Skip to main content

tv   Day 6 of Trial for Derek Chauvin Accused in Death of George Floyd Part 3  CSPAN  April 6, 2021 4:40am-6:14am EDT

4:40 am
>> i believe -- >> if you could publish exhibit 219.
4:41 am
>> before the break, we were discussing the escalation policy. i'd like to ask whether the escalation techniques are embedded within the policy itself. drawing your attention to exhibit 219, mpd policy prius for, take a look at the section here enlarged, includes but not limited to, if you could summarize for the jury the different bullets you see here. >> some of the bullets here for de-escalation tactics -- >> one moment. sorry. thank you.
4:42 am
sorry, please resume. >> some of the de-escalation tactics noted here include but not limited to placing barriers between an uncooperative subject and on officer, communications from the state to gain compliance using verbal persuasion, advisement for warnings using verbal techniques to calm an agitated subject and promote rational decision-making, calling for additional resources to assist including law officers and officers equipped with less lethal tools. >> the officers, those who have been through crisis intervention course, is that correct? >> correct. >> minneapolis police officers at the trading training center top techniques how to implement
4:43 am
this policy? >> that is correct. >> have you personally attended the training? >> i have. >> did you find it useful. >> yes. >> we talked about behavioral crises and identifying behavioral disease, how does minneapolis police department respond to behavioral crisis? >> one of the first things obviously is trying to get as much information as possible but as soon as officers at least acknowledge that it could be a potential situation with that color, the de-escalation piece should kick in and while they may not know exactly what they will encounter when they arrived on scene, this body of knowledge they have been taught should at least forefront in terms of different tools you will be using possibly to help de-escalate the situation.
4:44 am
>> what is the acronym? >> the acronym edt is labeled through minneapolis emergency communication center as an emotional, emotionally disturbed person so when our minneapolis police officers receive this call, it prompts them but there's at least initial information they will respond to someone who may be in crisis. >> is that something the officer was then munich eight by a dispatcher prior to going to the scene? >> that is correct. >> if that information is not imparted on them, they make their own assessment as to whether the person could potentially be edp? >> correct. >> you indicated neapolis police department receives over 100,000 calls a year. >> yes. >> do you have any idea how many calls involve people in crisis?
4:45 am
>> i believe in 2019, minneapolis police officers responded to 4500 of those signified as edt calls. >> 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 signs into mpd policy? >> that's correct do not i'd like to direct your attention to exhibit 231 published in this is seven/809, crisis intervention policy, you say it begins here but we'll go ahead and, over the page two. i'd like to highlight the jury a definition of a crisis and in
4:46 am
the definition of a crisis under mpd policy, generally speaking, we are talking about some of the same things we saw before in the de-escalation policy, is that right? >> that is correct. >> there can be mental illness, is that right? >> yes. >> substance abuse can be a crisis or barrier to communication, correct? >> yes. >> same with various stressors, is our right? >> yes. >> further, if you could emphasize the crisis intervention submission. and officers when they respond to this call or are aware they may be in crisis, and attempt
4:47 am
for intervention, is that correct? >> yes. >> generally speaking, what is the officer supposed to do to a person in crisis? >> attempt to de-escalate the situation. >> the policy of minneapolis police department in handling persons of crisis, if we could look at section three of the policy, next page. in accordance with minneapolis police department policy, what is an officer supposed to do? are they supposed to handle encounters with individuals expanding crisis? >> we want to meet people whether it are, our values, principles to those situations. we recognize oftentimes people expanding crisis, it's not
4:48 am
something they brought on themselves but they are dealing with it dignity and respect we should honor when we come to those calls so as legend here, protection, safety and sanctity of life oftentimes again we are the first phase of government they are going to be, it may be at 3:00 a.m. so we have to wear many hats but we want to be respectful in the care we are trying to provide for the individual. >> and sometimes a person might experience some sort of a breakdown, maybe did partially bring upon themselves. >> correct. >> are they still entitled to be treated in accordance to mpd policy? >> yes, they are. >> this policy again is parted
4:49 am
in training at the training center, is that right? >> that is correct. >> take that down, please, i'd like to talk to you little bit about officers role as first responders in terms of providing basic medical care. with that, tell the jury, our minneapolis police officers trained to provide basic medical care? >> yes, we are. >> please describe what level and where there various levels of medical care someone could be trained in. >> most members will have at least basic training in terms of first responder, abc airway breathing circulation, the effects of applying direct pressure on wound to stop
4:50 am
bleeding, many of the things that we will respond to, perhaps just because we are closer to a call and perhaps ems or fire obviously have a higher level of training but the training we have and receive is vital because they are vital. our officers carry tourniquet, we respond to situations where members in our community will have gunshot wounds so a couple of my officers a couple weeks ago, a man was shot in the femur was bleeding profusely but because they acted quickly, they knew how to apply the tourniquet, some of those are the basic steps. our officers have saved lives of children who have choked or what have you because they have been able to help start emergency breathing for them. those are some of the basic first aid, chest compressions, those types of basic first aid.
