My raising the issue was on the perception of the situation that can be construed. As I mentioned, EVERYONE knows that it is "bad" to put pressure on the front of the neck to control anyone and more so for 9 minutes. Everyone knows that doing such an act would result in death and there is no way anyone could "not" know that. Which means it would have to be murder period. It is improper characterization of what happened that can lead to improper opinions of what happened. A knee to the back of the neck only is not going to cause asphyxiation on a stomach down prone person. Chest compression can cause asphyxiation though and that is where the focus of the evidence is going to be and should be for anyone following this case.
In layman's terms, the medical examiner said Floyd died from a sudden failure in his heart's ability to pump blood to his brain due to the stress put on his body by the arresting officer pressing upon his neck.
I don't know about asphyxia, which was the finding of the independent medical examiner here. But the official autopsy set the cause of death as "Cardiopulmonary arrest complicating law enforcement subdual, restraint, and neck compression."
![]()
George Floyd Died of Heart Attack Complicated by Neck Compression
In layman's terms, the medical examiner said George Floyd died from a sudden failure in his heart's ability to pump blood to his brain due to the stress put on his body by the arresting officer pressing upon his neck.www.newsweek.com
The autopsy reports aren't all that clarifying to me. They do not support that he was strangled. Beyond that, I am not sure what you could draw from autopsy to conclude whether he went into fatal arrhythmia for multifactorial reasons including the trauma of his restraint or whether the ultimate cardiac arrest was due to hypoxia from his restraint or whether some degree of asphyxiation was instrumental in putting him into cardiac arrest but the other factors (intoxication, hypertensive heart disease, recent COVID illness, stress response to the trauma, etc.) were more important. While I feel confident obstruction of his neck vessels was not a mechanism of death, I don't think we could conclude the knee to the neck was not an important factor in contributing to his death.
I also abhor the "cardiac arrest = heart attack" explanations from the media. Most usually, a heart attack is refers to the occlusion of a coronary artery thereby causing ischemic injury to the heart. Technically, any reason the heart suffers damage from a lack of adequate oxygenated blood supply, it is a heart attack. However, cardiac arrest indicates the heart ceases to be in a rhythm capable of delivering blood to the body. The rhythm might be asystole (flatline) or it might be a fatal arrhythmia like ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation. And while we're on it, CPR is what's done to keep the tissues oxygenated at some level. The body may restore its rhythm on its own, or you might need to intervene. A defibrillator (shock) does not do anything for asystole (flatline). It actually disrupts temporarily abnormal electrical activity in the hopes that the body's normal conduction system takes over. No electrical activity isn't shockable. But you can push meds like epinephrine. Of course, cardiac arrest is often fatal even when ACLS providers are immediately on scene.
I agree that the two autopsies are both inconsistent and confusing.
What I do know is the legal standard for causation, which is that but for the defendant's conduct, the victim would not have died. Regardless of whether there were other contributing causes.
It should seem obvious to a lay jury, not understanding the medical arguments, that Floyd would not have died had it not been for the conduct of the police. The contra assumption is that, by raw coincidence, Floyd was going to die right then anyway, say from a random heart attack or overdose, even had he never encountered the police, and had they never sat on him for almost 9 minutes.
The only problematic issue so far as causation is what HP's argument points to - apportioning responsibility among the various defendants. I think at least in the case of the Chauvin trial, the prosecution will heavily rely on the fact that the county ME's finding was "neck compression." Whether it is correct or not, intelligible or not, that is the argument which will be made.
There is another argument against Chauvin, however. That even if it was compression of the chest which caused death, that Chauvin was the supervisor and he directed the other officers not to stop what they were doing.
I don't know about asphyxia, which was the finding of the independent medical examiner here. But the official autopsy set the cause of death as "Cardiopulmonary arrest complicating law enforcement subdual, restraint, and neck compression."
![]()
George Floyd Died of Heart Attack Complicated by Neck Compression
In layman's terms, the medical examiner said George Floyd died from a sudden failure in his heart's ability to pump blood to his brain due to the stress put on his body by the arresting officer pressing upon his neck.www.newsweek.com
Floyd sustained near the time of his death, including scrapes, bruisers and tears on his forehead, face and upper lip, shoulders, hands, elbows and legs
If I push someone off the worlds tallest cliff and from timing it can be proven the person had a heart attack before hitting the ground does that in any way absolve me from a murder charge?
If you were white and the perp was not, yes you would be absolved. If the victim was white and you were not, you would not be absolved.If I push someone off the worlds tallest cliff and from timing it can be proven the person had a heart attack before hitting the ground does that in any way absolve me from a murder charge?
