tv Day 6 of Trial for Derek Chauvin Accused in Death of George Floyd Part 3 CSPAN April 5, 2021 11:00pm-12:34am EDT
before the break, you were discussing the de-escalation policy. i would like to now ask whether the techniques are embedded within the policy itself and so drawing your attention to exhibit 219 and if you take a look at the section here that has been in large de-escalation tactics that include but are not limited to if you could please summarize for the jury the different bullets that you see here. >> some of the bullets for the de-escalation tactics -- >> sir, one moment.
>> go ahead. please resume. >> some of the de-escalation tactics that are noted include but are not limited to placing barriers between an uncooperative subject as an officer, communication from a safe position to gain the compliance using verbal persuasion. warnings, using verbal techniques to calm and agitated the subject and promote rational decision-making. calling for additional resources to assist including more officers, cit officers and officers equipped with less lethal tools. >> and they have been through the crisis intervention training course, is that correct? >> that is correct. >> and our minneapolis police officers of the training center taught different techniques on how to implement the policy? >> that is correct. >> have you personally attended the training? >> yes, i have.
a. >> did yoump find it useful? >> i have. >> you can remove that. we talked a little bit then about behavioral crises and identifying behavioral crises. how does the minneapolis police department responded to persons in a behavioral crisis? >> one of the first important things obviously is trying to get as much information prior to the call as possible. but as soon officers at least have knowledge that this could be a potential situation with the caller, the de-escalation piece should kick in. while they may not know exactly what they are going to encounter with an arrival on the scene, this body of knowledge that they've been taught should at least be kind of forefront in terms of the different tools that they will be using possibly to help de-escalate the situation. >> about what is an edp acronym?
>> edp i is labeled through our minneapolis emergency communication center as a emotionally disturbed person. and so, when our minneapolis police officers receive an edp call, that is prompting them thatat there is at least initial information that they are going to be responding to someone who may be in crisis. >> it is that something the officer would then be communicated by dispatch prior to going to the scene, correct? >> that is correct. >> however, if that information is not given, they make their own assessment on the scene as to whether the person could potentially be an edp, is that correct? >> that is correct. >> you indicated that the minneapolis police department receives over 100,000 calls a year, calls for services, is that right? >> yes. >> do you have any idea involve people in crisis?
>> i believe in 2019, minneapolis police officers responded to about 4500 of those signified edp calls.ms >> now in terms of teaching officers how to recognize a person who may potentially be in crisis and therefore unable to comply with demands, you place these different sides into the edp policy? >> that is correct. >> i would like to draw your attention to exhibit 231 and ask that to be published. this is 809, the crisis intervention policy. it begins here but we will go ahead and move over to page two. i'd like to highlight, please, for the jury, the definition of a crisis.
and again, in the definition of a crisis under edp policy, generally speaking we are talking about some of the same things that we saw before in the de-escalation policy, is that right? >> that is correct. >> there can be mental illness, is that right? >> yes.s. >> substance abuse can be a crisis or barrier to communication, right? >> yes. >> and the same with the various that right?s >> yes. >> and then if you can emphasize the crisis intervention definition. and officers when they either respond to man edp call or are aware the person may be in crisis in an attempt to crisis intervention method is that
correct? >> yes. >> and generally speaking, what is the officers supposed to do to a person in crisis? >> attempt to de-escalate the situation. >> the policy then of the minneapolis police department in handling persons in crisis, if we can look at section three of the policy -- that would be the next page. in accordance with the minneapolis police department policy, what are officers supposed to do, how are theyo supposed to handle encounters with individuals experiencing a crisis? >> again, we want to meet people where they are. we want to bring our values and our principles to those situations. we recognize thatni often times people who are experiencing crisis, it isn't something that they brought on themselves, but
they are dealing with. and so, there is a sense of dignity and respect that we should be honoring when we come to those calls. so, as it is mentioned here, the value of protection, safety and sanctity of life. often times again, we are that first phase of government that they are going to see.e that may be 3:00 in the morning. and so, we have to wear many hats, but we want to be respectful and that care that we are trying to provide for that individual. >> and sometimes a person might be experiencingg some sort of a breakdown. maybe they did partially bring it upon themselves, is that right? and are those people still entitled to be treated in accordance with the policy? >> yes they are. >> and this policy, again, is in parted at the training center by
that group, is that right? >> that is correct. a. >> i would like to, if you could take that down, talk to you a little bit about officers role as first responders in terms of providing basic medical care. and so, with that, can you tell the jury the minneapolis police officers where they trained to provide basic medical care? >> yes, we are. >> can you describe what level and where the various different levels of medical care someone can be trained in? >> so, most of the department members will have at least basic training in terms of firstt responder, the abcs, airway, breathing and circulation, the effects of applying direct pressure on wounds to stop
bleeding; many of the things we responded to, perhaps just that we are closer to a call is perhaps ems or fire before they get there, they obviously have a higher degree and level of training, but the training that we have and that we receive is very vital because the seconds are vital. our officers carry tourniquet's. we respond to situations where members in our community will have gunshot wounds, and as a matter of fact a couple of my officers a couple weeks ago saved a young man who was shot in the femur and bleeding profusely but because they got there quickly, they knew how to apply the tourniquet. those are some of the basics. a baby not breathing calls. officers have saved the lives of children who choked or what have you, because they've been able to help start emergency breathing for them. so, those are some of the basic types of first aid. chest compressions, those types of basic first aid.