4:51 am
>> our officers then specifically trained the training center to provide basic first aid? >> that is correct. >> does minneapolis police department have a policy regarding duty officer would have to apply that training to a real life situation? >> yes. we recognize, i mentioned we are oftentimes going to be the first ones to respond who needs medical attention so we absolutely have a duty to render aid. >> that of course is in the policy and procedure manual? >> yes, if i could display mpd policy 370. emergency medical response under roman one, you see the purpose of the policy is to lay out in writing the roles and
4:52 am
responsibility's of minneapolis police department employees, incidences involving medical emergencies. >> yes. >> if we look at the policy itself under roman to, does that explain what a minneapolis police officer is supposed to do when they come upon a medical emergency or medical emergency developing on a call? >> yes. >> what are they supposed to do? >> while awaiting ems, assisting individual having an acute medical crisis shall provide any necessary first aid consistent with mpd training practices. >> that presumes they are waiting for ems or emergency services, is that right? >> correct. >> would it be fair to say it's two parts, officer has to request ems or ambulance, correct? >> yes. >> while waiting for the
4:53 am
amulets, they are required to provide what medical training skills they have to help save the person. >> correct. >> our minneapolis police provided narcan kids? >> yes, we are. >> what are those? >> it's basically an inhaler for community members who may respond to who have overdosed, overdosed and out, to give them the inhaler injection so that they ultimately come to so a few years ago where for the most part, minneapolis fire department were the ones who responded to overdoses with narcan. unfortunate our city cities across the country saw an uptick heroine an opiate overdoses, we
4:54 am
have to make sure again because we are oftentimes the first ones to come across these situations, wanted to make sure we were in service to our communities they can sure we can save lives and equip them with narcan. >> a policy resulted as a result of this? >> yes. >> 229, please publish that. the narcan policy -- 348. >> correct. >> our officers provided training in the administration of narcan? >> yes. >> under appropriate circumstances. >> yes. >> i'd like to talk to a little bit about use of force. does minneapolis have a policy governing proper authorized use of force? >> yes, we do. >> 's is generally covered five -- 300 series of policy
4:55 am
procedure manuals? >> yes, it is. >> i'd like to discuss some of that with you and policy with you at this time, if we could pull and display exhibit 260. >> under the purpose of the policy, five -- 301, can you please read the first sentence under paragraph a? >> yes. sanctity of life and protection of the public shall be the cornerstones of the mpd's use of force policy. >> what does that mean? >> of all the things that we do as peace officers of the minneapolis police department, i mentioned of thousands of calls responding to, it's the one singular incident we will be judged forever will be use of force so while it is absolutely imperative that officers go home
4:56 am
at the end of their shift, we want to ensure community members go home, to self sanctity of life is vital that that is the pillar for our use of force. >> is this generally and always has been the case for minneapolis policy? >> it has not. >> when did that change? >> we implemented this particular in 2016. >> does the training and use of force and application use of force policy in part including this philosophy onto police officers in training at the training center? >> yes, sir. >> does the policy itself defined force x what is force? >> it does. >> if we could look at exhibit 217, i'll publish that. you highlight use of force.
4:57 am
generally speaking, what is force? >> it can be any physical contact, it can be with a weapon, it can be with a vehicle, any sort of physical contact more likely to render harm or injury to someone. >> is it restraint, use of restraint considered force? >> yes. >> what type of force is authorized under departmental policy? >> under 609, we operate under -- >> objectively reasonable force. >> if i could explain to 17.
4:58 am
first, go back to five -- 303 -- five -- 303 authorizes use of force, is that right? you mentioned 60906 state statute authorizing force under certain circumstances, is that right? >> yes. >> a phrase used for authorization of force is what type of force? >> reasonable. >> that force can be authorized under certain circumstances, is that right? >> yes. >> now if you would go to the next page. i want to talk about the circumstances under which a police officer is authorized properly to use force. highlight that. what other circumstances in which in all those officer is authorized to use force?
4:59 am
>> affecting lawful arrest, executing a legal process, forcing order of the court and any other duties imposed upon that officer. >> the term reasonable force is in policy, right? >> yes. >> exhibit 217 of the definition of reasonable force. please read that definition. >> the amount and type of force considered rational and logical for an objective officer on scene supported by facts and circumstances known to an officer at the time the force was used. >> you discussed a case the connor factors, i'd like you to first of all, is the policy referenced that you mentioned. >> yes. >> display to 17 page two.
5:00 am
we have three bullet points here under the connor factors, the officers are supposed to look at the totality of the circumstances, right? >> yes. >> the three bullets here that the officer is supposed to consider our watch? >> the officer should consider the severity of the crime at issue, whether the suspect poses an immediate threat to the safety of the officers or others and whether he is actively resisting arrest for attempting arrest by flight. >> these three different considerations are things you can attribute to the subject, correct? >> yes. >> the subjects conduct, not someone else's. >> yes. >> and it has to be judged like a reasonable police officer on scene at the time, correct? >> yes. >> do you recall, and obviously
5:01 am
you're here talking about what happened may 25, 2020 involving george floyd, do you recall why the officers responding to cut food that day? the original reason for the call? >> the original reason for the call was response regarding a counterfeit situation at the store, intersection of 38th and chicago. >> in terms of the deployment of your resources of minneapolis police department and as chief, how do you raise against the severity of that offense? the seriousness of that. >> it would probably not rise to the level and particularly in light of last year, the violent crime we have experienced in the city but we would certainly respond to it but it would not rise to the level in terms of the variance of the crime here.
5:02 am
>> looking at that particular type of crime, is that one for which the suspect is typically taken into a custodial arrest? >> typically not. >> why is that? >> not a violent felony. also in coordination with our system in our courts, there's a shift over the years to make sure the individuals who are going to jail are those from a public safety standpoint, need to be at least in that facility and if we can properly identify a violent situation, we can always charge other things so that's one of the reasons why. >> you use the phrase violent
5:03 am
felony, whether violent or a felony, what's more important? >> the violence. >> why is that? >> it can endanger not only officers but the community. >> something merely labeled as a felony may or may not require a full custodial arrest? >> correct. >> are minneapolis police trained in the use of force? >> yes. >> in the academy and also post service, service training? >> yes. >> are officers taught standards of force must be reasonable at the time it applied? the entire time is applied? >> yes. >> are officers taught the need to assess and reassess and reevaluate situations in the field?
