Firstly I would point out that fentanyl is dangerous and pretty unpredictable. The danger thresholds will be different across individuals. There is a lot ambiguity in “potentially lethal dose” given the vagaries of human physiology. What we know is that he had Fentanyl in his system. We know that the Medical Examiner of record did not think that was what killed him. He doesn’t say so in his report, and he didn’t testify to that at trial.
A key passage from this page: "* Because of the proliferation of fentanyl and its role in the overdose epidemic, many people wonder what a lethal dose is.
There is no easy answer to this, and one dose that may fatal for one person may not be fatal for another. The bottom line is ANY misuse of fentanyl (knowingly or unknowingly) has the potential to cause a fatal overdose.*"
The main reason I am unconvinced of the unfairness charges is this. The Jury saw the same autopsy reports we have. They heard detailed expert testimony, and detailed expert counter testimony. They weighed both against the evidence and found the defense wanting. They heard all the stuff about complicating factors from the defense. The jury saw the evidence, weighed the testimony and found Chauvin guilty. I can see no evidence that the judge suppressed testimony or evidence, or swayed the jury in anyway. Indeed the dueling expert testimony of the autopsy doctors (official, and family commissioned) in addition to the counter testimony was, in my lay opinion, pretty bad for the prosecution.
Still the jury saw all the evidence we have brought up, including the evidence of rather underlying health concerns and found Chauvin guilty.
When coupling all the evidence of the experts with the behavior of Chauvin at the scene (he stayed on Floyd vastly longer than was necessary, and not once addresses really obvious signs of serious respiratory distress) I think the jury made a reasonable finding of guilt.
In the absence of Chauvin’s prolonged neck restraint, and what seemed a cavalier attitude to the suspect in his care’s condition, I think a different verdict would have been found. That is to say, had Chauvin stopped the neck restraint much, earlier, checked the subject, rendered aid etc, there would be little to find him at fault for. His attitude and behavior on the scene was a pretty bad fact, and one I don’t think the defense could overcome. Chauvin was supported by several other officers (who I think are maybe unfairly caught up in this event). He was not in any fear for his life, or the lives of other officers, or even Floyd. Chauvin very casually stays in position for an extended period of time, on a cuffed subject. Given those facts, the jury found Chauvin’s behavior to be the primary proximate cause of Floyd’s death. That is not an unreasonable position to take. And since they had all the same evidence to look at the we do, the verdict doesn’t seem unfair to me.
Now in an appeal a new camera angle could come to light that shows Floyd was actually much more of a threat, more dangerously resisting etc. I’m pretty skeptical of such evidence being forthcoming but it could happen and I would adjust my opinion.