Yes, I am for real. I get to see this shit EVERY.SINGLE.DAY.That is so idiotic........are you for real??
If I push someone off the worlds tallest cliff and from timing it can be proven the person had a heart attack before hitting the ground does that in any way absolve me from a murder charge?
Neck compression is not asphyxiation. Not the same thing at all. Also, the official report said there no evidence of physical injuries that could lead to any form of death of Floyd as well. Which would include the neck compression which is not shown as something "found" during the official autopsy as a physical sign but something as an acknowledgement to the reports of the scene. There was evidence of trauma to Floyd as even the newsmax report you linked stated.
The scrapes to the face are indicative of a person able to move the face around on the ground while a knee is on the back of their neck. Aka, Floyd got road rash from moving his head around which shows that there was no way for the knee to the neck in that position to constrict airflow through the neck or blood flow through the arteries of the neck. Without a break in the neck, or constriction of airflow or blood flow, then any form of neck compression is not going to lead to a fatal outcome. It's just physically impossible. Might lead to a sore neck later though. Still no soft tissue damage relating to the "compression" on the neck was found at autopsy. Meaning the pressure on the back of the neck wasn't even heavy enough to induce bruising. The whole neck thing is a red herring. The compression of the back is about the only thing in the official autopsy report that can be used a direct connection of the officers being responsible for the death of Floyd at this point.
As for the the independent coroner Baden... Well Baden is a known fraud who has stated he based his "autopsy" for George Floyd on the videos he saw as well for his claim of asphyxiation. Hence the reason right now that "autopsy report" is not being allowed as evidence at all in the case. Pretty much anything Baden touches is not allowed as evidence in criminal cases either for several reason due to his less than reputable past.
Why is the conservative response always to quibble over the details? Clearly, the dude died from someone kneeling on some part of his body. Had he not been kneeled on, he would probably still be alive (unless of course they tased him while pushing him into the back of the patrol car).
Stop using some sort of "gotcha" as a defense. It is always shit like this. It reeks of conservatize brain and a smidge of autism. Are you on the spectrum by chance?
Judge: "You are accused of stabbing the victim 33 times which resulted in his death"
HP: "Ha! I stabbed him 32 times and shot him! I am outta here bitches!"
First of all HomerJS would never post anything that has any sort of Malware!! He would have checked it out first!Yes, I am for real. I get to see this shit EVERY.SINGLE.DAY.
I was responding to a post that read exactly like someone who was trying to get me to click on a link that led to content that could easily be malicious. Turns out that is the go-to move for threat actors. --- Paranoid much??
Do you know that the majority of malware is hosted in legitimate file sharing sites? Do you also know that simple AV signatures are insufficient to detect advanced threats? Do you also know that sites like documentcloud.org (one drive, box, etc., etc.) do NOT use adequate scanning technologies on their sites to keep someone from posting malicious content or modifying files to include malicious content? Do you also know that threat actors use current events to attract people to content such that they can get them to open said content? --- bla bla bla.....who didn`t know? You do realize that you are very late the cyber security party? Most of us already know what you spout off as something that you think only you know about!
Tada! You are now less ignorant! --- Actually you did not teah me a thing! Other than that you are paranoid and perhaps should seell your computer and become a budhist monk!
Now that I have responded to the post directed at me made with an inadequate understanding of cybersecurity, we can further discuss in the Security forum if you want to learn more. --- Why? I know more than you do about cyber security!
First of all HomerJS would never post anything that has any sort of Malware!! He would have checked it out first!
Second had you posted that link it would have been flagged! Why because you have no track record on these forums........which basically means your a noob!
Dude you must have shitty malware protection or none at all!
Or your a total noob to this and have no experience in computer security!
Now don`t go and tell me you have a cyber security degree and you work for Nortons or Microsoft!
We don`t need to talk about shizza.........I have been using a computer since the mid 90`s....never ever an issue with being hacked or being compromised!
Now go home and tell your momma that a bad guy in P&N told you you were a security beginner!
You already derailed the convo with your paranoia....Ahhh, the confidence of those who lack knowledge. You probably think anti-virus is the way to go to keep all bad things out and don't understand at all that the days of gloriously popping up browser windows on end points is long gone and threat actors silently work to extract your information over weeks or months. You really are showing your inexperience in understanding how threat actors really operate and how advanced malware works. -- You assume based on nothing that you know moere than other people when it comes to security!