5:04 am
>> yes, we are. >> are you familiar with minneapolis police departments critical thinking model? >> yes. >> how are you familiar with that? >> is something i wanted to embark and make sure was part of our training curriculum that includes the aspect of procedural justice and procedural justice is researched and evidence-based learning that's shown police departments, people with respect, give them voice, establish neutral engagements and feel there is trust in our communities, they are more likely to cooperate with us and likely to be seen more legitimate have shown employees come to work, there wellness is better this is very important, it is part of that procedural justice and critical
5:05 am
thinking training. >> i'd ask to display only to the witness exhibit 276. do you recognize exhibit 276 as mpds critical decision-making model? >> yes. >> offer exhibit 276. >> 276 is received. >> permission to publish. we heard about the model and now we can see it. in large the graphic, please. >> this is what the model looks like. the first stage of the critical thinking model decision-making model is information gathering? >> yes. >> slain. >> it's very vital, we rely upon trying to gather as much information as possible so we can try our best to effectively
5:06 am
go in, respond and manage the situation, trying to gather as much information at the onset, it is very important but we also need to make sure we continue to gather as much information as we deal with the scene or the call. >> i see the arrow points into direction, one in the respective trust in the other arrow points to the threat or risk assessment. let's talk about the middle of the circle first. what is the middle circle supposed to represent? >> that's the principles, really of what continues to guide us so for example, information gathering while we may associate specifically with receiving a 911 call, it is patrick giving us information, information gathering could be officers
5:07 am
coming across the call, but they were not dispatched to and need to talk to a community member. if they don't treat the members with respect will give them voice, it's likely they will receive less information that will be less helpful and result in the call so that was in trust and has to guide and part of that critical decision-making model. >> let's go to the next step, officers gather initial information and now the officer positions in need to assess it, is that right? >> yes. >> the next is a threat or risk assessment. is there a difference between a threat and arrest? >> there can be in terms of what's being played out at the time. you're constantly evaluating that in the information you receive which may be fluid, it's
5:08 am
going to dictate the threat or risk. >> once the officer made an assessment and threat or risk, the next step, the authority to act, what does that mean? >> when the officer based upon the information they received, evaluating that risk, and i going to act? is this going to be a physical arrest in my going to separate does this require a report? all of these things but it's getting more information for the officer to guide your she in terms of what the next appropriate step is, they need to act and take. >> if we, at least until this in the model, scenario and action, information gathering the officer receives that someone is approaching them with a weapon, like a bat so they would reflect
5:09 am
on that and determine whether or not it was a risk, maybe the person is at a baseball game for a threat, that is brandished? >> correct. >> under authority to act, they determined that this is a risk and they are being threatened, they would look at the authority act to the mpd policy procedural, is that right? under what is use of force policy, what tools are available to respond to hear? >> yes. ... >> taking a report pretty will not be enough of a reaction or
5:10 am
action. maybe a combination of things, it may mean that i'm going to have to are the officer will make an arrest we may need additional resources here because the situation could have the potential to not be stabilized. so all of that is part of that action. >> and then to review and reassess assuming that means exactly that. >> yes and as information, the dynamics can change so i can be just recessing the situation make sure that were trying to get to the best possible outcome and as peacefully and safely. >> because circumstances can change in the situation can change correct and forces that might be appropriate at that point in a moment may not be appropriate a different moment. and things can change it even another point. this particular critical thinking model exhibit 276, we
5:11 am
see examples of this throughout the training materials. there provided by the trainer facilities is that right and why is that pretty. >> is to really embed that's knowledge, that we do not want to fall susceptible to condiment check the box training. this training is important for all of our officers to have the knowledge and understanding. and our community members, they expect this to be consistent as they have encounters when dealing with the officers were engaging with the officers. >> we can take that downplays i want to shift a little bit to talk about use of force of the policy. does minneapolis police department and train its officers in specific defensive tactics. yes. >> and what is attorney appropriate. >> special operations center. >> and does the department
5:12 am
provided training for officers handling uncooperative individuals. yes. does the department provided training for handcuffing reluctance suspect. yes. when you provide the training, assuming you're taking someone into custody, do you also teach officers their responsibility, the personal responsibility with respect to the person they have just taken into custody pretty. >> yes we do. >> and what response ability dozen officer have with that person that taken into custody with restraints. >> the american policing profession which i believe is the best in the world, and able to say you why. two reasons really. >> rephrase your question. >> sir, you have responsibility and that throughout the officers and various forms of training as
5:13 am
to what when somebody is in their custody pretty. >> we have a duty of care so when somebody in our care or custody regardless of their suspect, we have an obligation to make sure we provide further care. >> is included people to whom a sense of tactics are being applied. >> yes. >> why is that. >> they are still in our custody and they have rights. the humanity of this profession, we need to make sure we are taking care of them. >> so how often are officers required to participate in sense of tactics training. >> is usually annual training. >> do you know when we are talking about the training and
5:14 am
the policies in effect, a make 25, 2020, or neck restraints and a chokehold supplied and authorized ipd policy at the time. >> at the time, yes. >> in their topper suet to the defensive tactics training as well. yes. at this time i would like to publish exhibit 224. exhibit 224 showing the policy five - 311 use of restraints, neck restraints and chokehold. do you see the chokehold was considered a deadly force option is that right pretty yes pretty. >> if you could go to the next page place. please. neck restraints, if you could highlight the portion from that down to unconscious neck restraint.