>> and our officers then specifically trained at the training center to provide this basic sort of first-aid? >> that's correct. >> does the minneapolis police department have a policy regarding any duty that an officer would have to apply that training to a real-life situation? >> yes. we recognize, again, i recognize we are going to be those that respond to someone that needs medical attention sometimes and so we absolutely have a duty to render that aid. a. >> and that of course is in the policy procedure manual, is that right? >> yes. >> if i can display exhibit 230 which is the mpd policy 7-350. >> emergency medical response. under roman one, you see the purpose of the policy is to lay out in writing the roles and responsibilities of the
minneapolis police department employees and incidents involving a medical emergency, is that right? >> yes. a. >> if we can take a look at the policy itself under number two, does that explain what a police officer is supposed to do when they come under a medical emergency or a medical emergency develops on a call? >> yes. >> what are they supposed to do? >> while awaiting ems, mpd employees assisting an individual having an acute medical crisis shall provide any necessary first aid consistent with our mpd training as soon aspect of all. >> so that presumes of course they are waiting for ems or some kind of emergency services, is that right? >> that's correct. c >> would that be fair to say that it's in two parts. an officer has to request ems or an ambulance, correct? >> yes. >> and while waiting for the ambulance, they are required to provide what medical training and skills they have to attempt
to save a person? >> that is correct. >> are the minneapolis police officers provided narcan or naloxone kits? >> yes. >> what are those? >> it is basically an inhaler for members that we may respond to that have overdosed. it is to give them that inhaler injection so that they can hopefully come to. so, we a few years ago for the most part the minneapolis fire department were the ones that responded to overdosed and carried the narcan. unfortunately, in our city and cities across the country, saw an uptick in heroin and opioid overdoses. we had to make sure that we
were, again, because we are often times the first ones to come across the situations, we wanted to make sure that we were in service with our communities and making sure that we could save livese and we were equippg folks with narcan. >> and the policy developed as a result of this. >> that is right. >> exhibit 229 if i could publish that. e the narcan policy. 7-348.- >> that is correct, yes. >> and r the officers provided training in the administration of narcan? >> yes. >> under appropriate circumstances. >> yes. >> now i'd like to talk to you a little bit about the use of force. does minneapolis have a written policy governing the proper and authorized use of force? >> yes, we do. >> it is this generally covered in the 5-300 series of the
policy procedure manual? >> yes it is. >> i would like to discuss some of that manual with you and the policy with you at this time. if we could pull up and display exhibit 260. under the purpose of the policy which is 5-301, can you please read the first sentence under a subparagraph a? >> yes. sanctity of life and the protection of the public shall be the cornerstones of the mpd's use of forceer policy. >> what does that mean? >> of all the things that we do as peace officers for the minneapolis police department -- i mentioned the thousands of calls that our men and women respond to, it is my firm belief that the one singular incident we will be judged forever on will bedg our use of force. and if so, while it is absolutely imperative that officers go home at the end of their shift, we want to make
sure the community members go home, tomac. so sanctity of life is absolutely vital and that is the pillar for the use of force. >> has this generally always been the case with minneapolis use of force policy? >> it has not. >> when did that change? >> we implemented this particular ins the 2016. >> is the training and use of force and application use of force policy been imparted including this philosophy onto thefi police officers in trainig and at the training centers? >> it certainly has, yes. >> does the policy itself defined force? what is force? >> yes, it does. a. >> if we can take a look at exhibit 217. i will publish that. you highlight useu of force.
ragenerally speaking, what is force? >> it can be any physical contact. it can be with a weapon. it can be with a vehicle. but it's any sort of physical contact that is more likely to render harm or energy to someone. >> is a restraint, the use of restraint considered force? >> that would be considered force. >> and what type of force is authorized under the departmental policy? >> under 609, we operate under the use of force statute objectively reasonable force. >> and if i could display exhibit 417.
>> let's first go back to 5-303. 5-303 authorizes force, is that right? you mentioned 609, state statute authorizing force under certain circumstances, is that right? >> yes. used for thehat is authorization of force is what type of force? >> reasonable. >> and that can be authorized under a certain circumstance, is that right? >> yes. >> so, now if you would go to the next page. now let's talk about the circumstances under which a police officer is authorized properly to use force. atwhat are the circumstances in which an officer is authorized to use force? >> an officer is authorized to use force affecting a lawful
arrest and executing a legal process and forcing the order of the court and any other duties imposed. >> and that is further delineated in the policy is that right? >> yes. >> exhibit 217 under the definition of objectively reasonable force. can you please read that definition?t >> the amount and type of force that would be considered rational and logical to an objective officer on the scene supported by facts and circumstances known to an officer at the time the force is used. >> you discussed the case of the connor factors and i would like you to first of all the policy reference the counter factors that you just mentioned if you could display to7 17-to.