I actually do it for living and do quite well at it. Everyday, I get to talk to my customers and their security analysts and explain to them how their security works and what they can do to improve on it. I get to see malware pass by anti-malware solutions only to be caught by advanced analysis techniques like sandboxing. I get to hear about what advanced threat actors are doing all over the world. I really do understand how this works. I won't share with you the cybersecurity firms I have worked for but one of them used to own Norton (which incidentally was the kiddie pool to develop enterprise products which is why it was better than most solutions from 2011-??). Personally your not telling almost everybody on these foruns anything new....been there and done thaT!
And no, Microsoft is not a cybersecurity company - again you show your ignorance. If you had refenced someone like FireEye, Crowd Strike, Palo Alto, or Carbon Black I would have known you may have some tiny clue about what you are talking about, but clearly you do not. You are at best some Windows Server jockey or a storage admin who reads articles on the interewebs about scary things like wannacry. More likely, you are a programmer who really doesn't understand how enterprise IT works because you are too busy reading code and looking for typos. -- Nobody said Microsoft was soley a cybersecurity company... obviously you have no clue -- Streamline and strengthen security | Microsoft
This has nothing to do with Homer's ability to follow a link and assess it's security risks. My point was that a simple post with a link to a hosting service where hundreds of pieces of malware are hosted every month was a bit suspicious. Maybe it is my experience that makes me so jaded. Perhaps some day, you will really understand how the bad guys work and you too will learn to be more cautious (running updated malware isn't the whole picture, sparky). -- your point made you look like a complete idiot! Why? Because only you cried about the link.......see how that goes.....
Now you can go scamper back to your server room or your lines of code and pretend to be doing complex work. --- as if you do complex work in your fetal postion.....paranoid as heck!
[No offense to server jockeys and programmers] --- no offense...you already proved my point!
Also, posting a bunch of drivel gives me a "track record"? Interesting. I will be sure t find more opportunities to post up meaningless stuff to achieve higher post counts. -- 436 posts in and we actually should trust you based on your paranoia??
We can take this up in PM but I am done derailing an important conversation. And I am in fact Homer posted up the documents for us.
What exactly are accusing me of?Ahhh, the confidence of those who lack knowledge. You probably think anti-virus is the way to go to keep all bad things out and don't understand at all that the days of gloriously popping up browser windows on end points is long gone and threat actors silently work to extract your information over weeks or months. You really are showing your inexperience in understanding how threat actors really operate and how advanced malware works.
I actually do it for living and do quite well at it. Everyday, I get to talk to my customers and their security analysts and explain to them how their security works and what they can do to improve on it. I get to see malware pass by anti-malware solutions only to be caught by advanced analysis techniques like sandboxing. I get to hear about what advanced threat actors are doing all over the world. I really do understand how this works. I won't share with you the cybersecurity firms I have worked for but one of them used to own Norton (which incidentally was the kiddie pool to develop enterprise products which is why it was better than most solutions from 2011-??).
And no, Microsoft is not a cybersecurity company - again you show your ignorance. If you had refenced someone like FireEye, Crowd Strike, Palo Alto, or Carbon Black I would have known you may have some tiny clue about what you are talking about, but clearly you do not. You are at best some Windows Server jockey or a storage admin who reads articles on the interewebs about scary things like wannacry. More likely, you are a programmer who really doesn't understand how enterprise IT works because you are too busy reading code and looking for typos.
This has nothing to do with Homer's ability to follow a link and assess it's security risks. My point was that a simple post with a link to a hosting service where hundreds of pieces of malware are hosted every month was a bit suspicious. Maybe it is my experience that makes me so jaded. Perhaps some day, you will really understand how the bad guys work and you too will learn to be more cautious (running updated malware isn't the whole picture, sparky).
Now you can go scamper back to your server room or your lines of code and pretend to be doing complex work.
[No offense to server jockeys and programmers]
Also, posting a bunch of drivel gives me a "track record"? Interesting. I will be sure t find more opportunities to post up meaningless stuff to achieve higher post counts.
We can take this up in PM but I am done derailing an important conversation. And I am in fact Homer posted up the documents for us.
LOL. Nothing at all! Your post just read exactly like something to entice me to download some malware. If your current career gets boring, you are well positioned to write malicious emails to unsuspecting recipients.What exactly are accusing me of?
This is true!You already derailed the convo with your paranoia....
You are the epitome of somebody who is a detriment to society!LOL. Nothing at all! Your post just read exactly like something to entice me to download some malware. If your current career gets boring, you are well positioned to write malicious emails to unsuspecting recipients.
You are the epitome of somebody who is a detriment to society!
Your very paranoia is dangerous! Please seek professional help!