5:15 am
there are various types of neck restraints that were authorized at the time is that right pretty. >> yes. >> in the neck restraints was defined as one or both sides of the persons neck with an arm or a leg. but the airway needs to be protected. and there are two types of neck restraints. >> actually he passed out. is that correct pretty. >> yes predict. >> under certain circumstances in which the officer was in fear of bodily harm, that would be authorized is that right pretty. >> yes predict. >> in the cause of neck restraints with the neck restraints with the intention of control but not render the
5:16 am
suspect by and conscious. by applying like to moderate pressure is not right pretty. >> yes. >> then if you could go to roman two on the same policy. highlight that. conscious neck restraint, can be used for somebody who is resisting possibly correct. yes pretty and conscious right neck restraint could be used for person who is using or exhibiting active aggression or disabled person's life, is that right pretty. >> yes. >> martha subject to his exhibiting active resistance lesser attempt would've been are likely to be effective is not right. >> yes printed. >> but no neck restraints would not be used as are merely passive resistance persistent. correct.
5:17 am
>> now i would like to draw your attention to may 25, 2020. can you tell the jury involving the defendant the officers george floyd and thomas lane and j alexander kueng on monday. >> on monday evening, around 9:00 p.m., the 25th of 2020, i received a call. i was at my residence i received a call from one of my come i think it was the deputy chief who had informed me that minneapolis police officers and responded to 30th in chicago. and while attempting to take someone into custody, that which
5:18 am
i have learned now that that was george floyd. and they believed that it was he did not make it or survive. he had been transported via ambulance to medical center. and while at least the information i evening and 9:00 p.m., that time, at least i was told he was still alive. i decided to contact the minnesota bureau retention and they are the state agency that conducts are critical incidents. i deemed that this would be a critical incident and protocol to alert them and then they would conduct that investigation. so made that call to the dca to have them start to conduct this critical incident.
5:19 am
>> did did you then proceed to that call pretty. >> i should also say that right after that call and notified minneapolis to say that this is situation that we have a lease right now and i briefed him as i received more information and do not proceed to leave my residence and i went directly to my office at city hall. >> when you arrived at city hall, do you recall saying any video images or footages of that. >> the first time that i saw a video of the event, was after i was notified that mr. george floyd was now deceased. so i had asked my deputy chief to pull up knowing the area well and knowing there's usually a camera.
5:20 am
at that location, ask him to locate that video so that i could review it. >> and that's what we would refer to as a milestone camera and the footage printed. >> that is correct. >> did you watch the footage from the milestone camera that evening pretty. >> i did pretty. >> can you describe to the jury what you saw when you watch the footage. >> when i first viewed this milestone video, when i was able to see and i should just note that it was from a distance from where the officers were with mrn really see was the backs of the officers. there is also no audio to this milestone video. and so if you did that video in its entirety. quite frankly, there was really nothing in terms of the actions
5:21 am
of at least again, this non- a/v, really jumped out at me. after a few minutes, it seemed a paramedic be vehicle pulled up to the scene and it was at that time, for the first time that i saw a glimpse of mr. george floyd when the paramedics placed his body on the gurney and transported him away from the scene. that was really my first observation of the incident from that night. >> at some point, did you become aware of another video printed been taken by a bystander. >> yes. probably close to midnight a community member had contacted me. said chief, almost for verbatim
5:22 am
said chief have you seen the video of your officer choking and killing that man at 38 in chicago. and so once i heard that statement, i just knew it was not the same milestone video camera that i had saw. and eventually within minutes after that, i saw the first time, what is now known as the bystander video. >> said he would say that this was a closer video and audio. >> yes, i was able to see the apartments and see the officers involved and i was able to actually see mr. george floyd actually here what was occurring and i was also able to get a better understanding of the
5:23 am
duration of the call in the incident. >> prior to testifying today, you've now reviewed the bystander video facebook video and its entirety. >> aspirated. >> and the milestone footage pretty. >> yes, i have pretty. >> and the body worn camera footage worn by the officers tou thao j alexander kueng thomas lane is the right pretty. >> nineteen. >> first i want to show you what is been received. do you recognize the exhibit 17 to be an image taken from the bystander video you reviewed. >> yes. >> based upon your view of all of the information that you just
5:24 am
mentioned, do you believe that the departmental policies five - 304 regarding de-escalation pretty. >> i absolutely do not agree. >> also. >> that action, is not de-escalation. and when we talk about the framework of sanctity of life and we talk about the principles and values that action goes contrary to what we are taught. >> as you report on exhibit 17, this is a train minneapolis police department defensive tactics taking pretty. >> is not predict. >> you read the departmental policy and neck restraints, since neck restraint printed. >> a conscious neck restraint by
5:25 am
policy mentions light to moderate pressure. when i look at exhibit 17, and when i look at the facial expression of mr. george floyd, that does not appear in any way shape or form that is my intent light to moderate pressure. >> so is it your belief that this particular form of restraint if that's what we will call it, in fact violates the departmental policy pretty. >> i absolutely agree that that violates policy. >> are you aware now that the defendant maintained this position on george floyd for nine minutes and any seconds prayed and we testified that that would be reasonable when it's applied, from the beginning through the entire encounter is that right pretty. >> yes. >> is why you see an exhibit 17, in your opinion, but then the
5:26 am
minneapolis police department policy five - 300 authorizing use of reasonable force pretty. >> it is not pretty. >> and why not predict. >> that is, it has to be objectively reasonable and take into account circumstances and information, the threat to the officer, the current to others. and this not part of the policy and not what we teach and should be condoned. >> when you believe or do you have a belief as to when this restraint on the ground that should've stopped. >> once mr. george floyd this is based on my video, once mr. george floyd had stopped resisting and certainly when he
5:27 am
was in distress and trying to verbalize that, that should have stopped. there is an initial reasonable of trying to just get him under control within the first few seconds but once there was no longer any resistance and clearly from mr. george floyd when he was no longer responsive and even motionless to continue to apply that level of force, to a person. he was hand cuffed behind his back, that in no way shape or form is anything that is by policy, not part of her training and certainly not part of our
5:28 am
ethics or values. >> sir, based on your route review of the video and training as an officer, did you see during this encounter, that mr. george floyd was exhibiting being in medical distress. >> yes. yes. >> so you just testified that mr. george floyd was unresponsive. >> that is correct. >> in the officers could not find a pulse. >> could you repeat us are. >> for you aware that the officers at the time of restraint were unable to find a pulse read. >> yes, i was aware of that. i was aware that the officers were not able to find a pulse, yes. >> did you see a defendant, for any of the officers attempt to provide first aid to mr. george floyd. >> i did not see the defendants attempt to try to revive him.