we have three bullet points to look at the totality of the circumstances and the three bullets hereul the officer is supposed to happen whether he's resisting arrest or attempting to evade by flight. >> fair to say these three different considerations are things you can attribute to the subject, correct? >> yes. >> the subject, not someone else. >> yes. >> and it has to be judged by a reasonable police officer on the scene at the time, correct? >> yes. do you recall you are here
talking about what happened on may 25, 2020 involving george floyd. do you recall why the officers were responding on that day? >> the original reason is the response for a counterfeit situation at the intersection of 38th and chicago. how do you rate the severity? >> it would probably not rise to the level of the crime that we have experienced in the city but we would certainly respond to it, but it wouldn't rise to the
level. is that one for which the suspect is typically taken to a custodial arrest? >> typically not. >> why is that? >> it isn't a violent felony we also have coordination with our jail system in our courts. there's been a shift for the years to make sure the individuals that are going to jail arere those who are from te public safety standpoint and needed to be at least in thatro facility. and i can identify the situation we can always charge a complaint and some other things, so that is one of the reasons why. >> you used the phrase violent felony. what is the more important part, whether it is a felony?
>> certainly endanger the officers and the community. >> where something that is labeled a felony may or may not require a full custodial arrest. >> in the service in the academy and also post service? >> yes. they must be reasonable at the time it is applied the entire time it is applied? >> yes. our officers taught the need to assist and reassess and reevaluate situations in the field? >> yes, we are. >> are you familiar with the
minneapolis police department critical thinking model? >> yes. >> how are you familiar with that? >> it's something i want to end dark the procedural justices research the evidence-based learning that has shown giving them voice to establish neutral engagements and build areas of trust. the communities are more likely to cooperate with us. we are likely to be seen more as legitimate. so this is very important. it's part of the procedural justice that i mentioned as part of the critical thinking.
>> exhibit 276. >> it is the critical decision-making model. >> yes. >> loffer exhibit 276. >> 276 is received. >> permission to publish? we heard about the model and now we get to actually see it. ift. we could enlarge the graph, please. the first stage of the critical thinking model is information gathering. it's very vital. we rely upon tying together as much information as possible so that we can try our best to go
in, respond and manage the situation at the onset it ismu very important, but we also need to make sure that we try to gather as much information as we are dealing with. >> let's talk about the middle of the circle first. what is the middle circle supposed to be representing? >> so for example, information gathering while we may be associated specifically with receiving the 911 call and the dispatcher getting us the information, but they can come across the call they were not
dispatched to and need to talk to a community member. if they don't treat the community member with respect or give them voice, it is likely that they will receive less information there will be less helpful in resolving that call so that neutrality respect and trust has to guide and be a part of all of that critical decision-making model. >> now the officer is in the position and the need to think about it or assess it, is that right? >> yes. >> the next step is a threat or risk assessment. is there a difference between the threat and risk? >> there can be in terms of what is being played out at the time and you are constantly evaluating that in the course of the information receiving which could be fluid.
it's going to dictate that threat or risk. >> so then once the officer has made an assessment on the threat or the risk, the next step is the authority to act. what does that mean? >> the officer based on that information they received, evaluating that threat or risk am i going to act, is this going to be a physical arrest, am i going to separate parties, is this required report. it's getting more information for the officer to guide he or she in terms of what is the next appropriate step they need to take. >> so, if we were at least at this point to put a scenario and action in gathering the information that somebody is prapproaching them with a weapo, like a bat and so then they would reflect on that and
determine whether or not a risk, maybe the person is in a baseball game or a bat is being brandished, after that, they determined that this in fact is ao risk and they are being threatened and look at the authority back to the policy and procedure manual, is that right? >> yes. >> under the what is the use of force and what to respond to hear. the next step after considering the authority to act, what is that? >> the officers making an assessment, with the authority resolve the situation and resolving the situations will it be enough? taking the report will that be enough of the action. it may mean a combination of things. it might mean i'm going to have
to or an officer left to make an arrest but we may need additional resources because the situation still could have the potential to not be stabilized. so, all of that is part of the goal and action. >> and then to review and reassess, assuming that means exactly what it says. >> yes exactly. and it has information to the dynamics that could change. so it could be a constant reassessment of the situation trying to get to the best possible outcome and is peacefully and safely. >> because circumstances can change, correct? >> yes. >> and that might beor approprie at one moment but not a different moment. or more force might be needed at another point, is that right? >> yes. >> this is a particular critical thinking model exhibit 276.
