Return to Transcripts main page
Inside Politics
Use-Of-Force Expert: Officers Are Trained They Can Put Their Knee On Shoulder Blade Area To Hold A Person Down On Ground; Prosecution Questions LAPD Use-Of-Force Expert. Aired 12:30-1p ET
Aired April 07, 2021 - 12:30 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[12:30:00]
SGT. JODY STIGER, HIRE PROSECUTION EXPERT ON USE OF FORCE: That I'm familiar with, yes.
ERIC NELSON, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: And you are trained that way.
STIGER: Yes.
NELSON: And there's the immediacy of the handcuffing, correct?
STIGER: Correct.
NELSON: And then there's the need to continue to control the suspect, correct? If they are resisting?
STIGER: Yes.
NELSON: And then there is simply holding someone or restraining them to decide what you're -- what your next steps are going to be, right?
STIGER: Yes, in most cases, however, specially in the last 20 years, officers are trained to -- once you handcuff the person, even if they are still resisting, you still want to try to put them in somewhat of a side recovery position or set them up.
NELSON: Even if they're still resisting?
STIGER: Yes. And hold them down in the side recovery position or utilize a hobble.
NELSON: You would agree that the Minneapolis Police Department are trained that when a person is handcuffed and then rendered unconscious, that officers need to use caution in -- on handcuffing them to revive them?
STIGER: I'm not familiar with that, no.
NELSON: Did you, as a part of your analysis, review any training materials regarding the use of the lateral vascular neck restraint?
STIGER: Yes.
NELSON: Just looking in front of you, did you look at this training material?
STIGER: Yes.
NELSON: Officers are trained that if CPR is needed, they remove handcuffs first, right?
STIGER: Correct.
NELSON: And to use caution, because the subject may revive agitated and ready to fight.
STIGER: Correct.
NELSON: You've had that training, too?
STIGER: Yes.
NELSON: You've had that experience where someone is rendered unconscious is revived and fights you more?
STIGER: Not that they -- they passed out and then they came to, yes.
NELSON: And then they fought you more?
STIGER: Yes.
NELSON: Looking at what's already in evidence, the 2019 use of force manual at slide 41. This is what we're talking about in terms of the prone arm control, right?
STIGER: Yes.
NELSON: And you see a photograph here officer's knee appears to be across into the shoulder blades, and between the shoulder blades across the head and neck area of the person, right?
STIGER: Yes, as he's attempting to handcuff the person wrist (ph).
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Your Honor, not an objection but (INAUDIBLE), would you please identify (INAUDIBLE).
NELSON: That was -- I haven't listed as 10:31 or that's what I haven't -- I don't remember what (INAUDIBLE).
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: That's the 2019 (INAUDIBLE).
NELSON: 2019 use of force (INAUDIBLE).
(OFF-MIC)
NELSON: Sorry. I'm referring to bates stamp 21464, was the 2019 defensive tactics that we introduced.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (INAUDIBLE).
NELSON: Sorry. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We just take a brief pause.
NELSON: Sorry to that.
JOHN KINGS, CNN HOST: Quick pause in the trial here. The lawyer -- the defense attorney is questioning this prosecution witness in his cross examination and the prosecutors just wanted to point of reference to find the document. He's using a Minneapolis police training document about the use of force. And so there's a quick pause here while the attorneys essentially make sure that they have the document in front of them that's being addressed in the questioning.
I'm going to bring in our analyst -- risk (ph) bringing our analyst Laura Coates. It may not be long conversation here but you see the attorneys now making sure, just comparing notes in the courtroom. They have thousands and thousands of exhibits and receipts. They're just making sure they're on the same page with the documents. Let's see.
Laura and Chief Ramsay with us, but I think we're going to get back to the testimony. We do. My apologies to both.
NELSON: This is from Exhibit 126, which is already an evidence. I'd ask for permission to publish.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Go ahead (ph).
NELSON: Again, you see here, this officer's knee appears to be over the neck and head of the subject as he's attempting to handcuff him, correct?