If I push someone off the worlds tallest cliff and from timing it can be proven the person had a heart attack before hitting the ground does that in any way absolve me from a murder charge?
You want the truth? The answer is maybe. This is why details matter. If the heart attack happened as a direct result of fright from the fall, then it is still murder. If the heart attack happened as something unrelated, then it would be attempted murder. The later would be hard to prove though.
Anyhow there is a little strange law study case about something similar to this. It was about a police investigating the death of a man that apparently fell to his death by jumping head first off a very tall apartment building. At first the death was ruled a suicide as people saw him jump from a large apartment building with video footage of the roof top showing only him on top before the jump. The police closed the case until the coroner found a bullet imbedded in his skull. When the police started questioning the people living in the apartment building, they all claimed they heard a loud fire cracker shot that day once as well. After the police went door to door and investigated the outside of the apartment building, the noticed one unit hard a busted window. Upon questioning the occupants, the police were informed by the wife of an older couple that her husband and her were having another bad argument. That he pulled out his rifle and shot at her but missed. That the shot went through the window. After going over the ballistics of the round and the rifle, they were shown to be a match and the man was arrested for murder charges. The man insisted that he didn't see nor know of anyone that was jumping off the building. He was given a crappy defense attorney and was convicted for murder for which he appealed.
While this was going on, his wife was very upset at the whole thing and hired a better attorney to help investigate the case. This was because the wife told the new attorney that this was a regular thing she and her husband did. That they were constantly fighting over the years and he would pull out his gun and pretend to shoot her. After having more investigation with the other residents, they all attested to knowing about the couples crazy fight. That they all even knew the husband fakes shooting her many times in the past. Most of the recent fights were because the lady had started having an affair with a younger man after their marriage became estranged. Still the husband and wife tried to work it out and for the past 6 months they hadn't had a fight with each other. So the attorney focused on the person the wife was having an affair with. Not able to find the man in question, they were given an address by the woman where they went to his house to ask questions. No one answered. After forcing discovery of further evidence, the attorney got an order from the court for a search warrant for the premises of the ex-boyfriend's apartment. When they finally gained entry into the apartment they gained further insight into the case.
First, the apartment had no one living in there for awhile it seemed. Further searching found a strange note that upon inspection explained everything about the case. It seemed the young man had indeed been an affair with the wife of the estranged husband recently convicted of murder. He was madly in love with her in fact. He wanted her to leave her husband and ended up giving her an ultimatum to choose him or the husband. The wife in the end chose her husband leaving the young man despondent. He came up a plan. He decided that if he couldn't have her then no one would. He knew the wife and husband always fought and during the fights the husband would sometimes pretend to shoot her with an unloaded rifle. This is something she confided into him before. Knowing this, and having a spare key to their apartment for a few trysts with the wife before, he snuck into the apartment to load the rifle while no one was there. This was founded in his social media posts after going through his computer while talking with a friend of what he could do to get back at the couple for the wife not choosing him.
So the police had a new suspect. The husband was let go and the ex-boyfriend was now the prime murder suspect for the case since they had evidence of him actually placing the ammo into the rifle. The police scoured every where for the boyfriend but couldn't find him. There was no social media posts or contacts from the boyfriend indicating where he might have gone. No hits on his bank account or cards. No phone calls made from his number. Finally an officer got a warrant from the phone company to track down his last known GPS location. Arriving at the location it was the local morgue. After going through all the bodies they found their match. It was a body with a head mangled beyond recognition from someone that jumped off a building. Realizing the original person that jumped off the couple's apartment building was the ex boyfriend, they realize that he jumped months later after realizing that the husband and wife were no longer fighting anymore and his revenge to get back them wasn't happening. He was so heart broken he jumped from their apartment after seeing the husband in the apartment unit when he went to go find the wife that day to see if anything happened. As he made his way up to the rood, unbeknownst to him, the husband and wife had just started another fight as the husband was mad at opening the door to a young man claiming to be his wife's boyfriend. Since he thought the wife had certainly chosen the husband over him, he jumped off the roof of the building. The husband at the same time was having a fight with the wife. He grabbed his gun and fired at the general direction of the wife not really aiming at her. To their surprise there was a round in the chamber and it was fired out through the window striking the young ex-boyfriend in the head to kill him before the fall did. Since the ex-boyfriend was the one that put the round there in the first place the case was re-ruled a suicide.
While the above story is mostly one of those "what if" case study law class things, it is used to illustrate culpability and why details matter in the judicial process.
Uh, yeah dude. I pretty much said the same thing in post #62, using 1/20th as many words.
Writing is great, but reading is good too. Also this.