we see examples of this throughout training materials provided is that right? >> yes.ig >> why is that? >> it is to really embed that knowledge that we don't want to fall susceptible to check the box training. it's important for all of our officers to have a knowledge and understanding of and our community members can expect this to be consistent as they have encountered with our officers. >> if we could take that down. and i want to shift a little bit to talk about use of force in the policy. doeses the minneapolis police icdepartment to train officers n specific defensive tactics? >> yes. >> where does that training occurred? occur? >> the special operations center. >> does the department provide
training for officers handling uncooperative individuals? >> yes. >> does the department provide training for handcuffing reluctant suspects? >> yes. >> when you provide the training, you assume you are taking someone to custody. you also teach officers their personal responsibility with respectib to the person they jut taken into custody.. >> yes, we do. >> what responsibility does an officer have with the person taken into custody or restrained? >> so, the american policing profession, which i believe is the best in the world, and i will tell you why and it is for two reasons -- >> rephrase your question. >> yes, your honor. you have a responsibility in
various forms of training as to once someone is in their custody. >> we have a duty of care so when someone is in our custody, regardless if they are a suspect, we have an obligation to make sure that we provide for their care. >> does that include people to whom defensive tactics are being applied? >> yes. >> why is that? >> they are still in our custody andd they have rights. the humanity of this profession we need toss make sure that we e takinge care of them. >> how often our officers required to participate in the defensive tactics training? >> it's usually yearly annual training. >> when we are talking about the training and policies in effect
on may 25, 2020, neck restraints and chokehold's release taught and authorized by the policies at theor time? >> at that time, yes. >> they were taught pursuant to the defensive tactics training as well? >> yes. >> i would like to publish exhibit 224. >> exhibit 224 is showing mpd policy 5-331 use of restraints, neck restraints and chokehold's. it's considered a deadly force. if you can go to the next page, please. >> neck restraint if you can highlight that portion down to unconscious neck restraint,
there are various types of neck restraints authorized at the time is that right? >> yes. >> and it is defined as compressing one or both sides of a person's neck but without applying direct pressure to the trachea and airway that needs to be protected. >> yes. >> and there were two types of neck restraints authorized, conscious and unconscious neck restraint. >> yes. >> is the objective of the unconscious neck restraint the second one would be to have them pass out. >> that's correct. t >> under certain circumstances in which the officer was in fear of grave bodily harm or death. >> yes. >> and conscious neck restraints is with the intent to control but not render the subject bunconscious is that right? >> yes. >> applying light to moderate
pressure. >> that's correct. >> if you could go to number two on the same policy. conscious neck restraint can be used for someone actively resisting. >> yes. >> and unconscious could be used for a person exhibiting active aggression or to save a persons life is that right? >> yes. >> or a subject that is exhibiting lesser attempts likely to be effective but no, neck restraint or not to be used against persons that are nearly passively resistant. >> thatt. is correct.
>> now i would like to draw your attention to may 25, 2020. can you tell the jury what you first learned of the incident involving the defendant, officers thao, kueng, lane and george floyd? >> on monday evening around 9 p.m. on may 205th, 2020 i received a call. i was at my residence and i received a call from a deputy chief that had informed me that minneapolis police officers had responded to 38 and chicago and while attempting to take someone into custody that, which i learned now to be mr. floyd,
they believed he wouldn't make it or survive so he was being transported by ambulance to the county medical center. and while at least the information i had that evening at 9 p.m. at that time i was told he was still alive, i decided to contact the minnesota bureau of criminal apprehension and they are a state agency that conducts our critical incidents. i deemed that this would be a critical incident and it's been our protocol to alert them and theyhe would conduct that investigation so i made that call to have them start to conduct this critical incident. >> did you then proceed to city
hall? >> i shoulded also say that rigt after that call i notified the minneapolis mayor to say this is the situation we have at least right now and i would rate him as i received more information. i then proceeded to leave my residence and i went directly to my office in city hall. >> when you arrived at city hall, do you recallha seeing any video images or footage? >> the first time that i saw a video of the event was after i was notified mr. floyd was now deceased. so i asked my deputy chief to pull up, knowing the area very well and knowing there's usually a city-owned camera at that location, i asked him to locate
that video so that i could review it. >> that's what we would refer to as the milestone camera or footage? >> that's correct. >> did you watch the footage from the camera that evening? >> i did. >> can you describe what you saw when you watch that footage? >> when i first viewed this milestone video, what i was able to see -- i should just note that it was from a distance from where the officers were with mry see over the backsides of the officers. there was also t no audio to ths milestone video and so i viewed the video in its entirety and quite frankly, there was really nothing in terms of the actions of at least again the snow on
the a/v that out at me. after a few minutes it seemed a paramedic's vehicle pulled up to the scene and it was at that time for the first time i saw a glimpse of mr. floyd when paramedics placed his body on the gurney and transported him away from the scene, but that was my first observation of the incident from that night. >> at some point did you become aware of another video that had been taken by a bystander? >> yes. probably close to midnight a community member contacted me and said chief, almost verbatim
but chief, have you seen the video of your officer choking and killing that man at 38th and chicago. oncece i heard that statement, i knew it wasn't the same milestone camera video that i saw. individually within minutes after that, i saw for the first time what is now known as the bystander video. >> so fair to say this was a much closer video and add audio? >> yes. i was able to see the occurrence and the officers involved. i was able to actually see mr. floyd and i was able to hear what was occurring. i was also able to get a better understanding of the length of time, the duration of the incident, yes.