5:29 am
>> no cpr no chest compressions pretty. >> objection. >> rephrase pretty. >> did you see them provide any medical attention. >> i did not. >> and based on the observations, do you have an opinion as to whether the defendant violated mpd departmental policies - 350, by failing to render aid is to mr. george floyd. >> i believe that they violated that policy in terms of that pretty. >> thank you. i have no further questions at this time your honor. [inaudible]. [inaudible].
5:30 am
[inaudible]. [inaudible]. [inaudible]. [inaudible]. >> good afternoon. thank you for being here this afternoon and this morning printed few follow-up questions for you regarding this incident printed your determination today in reference to employment
5:31 am
policies and by derek chauvin violating the policies is that correct pretty. >> that is correct. >> now is the police chief, i assume that you're not out of the streets state today are sing people. >> that is correct. >> can you give me a general idea of one the actually the last time you actually arrested a suspect pretty. >> it is been any years sir. >> your roll as minneapolis police chief is to sort of grantor in scope right. >> it is large in context and the operations of the department, yes. >> and part of that job is to be sort of aware of issues in the policing, policy changes, enforce changes in all of these things all under the umbrella of your roll as chief, grade pretty. >> yes pretty. >> resort of the general in this formulating the plan for your police department.
5:32 am
>> and delegating some of those choices to the subject experts, correct. >> so when you talk about training of a police officer, you would also include the training that the minneapolis police department goes through but you may go to other training out-of-state, listen to speakers talking about issues that confront policing correct as well as maybe a homicide detective will get permission to travel to an interview a suspect type of training and some other state or areas. >> yes. >> so there's a variability within the training depending upon your roll, in that police department pretty. >> yes. >> so we've got sort of your rank and file basic of patrol officers and they go through all of the training that you described as defensive tactics, medical assistance and basic medical training.
5:33 am
the crisis and intervention in things that we have been talking about here today. >> yes pretty. >> than the investigative type of officers magnitude additional or back training but may go through some additional training in terms of how to interview suspect or how to properly collect evidence etc. >> yes. >> so you is the police chief have more management or administrative side of the police department, you go to the kind of big picture training sometimes. >> yes. >> so i want to review with you a few of the policies that we have already talked about today. we can take this down for the moment. [inaudible].
5:34 am
[inaudible]. [inaudible]. [inaudible]. >> first of all, i would like to show you exhibit 216216, which is the use of force policy for the city of minneapolis police department and we have discussed this. >> yes pretty. >> i know what we did is we kind of jumped around from our department i would like to walk through some of these issues and little bit more of a linear fashion. so you described under the policy five - 301.01. that the amendment reasonable
5:35 am
standard applies to the use of force in minneapolis of the minneapolis police department, agreed. >> yes. >> and that wason to say that the employees only use the amount of force that is objectively reasonable and if it continues in light of the fact and circumstances known to that employee at the time the force was used. >> yes. >> so the reasonable standard of the object reasonable standard applies to the facts and circumstances that are known by the officer at the time the force was being used, correct. >> yes. now five - 302 gives a definition terms of the use of force and differentiates between active aggression and active resistance. can you describe the difference between active resistance,
5:36 am
excuse me active aggression and active resistance. >> active aggression, the behavior initiated by the subject that may or may not be in response to the police effort to bring a person into custody or control the active aggression, when presented behaviors cost is an assault. mark reasonably indicates that an assault or injury to persons likely to occur in a moment. >> limited stop either, that is active aggression. so that's what a suspect is essentially talking with the police officers or doing something that is aggressive behavior early speaking. agreed printed. >> yes. >> and that is in its nature. >> yes pretty. >> now read active a group entered businesses pretty. >> and he resistance is a response to police efforts to bring a person into custody or control pretty tame it or arrest in the subject engages in an active resistance when engaging in physical action or verbal behavior reflecting intention to make it more difficult for officers to achieve absolute
5:37 am
physical control. >> so essentially, but 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. he agreed printed and sometimes maybe that is not trying to punh the officers but pulling away or hiding his arms are doing something that just makes it more difficult physically right printed. >> yes. >> and sometimes you're not going to take me alive, like they're saying something to prevent the officer from arresting him. -right-curly-bracket of the using their words and their behaviors, is it, and based upon your experience for people to enjoy being taken into custody. >> no pretty. >> to people like to be arrested. >> they do not. a. >> and in your experience, is a common practice for people whom are being arrested to say things
5:38 am
in an effort to try to get the officers to not arrest them. >> that is true rated. >> my mom's home site, i need to get home to my kids over the maybe words that they use to try to convince an officer to not arrest them right pretty. >> yes. >> you would also agree that being arrested and being detained is different. agreed. >> there canopy. >> so an officer in certain circumstances is permitted to expand the scope of the original intervention. would you agree with that. >> objection. >> let me try again. we don't know officer approaches a situation, let's assume it is relatively minor offense. it is possible, that that minor offense can grow in scope of
5:39 am
investigation. >> yes. it is actually a common for that have been correct pretty. >> yes pretty. >> an officer traffic stop, or something like that and sells drugs in the car, which is the car, find drugs or guns etc. right pretty. >> yes. >> soap start out as a relatively minor is it, traffic is a ticket can turn into a felony arrest correct pretty. >> he could pretty. >> and then again happens quite regularly pretty. >> yes. >> someone an officer, you agree that being a police officers pretty dangerous profession. >> there are dangers with it. i've never had to get in a fight in my job. but in your job is probably more probable. would you agree with that.
