense is the claim that it might have been too late before Chauvin had him on the ground, on his face and started kneeling. If Floyd died of the mental stress of being restrained…. then Chauvin killed him.”
.
Mental stress from being restrained provably precedes prone restraint. Floyd resisted handcuffs, strongly resisted getting in the back of the police car, and complained that he “couldn’t breathe” *before* he was placed in prone restraint. Since there’s no possible way for merely being handcuffed to restrict his breathing, it’s clear that he was *already* in some sort of distress prior to kneeling. Is it *possible* that prone restraint was even more stressful and put him over the top? I think so. Is it possible that it made no difference at all to the final outcome? Again, I think so.
.
“And if you punch an old lady, knock her over and cause death, her frailty will likely “contribute†to her dying from the injuries your actions cause. Her frailty is not a defense to your having killed her. So Floyd’s underlying health conditions aren’t really going to help Chauvin here. Even the drugs likely won’t since almost no one is going to believe he would have died at that particular moment in time from his heart condition and any drugs.”
.
Certainly if you punch an old lady, knock her over and cause injuries, and she dies from those injuries, you killed her. But that’s not comparable to this case — Chauvin’s kneeling caused *no* detectable injuries at all. Floyd died of cardiopulmonary arrest, which *both* his overdose and his severe heart disease were capable of causing even without combining them. To make a direct line between Chauvin’s kneeling and the death you have to believe that the disease/overdose would not have triggered death if Floyd was standing, would not have triggered death if prone, but would have triggered if and only if Chauvin used knee restraint.
.
We know when the cardiac arrest happened, because it causes unconsciousness. But a majority of cardiac arrest victims experience symptoms before the arrest, and shortness of breath *is* one of those symptoms. Floyd’s complaint that he couldn’t breathe was certainly consistent with an upcoming cardiac arrest. Given that Floyd *actually died* of cardiopulmonary arrest, I don’t see how Chauvin’s defense team can avoid addressing the possibility that Floyd was already experiencing heart issues *without* actually having ExDS.
DaleS
Sure it appears he was in “some” distress. But this won’t help Chauvin’s case.
Either Chauvin and the other cops
(a) thought he was not in very much distress or
(b) They did thing he was in a lot of distress
If (a) that points to people thinking he was actually not in that much distress. In which case, the knee and prone position were triggering the problems or
If (b) then putting him to the ground and putting the kneed to the neck is knowingly doing something that harms a person through police action.
Neither of these things help Chauvin morally or legally. Moreover, even being mistaken doesn’t help Chauvin’s case legally because you take your victims as they come.
I think most jury members will the argument that injuries that are of the sort that one would expect to be undetectable were undetectable unpersuasive. As. They. Should. It’s quite likely this won’t help Chauvin much, though who knows. Maybe with the “reasonable doubt” standard some will buy it.
Well… perhaps someone should have told Chauvin that. Then he might have not decided to push someone on the verge of a heart attach to the ground and put his knee to his neck. One would hope cops are trained to not suddenly manhandle people who appear to be about to have a heart attack.
.
So this would either be evidence that MN police training is abject, or that Chauvin ignored it, placed someone face down (which tend to cause chest pressure) and applied neck pressure to someone who was showing symptoms of a heart attack.
.
Morally Chauvin’s only defense was that he did not think Floyd was exhibiting symptoms of a heart attack or ED. Because at least in this case he wouldn’t be doing exactly the wrong thing when presented with someone having a heart attack or exhibiting ED.
Legally, it’s a tough call. It’s hard to believe he can come up with any reasonable justification that says he did not murder the guy that is consistent with claiming he believed the guy was having a heart attack or exhibitting ED. Because if Chauvin thought either of those things when he acted, then Chauvin is a psychopath.
But the problem with the defense that Chauvin and other cops did not think Floyd was having a heart attack or ED is that, in that case, it seems pretty dang unlikely Floyd was having either of those things. So…. Chauvin killed him.
“ExDS fears would explain why you would have multiple people holding him down, or why you would continue restraint when the subject is no longer conscious,”
I don’t think there’s anything that says you should do anything to someone who’s unconscious. In the Lewis case, the officers changed tactics after determining he wasn’t conscious.
>you think he would have died anyway?
In the case of Eric Garner this is a definite no, but when he resisted arrest, the cops went by the book, and he ended up dead because his health conditions couldn’t handle the standard procedures. The cops should have adjusted to circumstances. It’s possible a different officer in charge would have led to a better decision there, but I don’t think they should have been thrown in jail.
In this case, it looks like Chauvin was acting according to his training. I don’t see the hostility or sociopathy that others are seeing. They weren’t beating him savagely.
This is a silly discussion.
.
The public will never accept Chauvin’s behavior as anything a police office should ever do… his behavior was simply beyond the pale: senseless, horrible, and cruel, and he will suffer the consequences. The video shows clearly was nearly yukking it up as Floyd begged him to stop. The jury is going to believe Chauvin’s actions are the principle cause of death, just as I do, and they will convict him. I predict Chauvin will go to jail for a very long time, with an extra dose of time for tax fraud on top of the homicide.
MikeN,
“I don’t see the hostility or sociopathy that others are seeing.”
.
Then you must be watching some other video.