>> prior to testifying today, have you reviewed the video in its entirety? >> yes, i have. a. >> you also reviewed the milestone footage. >> yes, i have. >> have you reviewed the body worn camera footage worn by officers thao, kueng, lane and the defendant? >> yes, i have. >> now, first i want to show you what has been received as exhibit 17. do you recognize exhibit 17 to be an image taken by the bystander video that you reviewed? >> yes, i do. >> now based upon your review of all of the information that you just mentioned, do you believe that the defendant followed
departmental policy 5-304 regarding de-escalation? >> i absolutely do not agree. >> how so? >> that action is nots de-escalation. when we talk about the framework of our sanctity of life and about the principles and values that we have, that action goes contrary to what we are taught. a. >> as you reflect on exhibit 17 i must ask you is this a trained minneapolis police department defensive tactic technique? >> it is not. >> we read of the departmental policy on neck restraints. is this a neck restraint? >> the consciousec neck restrait by policy mentioned light to
moderate pressure. when i look at exhibit 17, and when i look at the facial expression of mr. floyd, that does not appear in any way, shape or form that that is light to moderate pressure. >> so is it your belief then that this particular form of restraint, if that is what we will call it, in fact violates departmental policy? absolutely agree that violates our policy. >> are you aware now the defendant maintains his position for nine minutes and 29 seconds. >> i am aware. >> and you testified the force has to be reasonable when it's applied at the beginninged and through the entire encounter, is that right? >> that is correct. >> is what you see in exhibit 17 in your opinion within minneapolis police departmental
policy 5-300 authorizing use of reasonable force? >> it is not. >> and why not? >> it has to be objectively reasonable. we have to take into account circumstances, information, the threat to the officer, the threat to others and the severity. that is not partf of our policy, that is and what we teach. >> when do you believe or do you haveha a belief when this restraint on the ground that you viewed should have stopped? >> once mr. floyd, and this is based onn my viewing of the videos, once mr. floyd stopped resisting and certainly once he
was in distress and trying to t verbalize that, that should have stopped. there is an initial reasonableness trying to just get him under control in the first few seconds, but once there was no longer any resistance and clearly when mr. floyd was no longer responsive or even emotionless to continue to apply that level of force to a person prone doubt, handcuffed behind their back, that in no way shape or form is by policy, it is not part of our training and certainly not part of our ethics or values.
>> based on your review in your own experience in the training did you see signs that mr. floyd was exhibiting in addition to being in medical distress? >> yes. >> and i think you just testified mr. floyd was unresponsive? >> that's correct. >> and officers were aware they couldn't find a pulse. >> can you repeat that? >> were you aware officers at the time of the restraint were not able to find a pulse? >> yes. >> andwa so stated. >> i was aware the officers were not able to find a pulse, yes. >> did you see the defendant or any of the officers attempt to provide first aid to mr. floyd? >> i did g not see any of the defendants try to attempt to provide first aid to mr. floyd. >> the defendant didn't try cpr or sort of chest compressions.
>> is objection, argumentative. >> rephrase. >> did you see them provide any medical attention? >> i did not. >> and based on these observations, do you have an opinion whether the defendant violated the departmental policy 7-350 by failing to render aid to mr. floyd? >> i agree the defendant violated our policy in terms of rendering aid. >> thank you. i have noty further questions at this time, your honor. >> mr. nelson.
and mr. chauvin's actions violating the policies. >> that's correct. >> as the police chief i assume you are not out on the street from day-to-day arresting people. >> that is correct. >> when is the last time i don't mean to be dismissive but that you actually arrested a suspect? >> it's been many years. >> your role as the police chief is sort of grand in its scope. >> it's largege in context and e operations of the department, yes. >> and part of that job is to be sort of aware of issues in policing and kind of policy changes, use of force changes, t all of these things fall under the umbrella as your role as chief, agreed? >> yes. >> you are sort of the general, formulating the plan for your
police department? >> and delegating some of the subject matter experts, yes. >> when you talk about training as a police officer, you would also include the training that the minneapolis police department goes through but you may go to other trainings out of state, listen to speakers talk about issues that confront policing as well as may be a homicide detective will get permission to travel to and interviewing of a suspect type of trainingct and some other ste or location. >> yes. >> so there is a variability in the training depending upon your role in the police department? >> yes. >> so you've got your sort of rank-and-file basic patrol officers and they go through all of the training you described, the defensive tactics, medical assistance for basic medical training, crisis intervention, things we have been talking
about today. >> yes. >> and the investigative officers they have to go through that training. they may go through some additional training in terms of how to interview suspects or how to properly collect evidence et cetera unique to their role. and then you as the police chief or those that are in more management or administrative side of the policeha department, you go to kind of the big picture training. >> that's correct. >> i want to review a few of the policies we have already talked about today. we can take this down for the fmoment, your honor.
first of all i would like to show you it has been introduced as exhibit 216-to 16, which is the use of force policy for the cityis of minneapolis police department. >> yes. >> and i know kind of what we did a little earlier is jumped around fromm part two part. i would like to walk through some of these issues in a little bit more of a linear fashion if we could. so, you described under policy 5-301.01 that the fourth
amendment's reasonableness standard applies to the use of force in minneapolis. >> yes. >> and that goes on to say that the employees shall use the amount of force objectively reasonable and it continues in light of the facts and circumstances known to that employee at the time the force is used. >> yes. >> so the reasonableness standard applies to the facts and circumstances known by the officer at the time the force is being used. >> yes. >> now 5-302 gives definition in terms of the use of force and differentiates between active aggression and active resistance. can you describe the difference between active resistance, excuse me, active aggression and active resistance?