5:40 am
[inaudible]. >> talking about the use of force, when an officer approaches a motor vehicle, is considered to be one of the most dangerous initiations of contact. between an officer and a citizen. >> i don't have the exact statistics only, and certainly, and encounter obviously certain more hyper. i know it's a domestic responsible can also have a heightened awareness for the officers. but certainly something, traffic stop certainly raises and awareness for the officers yes for their safety. >> that is because ss suspect sort of space, the officer does not know what is in the car in the during this domestic situation and they are walking into somebody else's territory so to speak. >> yes predict. >> so there could be guns or
5:41 am
knives or any number of instruments i could bring harm to a police officer. right pretty. >> potentially pretty. >> obviously, there's tens of thousands of traffic stops and not every traffic stop turn violence and i'm not suggesting that that does happen regularly, agreed. summa that traffic stops turned violent pretty. >> yes they can't. >> so when we are talking about the five - 301.01, the last sentence that was not read before, is the force used to be consistent with current training. agreed. >> yes. >> now there is a difference between a policy change and a best practice change, would you agree with that. >> can you clarify. >> sure, there certain times when there is a policy with prospective the use of force
5:42 am
makes specifically change to prohibited in particular style or use of force, right rated. >> yes pretty. >> so thinking about the old days, the officers used to wear like waited gloves to make the punches more effective right pretty. >> yes rated. >> policy change in prohibited that correct. >> yes. in fact pretty. >> so there's a difference between the evolution of defensive tactics would you agree with that. the defective tactics and training that you received in 1989 is much different than the defensive tactics attorney has talked about now are taught now predict. >> yes pretty. >> he may be 15 years ago, believed that the minneapolis police department started moving towards more body weight control and sorted the due to training as opposed to simply striking people. >> in your referencing policy or just training. >> training. >> i believe so. a. >> about ten or 15 years ago and
5:43 am
that was sort of highlighting the evolution of these kind of prescribed it in addressing this of policing as you become a police officer and that is one way it evolved. >> yes. >> and when something changes per policy, you can't work waited gloves anymore for example. that is that, no more. agreed. >> yes and i agree. it. >> but if the policy or the training for example evolves into a best practice, it is a prevent an officer from learning a technique he learned earlier in history. it just may not be the best practice correct. >> so i paused just to when you say you're learning can something, it is on the line of their policy, that would not be prohibited.
5:44 am
>> let me try to explain. like so, if an officer was trained in particular handicapping technique, and then they go to their defensive tactics training they say, is a better way to handcuff a suspect. it is not a policy change, it is just a best practice change. and they can still use the old way they did. >> it would have to be something that the training staff would have to not just an officer saying, i'm going to do it this way. so they have to be authorized through training. >> so we can talk about that kind of thing with the training and the use of force defensive tactics training. that would be better place to talk to about that pretty. >> yes. [inaudible]. >> now when we are talking about
5:45 am
active aggression and active resistance, sometimes those two things are happening simultaneously, agreed pretty. >> again. [inaudible]. >> now we were talking get about again, the grand versus connor case and how that is incorporated into the minneapolis police department policy. i am showing you exhibit two and seven now and should be up in front of you. what were basically talking about was the united states supreme court decision that outlined objectively reasonable use of force, standard right. >> yes pretty. >> in grand versus connor is not
5:46 am
limited to those three factors that they were read before, right predict the analysis predict. >> correct. >> those are three that are kind of listed but ultimately, it is not an all inclusive list of considerations the reasonable use of force agreed. >> that is my understanding. >> when in fact what the policy is that the reasonable this of a particular use of force must be judged from the perspective of the reasonable officer on the scene. rather than with the 2020 vision of hindsight right predict. >> yes pretty. >> sore looking at it in the instant in the moment based upon the object of standard right predict. >> yes predict. >> also includes a big calculus of the reasonableness must embody allowance for the fact that police officers are often forced to make splits second
5:47 am
judgment in circumstances that are uncertain and rapidly evolving about the amount of force that is necessary in that particular situation. and that is because when they go to a situation, and what we talked about before, we can initially be very minor can it grow into something major a grade. >> yes. >> now, exhibit 219. [inaudible]. [inaudible]. >> you are a part of five - 304 which is threatening the use of force and de-escalation. i want to talk to you a little bit about de-escalation. have you heard the term,
5:48 am
sometimes you have to escalate to de-escalate, have you ever heard of that praise pretty. >> no. >> so when you're you talk about policy talks about that officers shall consider verbally announcing their intent to use force including displaying an authorized weapon is a threat of force. right. sometimes an officer has to take out his gun and say hey, that is a use of force in that instance. right pretty. >> yes predict. >> and if feudalism, i'm going to use force that's a pretty clear indication that you're going to use of force would you agree with that pretty. >> yes pretty. >> but i think such as tasers and chemical, is not just limited to a firearm right so sometimes when an officer has to do is command the presence, they have to command or to control of the situation. >> yes. >> sometimes is not particularly attractive visit.