STIGER: Correct.
NELSON: And so there are circumstances when the hand -- the knee is put in this position, correct?
[12:35:04]
STIGER: Yes. But officer is always cautioned to try to stay away from the neck as much as possible.
NELSON: All right. We can take that down, Your Honor. Now, you were shown a series of photographs, the comparative photographs. And I just don't have a copy of that right now. I believe it was Exhibit 274, the one you just admitted?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: 254.
NELSON: 254? I don't have that yet. There was a one photo -- would it be possible to publish that?
The photo, if we could publish this exhibit in this upper right hand corner, right?
STIGER: Yes.
NELSON: Mr. Chauvin, the right shoulder is down lower, right, than the left shoulder?
STIGER: Yes.
NELSON: And that would be consistent with more of his weight being on his right side, correct?
STIGER: Yes.
NELSON: We can take that down. And again, when we look at still photographs, what we're -- what we miss is sort of the dynamics of what's happening, right?
STIGER: Yes.
NELSON: So, weight can be shifting from side to side at times?
STIGER: Correct.
NELSON: Right. And if an officer is generally speaking, on his toes, the majority of the weight is going to be in the feet, right? That's what you're trained?
STIGER: Yes, that's how officers are trained.
NELSON: And so if his left leg, his foot is off to the side, he has no weight, or he has less weight on that side of his body because his foot is off to the side, right?
STIGER: Yes.
NELSON: And if his right foot, the toes are tucked under, that would be consistent with having the majority of the weight on the right side, right?
STIGER: Yes.
NELSON: And again, in uses of force that you've -- you'd used yourself, or in uses of force that you have reviewed, right? Oftentimes, these things, uses of force, leave injuries on a suspect, right?
STIGER: Yes.
NELSON: And if the weights of a human being was placed in a particular area, based on your training and experience reviewing police uses of force, you would expect there to be injury where the majority of the weight exists, right?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Objection, Your Honor, lack of foundation (INAUDIBLE).
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Overruled. You may answer (INAUDIBLE) if you want.
STIGER: Not necessarily, no.
NELSON: OK. But obviously, medical doctors may be able to answer that better, right?
STIGER: Correct.
NELSON: You would agree that on May 25th of 2020, Minneapolis Police Department authorized the use of neck restraints, right?
STIGER: Correct.
NELSON: And that the conscious neck restraint was not considered a lethal use of force?
STIGER: Correct.
NELSON: So, I am -- would like to show you a series of photographs that were introduced yesterday, starting with Exhibit 1045. So before we go there, you would agree that the -- some of the problems with photographs are that, again, it doesn't capture -- a single photograph isn't going to capture the dynamics of what's happening, right?
STIGER: In some cases, yes.
NELSON: Wait can shift, right?
STIGER: Correct.
NELSON: In a video versus a still photograph, right?
STIGER: Yes.
NELSON: And positions can change, right?
STIGER: Yes.
NELSON: And those things can happen throughout the course of the time of use of force, right?
STIGER: Yes.
NELSON: Now, I like to show you and publish Exhibit 1045. I don't know if you've seen these but these are stills from the body-worn camera. Sorry.
[12:40:10]
It's a little difficult to see through the glare here, but maybe you can see it better on your screen.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And if you would stand (INAUDIBLE) see the glare feel free.
STIGER: Thank you, sir.
NELSON: In this area here, it appears that you can see Officer Chauvin's left leg?
STIGER: Yes. NELSON: And that Officer Chauvin's shin appears to be sort of parallel to or over Mr. Floyd's left shoulder blade, agreed?
STIGER: It's hard to tell. It could be his neck or shoulder blade.
NELSON: In this dip right in here, the area between the two shoulder blades, he's handcuffed, right, that causes that the shoulders to sort of come back?
STIGER: I'm sorry. You're referring to his left knee, correct?
NELSON: Right.
STIGER: Is that what you stated, his left knee?