>> reactive aggression, behavior initiated by the subject that may or may not be in response to police efforts to bring a person into custody. the act of aggression when presenting behaviors that constitute an assault or in the circumstances reasonably indicate an assault or injury to any person is likely to occur. >> let me just stop you there, that's active aggression so when a suspect is essentially fighting with the police officer or doing something that is aggressive behaviorally speaking that is aggressive in its nature. >> yes. >> now can you read act of resistance. >> a response to police effortsa to bring a person into custody or control for detainment or arrest. subject and engages in active ee resistance when engaging in physical actions or verbal behavior reflecting an intention to make it more difficult for officers to achieve actual physical control. >> so, essentially what we are
talking about here is behavior that may or may not be physical in its nature that simply makes it harder for an officer to take a person into custody and sometimes that is maybe not trying to punch the officer but pulling away, hiding his arms or doing something that just makes it more difficult physically. >> right.ll >> sometimes it's your not going to take me alive, they are saying something to prevent the officer from arrest so they are using their words, using their behavior. is it common based upon your experience for u people to a eny being taken into custody? >> no. to bepeople like arrested?>> >> definitely not. >> and in your own experience is it common practice for people thatra are being arrested to say things in an effort to try to
get the officer to not arrest them? >> that is certainly. >> my mom is home sick i need to get home to my kids. there may be words they use to try to convince an officer to not arrest them. >> yes. >> you would also agree there's a difference between being arrested and being detained, agree? >> there can be. >> so an officer in certain circumstances is permitted to expand the scope of the original intervention, would you agree to that? >> [inaudible] >> restate. >> when an officer approaches a situation and let's assume it is a relatively minor offense, is it possible that that minor offense can grow in its scope of
investigation? >> ityes. >> and it's quite common for that to happen, correct? >> yes. an officer makes a traffic stop for speeding or something like that, smells drugs in the car, searches the car, finds a large amount of drugs, guns, et cetera. so it is a minor incident a traffic ticket could turn into a felony arrest. so again it happens quite regularly. >> yes. you agree being a police officer is a pretty dangerous profession? >> there are inherent dangers. >> i never had toi' get in a fit with anybody in my life and my job, but in your job it is probably more probable that that will happen, would you agree?
>> now, talking about the use of force when an officer approaches a vehicle is that one of the dangerous initiations of contact? between an officer and a citizen? >> i don't have the exact statistics on it. certainly in an encounter that officers are -- i know the domestic response can have a heighteneded awareness that's because that is that suspects space, they don't know what is in the car or the apartment during a domestic situation. you are walking into someone else's territory, so to speak. >> yes. >> and so there could be guns, there could be knives, there
could be any number of instruments that could bring harm to a police officer. >> there's a potential. >> obviously there's tens of thousands of traffic stops and not every traffic stop turns violent. but that does happen regularly, agree? that traffic stops can turn violent. >> yes they can.'t >> so, when we talk about the use of force policy under 5-301, the last sentence that wasn't read before was the force used shall be consistent with current training. and that is a policy and best practice change, do you agree? >> cann you clarify? >> there are certain times the policy with respect to the use of force may specifically
prohibit a particular style or use of force. so thinking about in the old days, officers used to wear weighted gloves to make their punch is more effective. >> yes. >> the policy changed and prohibited that, correct? >> reyes. and there is a difference between say the evolution of the tactics. the training that you received is different than the training that is taught now. >> yes. >> and i believe it was maybe 15 years ago that the minneapolis police department started moving towards your body weight and jujitsu. >> are you referencing policy or training?? >> training.
>> ten or 15 years ago. >> that was highlighting the evolutione as you described in your examination. that is one way that it's evolved. >> yes. and when something changes per policy, weighted gloves, for example, that's it. no more. but if it evolves into a best practice it doesn't prevent in officer from learning a technique that he learned in hie career. it just may not be the best practice anymore. >> i paused when you say they are learning something but if it's not in alignment with our policy, then that wouldn't be prohibited. >> let me try to explain.