5:49 am
>> can you explain pretty. >> sure, the use of force, is not something that people like to watch generally right predict. >> objection, speculation. >> we would great that the use of force is not an attractive notion. >> i would say that use of force is something most officers use and they would rather not use. >> and you described in your direct examination have a single greatest way that the minneapolis police department could be judged is based upon how the public perceives its use of force. >> yes. >> so has a tendency to garner a lot of attention rated. >> it can. >> so much so that citizens have become more prone to report
5:50 am
observed interaction with police right pretty. >> yes predict. >> something you didn't have to do with back in 1989 right pretty. >> yes. >> so essentially what the policies and five - 304 in terms of threatening the use of force, it is contained within this de-escalation, sometimes you have to display a weapon to gain command so that you can de-escalate. right. >> yes read it. >> is a fair to say that it's pretty much every single one of these use of force a policy, contains some praise if reasonable or have practical. there is limitations on the use of force right. >> yes. >> in a situation by situation right and again as we go back and look at the language of graham versus connor in the policy is contained by minneapolis police department,
5:51 am
it is the use of force has no precise objective singular rule. it is different in every case. >> yes. >> so for example, in a de-escalation policy five - 304, de-escalation is advisable when it is safe and feasible correct. >> yes. >> and sometimes de-escalation again, include this the use of force. in the use of force can be a de-escalation tactic. >> i was thinking of your example displaying your weapon and so, i do not have a lot of knowledge in terms of difficult
5:52 am
force being used to actually de-escalate the situation. but threatening verbally. [inaudible]. i am more familiar that pretty. >> so if we would rather talk to. >> objective. overall pretty. >> we would be the best source of that pretty. >> objective, overall. [inaudible]. >> the purpose of de-escalation is to attempt to slow down or to stabilize the situation so that more time resources become available to the officer. >> yes. it. >> basically, slow down, everybody calm down. let's try to relax, right pretty. >> yes. >> but it's a lot more, the practice of de-escalation is not just trying to talk somebody out of doing something, there are actions that are important, there may be reactions that are important.
5:53 am
in the de-escalation policy includes for examples of this. right rated. >> yes pretty. >> such as placing burgers between an uncooperative suspect in an officer and sometimes or another officer. in the containing is right, that's one of the examples in the policy. >> yes pretty. >> i containing the threat, that could include physically straining someone so that they don't upset another person right pretty. >> aspirated. >> proposed another person have a violent reaction. >> yes. >> moving from a position that exposes the officers potential threats to save her position right. so retreating in certain circumstances. reducing exposure to potential threats distance cover or concealment. so hiding, maybe hiding behind squad car.
5:54 am
in avoiding a physical confrontation. that is probably pretty big one. right. and using verbal techniques to calm and agitated subject or promote rational decision making it. this go down towards the head and lastly, calling additional resources. right. >> yes. >> we talked about and. [inaudible]. [inaudible]. [inaudible]. 230.
5:55 am
[inaudible]. [inaudible]. >> exhibit 230 which is the emergency medical response, do you agree that the policy requires minneapolis police employees to request an emergency medical service as soon as practical. right. >> yes. >> of a person comes into contact with an acute medical, any potential delay could potentially increase the medical crisis. so sometimes the officers will call for ems, not thinking it's a major issue. when suddenly becomes apparent that it can step up request a quicker response from the ambulance right pretty. >> yes pretty. >> an officer can do that to ensure the medical treatment of the suspect or the person there in contact with right pretty. >> to ensure i'm sorry,.
5:56 am
>> sorry, it is been a long week pretty to ensure the medical condition of the suspect, to help with that. >> yes. >> thank you think there as quickly as possible pretty. >> yes. [inaudible]. >> we didn't talk about the maximum restraint technique that you're familiar with the policy surrounding that. >> yes. >> i will show you what is been admitted as exhibit 325. can you describe with the maximum restraint technique is. >> yes, maximal restraint technique is been referred often to. [inaudible]. and that is a method of an officers arguing with typically a combative or an aggressive
5:57 am
person in order to projected them at what the property and it is placing basically attaching a corn of the legs to the waist so that the person the individual does not have free movement of his leg at their legs so securing them again usually by their ankles, and if you're prone to bringing that up to your waist and securing get. in the maximal restraint technique or the humble, if it is used, a supervisor has to responded to the scene and you cannot transport anyone prone in that position due to the risk of the breathing. and so, that is accompanied by mrt, the maximal restraint technique. >> so you talked a little bit in terms of the use force of how
5:58 am
officers are reevaluating their use of force from time to time right or should be. >> right. >> so if an officer decided to use that maximum response technique you decide, in the decides not to use it, that is kind of adjusting that use of force. [inaudible]. >> i would have some clarity. i don't know, what, i mean, by that is if you were to have in person handcuffed on their stomach on the ground on the pavement and had to officers let's say securing their legs to the back of the waist. you away, are imploring or employing what that technique is about anyway.
5:59 am
so there can be some variances to that if that make sense. >> it does so let's assume that you have two officers pulling the leg forward and sensually employing that version so to speak his maximal restraint. but then they released head and said are not going to hobble this person were not going to deploy the mrt, we are going from a decision to employ that technique backwards down to continue them in terms of the use of force. you agree with that. >> 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.
6:00 am
>> i'm not asking in terms of the policy, i'm trump denton talking terms of the use of force in the critical decision making mode. you describe how the use of force you have to go through this critical decision-making model, how much force i'm going to use and sometimes you have to back off the use of force. agreed. >> yes pretty. >> and sometimes you have to go forward the use of force, even more as his constant reevaluation agreed. >> yes. it. >> so when you have officers who make a decision that the facts and circumstances which were not using the hobble device but then later decide not to employ that device, that is a critical decision-making model in action. agreed. >> yes. >> and it be a reduction in the use of force and they still require supervisors or it may to be unseen, policy wise but it is
6:01 am
a reduction in the use of force agreed. >> just talking specifically, the events of may 25th pretty. >> i'm talking about in general. >> yes. >> if you would agree that ultimately that all of the minneapolis police department policies relevant to the use of force, the emergency medical response, the emergency medical treatment, all of these policies are by their very language, are situationally potential right. they all say the circumstances allow, if the time permits, if it is safe, they have a qualifier to them agreed. >> yes, i would agree with that read. >> also you exhibit 231.
6:02 am
at the bottom of exhibit 231, is a crisis intervention policy. and the second page includes the definition. can you read the entire definition of what a crisis is. >> yes predict an event or situation where an individual safety and health are threatened by behavioral health challenges to include mental illness, developmental disabilities, substance use our overwhelming stressors. a crisis can involve an individual's perception or experience of an event or situation as an intolerable difficulty that exceeds an individual's current resources and coping mechanisms and may include unusual stress in his or her life and renders him or more
6:03 am
unable to function as he or she normally would. and crisis may not necessarily result in an upward trajectory or intensity culminating in thoughts or actions or possibly dangerous to himself or herself or and or others. >> so generally speaking, again not relevant to the may 25th of 2020 is any, will get there in a minute. but when we talk about general police response, sometimes the police may respond to something and the person were dealing with is not in a crisis agreed. >> yes pretty. >> but others may be perceiving what happened and could become a crisis to that person. >> objection. >> let me rephrase it greatest people who observed, would you say the people who observed police interactions with people,
6:04 am
especially more physical resource type, that could turn into a crisis to observer pretty. >> objection. >> sustained. >> so in terms of the definition of crisis, crisis may involve an individual's perception or experience of an event or situation as an intolerable difficulty that exceeds that individual's current resources and coping mechanisms. right. >> yes pretty. >> does not necessarily mean that you are the person's home you are arresting, or having contact with, is going to be the person will experience a crisis, agreed. >> objection. >> overruled. >> counselor, respectfully, hearing the two are sing the person who is witnessing the situation with the officers, the
6:05 am
situation may cause them to be in crisis printed. >> correct pretty. >> he could potentially. >> and the crisis may but not necessarily result in an upward trajectory or intensity culminating in the thoughts and actions or possibly dangerous to hamper or others. >> counselor, just watching this prayed it could. >> so people are watching something that they appear to believe they believe is wrong, contrary to the police policy, that may cause them to get upset and the level of volatility may grow throughout the course of the attraction. >> objection, this irrelevant and calling for speculation. [inaudible]. >> because ultimately part of the training the minneapolis police officers have to go through is how to deal with crowds observing police
6:06 am
interaction. right. >> yes predict. >> because it may be upset with the police interaction right predict. >> yes. >> in their classes through the training academy and classes through in-service specifically dealing with how to deal with the crowd control right. >> yes. >> in all of this is to revert in part back to that de-escalation process as well write. >> yes predict. >> so part of it as the ground under crown grows and becomes morris avenue, part of it is to try to de-escalate which could involve trying to avoid a physical confrontation. >> yes. >> trying to stay safe. >> content not yelling back at somebody are not engaging with him. >> yes. >> and sometimes, when an officer tries to de-escalate the situation, and someone is so
6:07 am
upset right. sometimes they do not hear what the officer tells them, would you agree with that. >> objection, speculation read. >> is impossible, that someone in its crisis may prevent them from hearing when an officer is telling them. >> they can. >> sustained. [inaudible]. >> you testified that you have watched the body camera correct. >> yes. [inaudible]. [inaudible]. [inaudible].
6:08 am
>> i am going to show you, i don't know mr. swisher, this is exhibit 1008 which is ten seconds approximately a 52nd reps of. [inaudible]. body worn camera. i give you a copy of it. [inaudible]. >> i am just telling you. >> i'm going to show you on your screen, a short clip of the video to see if this would be contained and what you have watched. [inaudible]. you would agree that appears to be taken from one of the officers body cameras on may 25th, 2020, at
6:09 am
approximately 2025 and 33 seconds. >> yes. >> and again watching this without sound. [inaudible]. [inaudible]. ... ...
6:10 am
[silence] >> someone for collecting -- >> yes. >> so you would agree it appears to be a short clip when one of officers body worn cameras may 25, 2020? >> yes. >> you seen this before? what appears to be mr. floyd's arm by the back of the squad car? >> yes. >> one hundred eight. >> received. >> published. [inaudible] >> we need -- >> sorry. >> you hear a voice that says
6:11 am
we've got an ambulance coming? >> yes. >> policy five -- 311, let's talk about five -- 311, the neck restraint policy. [silence] [silence] >> an afternoon break.
6:12 am
we will reconvene around 3:20 p.m. thank you. [silence]tandards bu
6:13 am
bureau, the use of neck restraint and policies.

1 View

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on