if an officer was trained in a particular handcuffed technique andhn then they go to their defensive tactics training and say this is a better way to handleec it -- handcuffed a suspect. it isn't a policy change it is just a best practice change and they can still use the old way they did it. >> it would have to be h somethg that thehe training staff would have to not just in officer saying i want to do it this way. they would have to be authorized in the training. >> so, we can talk about that kind of the thing with the defensive tactics use of force. that would be the better people to talk to about that. >> yes. now, when we talk about active aggression and resistance,
sometimes those two things are happening simultaneously, agreed? >> it can be, yes. >> we were talking about graham versus connor and how that is incorporated into the minneapolis policehe department policy. i'mli showing you exhibit 217 n. it should be up ine front of yo. what we are basically talking about is the united states supreme court decision that outlined the objectively reasonable use of force standard, right? and graham versus connor is not limited to those three factors
that you were read before, graham versus connor announcement. those are three that are kind of listed but ultimately it isn't an all-inclusive list of considerations for the reasonableness of the sub source. >> that is my understanding, yes. >> and in fact, what the policy reads is that the reasonableness of a particular use of force must be judged from the reasonable officer on the scene, rather than with the 2020 vision of hindsight. >> yes. >> so, we are looking at it in the instant and moment based upon the objective standard, right? >> yes. >> the policy also includes that the calculus and>> the reasonableness must embody allowance for the fact that the police officers are often forced to make split-second judgments and circumstances that are
uncertainar and rapidly evolving about the amount of force that is necessary in a particular situation. >> that's because when officers noted the situation kind of like what we talked about before, what can be initially very minor can grow into something major, agreed? >> yes. >> you read a part of 5-304 which is threatening use of force and de-escalation. i want to talk about the de-escalation. have you heard the term sometimes you have to escalate
to de-escalate, have you heard that phrase? >> i have not. >> here the policy talks about officers shall consider verbally announcing their intentt to use force including displaying an authorized weapon as a threat of force so sometimes in officer has to take out his gun and say that's a use of force in that instance and if you don't listen to me i'm going to use force. it's a pretty clear indication force could be used when you have a gun pointing at you woula you agree? >> yes. >> but other things such as chemical irritants and tasers, not limited to just a firearm.ig >> yes. >> sometimes what an officer has to a do is command the presence, they have to take control of the situation and sometimes that isn't particularly attractive, is it? >> could you explain?
>> sure. use of force isn't something people like to watch generally. >> objection, speculation. >> sustained. >> would you agree the use of force is not an attractive notion? >> i would say that it is something most officers would rather not use. >> and you described in your direct examination how thee single greatest way the minneapolis police department could be judged is based upon how the public perceives its use of force so it has a tendency to garner a lot of attention. >> it can. >> so much so that citizens have become more prone to record observed interactions with
police. >> yes. >> something you didn't have to deal with back in 1989. >> yes. >> so, essentially with this policy 5-304 in terms of threatening the use of force it is contained in the de-escalation content. sometimes you have to display a weapon to gain command so that you can de-escalate. >> is it fair to say that pretty much every single one of the use of force policies contains some phrase if reasonable or as practical a mother's limitations on the use of force, right? >> yes. >> and it is situation by situation. again if we go back and look at the language of graham versus connor and the policy contained by the minneapolis police
department, it's the use of force has no precise objective singular rule. it's different in every case. >> yes. so for example in the de-escalation policy 5-304, de-escalation is advisable when it is safe and feasible, correct? >> yes. >> and sometimes de-escalation includes the use of force. use of force can be a de-escalation tactic. >> i'm thinking of your example of displaying your weapon. i don't have a lot of knowledge in terms of physical force being used to de-escalate a situation.
threatening use of force, i'm more familiar with that. >> so if we were to talk to the use of force or the defensive [inaudible] >> objection,, argumentative. >> overruled. >> yes. but the purpose of de-escalation ishe to attempt to slow down or stabilize a situation so that more time, options and resources become available to the officer. basically slowdown, everybody kind of calm down. let's try to relax. but it's a lot more the process of de-escalation is not just trying to talk somebody out of doing somethingod in our actions that are important, there may be reactions that are important and the de-escalation policy includes some examples of those
things such as placing barriers between>> an uncooperative subjt and sometimes those barriers are another officer. containing a threat, that's one of the examples in the policy. >> yes. by containing a threat, that can include physically restraining someone so that they don't upset another person. >> yes. >> or because another person to have a violent reaction towards them. >> yes. moving from a position thatg exposes officers to potential threats to a safe position so kind of retreating in certain circumstances. >> reducing exposure to a potential threat using distance cover or concealment. so, hiding behind a squad car. avoiding physical confrontation.
exhibit 230 which is the emergency medical response agrees the policy requires minneapolis police employees to request emergency medical service as soon practical. if a person comes into contact having an acute medical crisis and delay in treatment can potentially aggravate the severity of the medical crisis. sometimes officers will call for ems, not thinking that it's a major issue when suddenly it becomes apparent they can step up and request a response. and that is something that an officer can do to ensure the medical treatment of the suspecc that they have for the person that they are in contact with. >> sorry. it's been a long week.or
to ensure the medical condition of the suspect, to help with them. >> getting them out there as quickly as possible. >> yes. we didn't talk about the maximal restraint technique you are familiar with of the policy surroundingr that. >> and i show you what has been exhibited ass to 25. >> can you describe what the maximum techniquexi is? >> aithe maximal technique has often been referred to as a method of if officers are dealing withyp a typically combative or aggressive person in order to protect them or
property is placing basically attaching a cord from the legs to the waist so that the person, the individual doesn't have free movement of their legs. so it's securing them again by their ankles, if you are prone and to the hobble if it is used, a supervisor has to respond to the scene. you cannot transport anyone prone in that position due to the risk of the breathing. you talked about the use of force and how officers are kind
of reevaluating from time to time or they should be at least. so, if an officer decides to use the maximal restraint technique and then decide later on decides not to use it, that is kind of adjusting the use of force. >> with some clarity, what, i mean, by that is if you were to have a person prone on their subject on the ground and had to officers let's say securing their legs to the back of the waist you are still imploring what that technique is about anyway so there can be some
variances to that if that makes sense. so let's assume you've got to officers pulling the legs forward and employing that version so to speak at the maximum restraint you are going from the decision to employ that technique backwards. >> counselor, just these types of uses of force can be problematic in terms of there is a high risk to them. so, meaning that if you are going to take that initiative to do that alternative version in the first place, you would want to get a hold of the supervisor because something could happen in terms of that person. >> i'm not asking in terms of
the policy. i'm asking in terms of the use of force and critical decision-making model. you described the useib of force you have to go through this critical decision-making. how much force and i going to use and sometimes you have to back off the use of force and sometimes you have to go forward with the use of force meaning use even more e force. and it's this constant reevaluation and so when you haveou officers who make a decision that the facts and circumstances would warrant using the hobble device but later decided not to employ that device, that is a critical decision-making model in action, agreed? >> yes. and it would be a reduction in the use of force and may still require supervisors to be on seeing the policy wise, but it is a reduction in the use of force, agreed?
>> are we talking specifically the events of may 25 or in general?er >> in general. >> yes. >> you would agree ultimately that all of the minneapolis police department policies relevant to the use of force, emergency medical response, emerging medical treatment, all of these policies are by their very language situationally dependent. they all say if the circumstances allow, if time permits, if it's safe. they have a qualifier to them. exhibit 231.
at the bottom of exhibit 231 is the crisis intervention policy and the second page includes the definition. could you read the entire definition of what a crisis is? >> and the event or situation where an individual's safety and health are threatened by behavioral health challenges to include mental illness, developmental disabilities, substance use or overwhelming stressors. a crisis can involve an individual's perception or experience of an event or situation as an intolerable difficulty that exceeds individuals current resources and coping mechanisms and may include unusual stress in his or her life that renders him or her
unable to function as he or she normally would. the crisis may but not necessarily result in an upward trajectory or intensity culminating in thoughts or acts that are possibly dangerous to himself, herself or others. >> so, generally speaking, not relevant to the may 25, 2020 incident, we will get there in a minute. but when we talk about a general police response, sometimes the police may respond to something out of the person that they are dealing with is not in a crisis, agreed? >> yes. other people may be perceiving what is happening and it could become a crisis to that person. >> objection. people who observe, would you say people who observe police interactions with people especially the more physical use
of force types that could turn into a crisis for an observer? >> objection, irrelevant. >> [inaudible] >> so, in terms of the definition of crisis, it may be the individual perception or experience of an event or situation as an intolerable difficulty that exceeds that individuals current resource and coping mechanisms. >> right.. >> that doesn't necessarily mean that the person with whom you are arresting or having contact with is going to be the person that will experience a crisis, agreed? >> irrelevant. >> overruled. >> so you're saying the person that is witnessing a situation may cause them to be in crisis?
>> the crisis may but not necessarily result in an upward trajectory or intensity culminating in thoughts or acts that are potentially dangerous to him, her or others. >> in concert, this is the personel watching this, so peope are watching something that they appear to believe or they believe is wrong and contrary to the policy that may cause them to get upset and that level of volatility may grow throughout the course of the interaction. >> objection. irrelevant. calls for speculation [inaudible] >> overruled. it's in the scope. because ultimately, part of the training that minneapolis police officers have to t go through is how to deal with crowds that observe police interactions.
>> right. >> crowds that may be upset with police interaction. there are classes through the training academy and classes through in-service specifically dealing with how to deal with crowd control. part of it is how to de-escalate, which could involve trying to avoid a physical confrontation. and sometimes when an officer tries to de-escalate a situation and someone is so upset
sometimes they don't hear the officer tells them, would you agree? >> objection, speculation. >> that calls for speculation. >> is it possible generally speaking that someone's crisis mayy prevent them from hearing what an officer is telling them. >> you testified you've watched the body cameras. >> right. >> i'm going to show you -- i
don't know -- this is exhibit 1008. approximately a 52nd clip of kueng's body camera. [inaudible] i'm going to show you on your screen a short clip of a video to see if this would be contained in what he watched. and i need to -- you would agree that appears to be taken from one of the officer's body cameras, may 25, 2020 at
approximatelyim 20:25:23. >> yes. >> it again, watching it without sound.[i [no audio] at this point did you see someone's reflection in the back of the squad car there? >> i did not. it might be just because the brevity of the video. >> yeah, it's unfortunate. the upper left corner on the bumper of the squad car in the video. >> [inaudible] >> i'm sorry? >> can i use the cursor or the stylus -- >> sure. all this fancy technology here.
>> do you see the legs of someone? >> yes. >> so you would agree that this tappears to be a short clip from one of the officers body worn cameras on may 25 of 2020? >> yes. >> you see what appears to be mr. floyd's arm there by the back of the squad car, right? >> yes. >> i would offer exhibit 1008. >> any objection? >> no objection. >> 1008 is received. >> and if i may publish. ..