NELSON: Right.
STIGER: Yes, his left knee appears to be, based on the photograph I'm looking at, near the neck area of Mr. Floyd.
NELSON: In between the shoulder blade here and what would be the shoulder blade behind his hand.
STIGER: Above it. I wouldn't say it was in between it, it's more looks like -- it appears to be more above the shoulder blades than it does on the shoulder blades or below.
NELSON: Almost resting on the shoulder blade.
STIGER: Above. I would --
NELSON: You would say it's above?
STIGER: Yes.
NELSON: All right. But it appears to be angled in towards the cruiser, correct?
STIGER: Yes.
NELSON: I am showing you -- oops. I'm going to show it this way that again. That being at 2023, 32, right?
STIGER: Yes.
NELSON: Again, you can see Mr. Floyd's shoulder blade here a little bit more pronounced?
STIGER: Yes.
NELSON: It appears to be above the shoulder blade, correct?
STIGER: Correct.
NELSON: Mr. Chauvin's, excuse me, Mr. Floyd's shoulder blade is a little more pronounced. Mr. Chauvin's shin appears to be -- or calf, excuse me, appears to be above the shoulder blade?
STIGER: Correct.
NELSON: Angled in towards the squad car, correct?
STIGER: Slightly, yes.
NELSON: I'm showing you 1047. This is now at 2027, appears to be a different angle now, right?
STIGER: Yes.
NELSON: And you can get a much clearer view of the placement of Mr. Chauvin's knee?
STIGER: Yes.
NELSON: And again, here you've got the shoulder blade, shoulder blade, Mr. Chauvin's knee is sort of at the base of the neck, right?
STIGER: Correct, I would agree.
NELSON: And looking finally at Exhibit 1048, you can see Mr. Floyd's had in this picture, correct?
STIGER: Yes.
NELSON: And it gives you, again, a depth perception of the placement of Mr. Chauvin's knee relative to the neck of Mr. Floyd?
STIGER: Somewhat, yes.
NELSON: Now, if we could take this down, Your Honor. I like to show you what has been introduced into evidence as Exhibit 1020. Which, on the left hand side of your screen, you see that appears to be the bystander video?
STIGER: Yes.
NELSON: On the right hand side that's from Mr. King's body-worn camera?
STIGER: Yes.
NELSON: You'd agree that at this point, based on everything that we've seen in the same photographs, on the left hand side, it appears that Mr. Chauvin's knee is on Mr. Floyd's neck?
STIGER: Yes. More of the base of the neck.
NELSON: And from Officer King's body-worn camera, it appears that it was more at the base of the neck in between the shoulder blades, right?
STIGER: Yes. NELSON: OK. And in fact, as you review some of the videos where Mr. Floyd was on the -- in the prone position, there are points in time at which Mr. Floyd picks up his head and moves it, agreed?
[12:45:12]
STIGER: He attempted to early on, yes. He's stating he couldn't breathe so I assumed he was attempting to try to breathe better.
NELSON: But he was able to lift up his head at some points, turn it?
STIGER: Slightly, yes, he attempted to.
NELSON: I have no further questions, Your Honor.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Redirect.
STEVE SCHLEICHER, PROSECUTING ATTORNEY: Thank you, Your Honor. Sir, to clarify a little bit, I'm -- thank you -- to clarify a little bit on the known risks that you testified to, with respect to positional asphyxia --
STIGER: Yes.
SCHLEICHER: -- is the risk related to the pressure on the neck or the pressure on the body?
STIGER: It's the pressure on the body. Any additional pressure on the body complicates breathing more so than if there was no pressure at all.
SCHLEICHER: Right. And so the placement of the knees, even if there can be shifting between the neck, the base of the neck, the point is that both of the defendant's knees were on Mr. Floyd's body during the entirety of the restraint period, is that right?
STIGER: Yes.
SCHLEICHER: I want to ask you some questions about what may have been apparent to the defendant when he first got on the scene. You were asked some questions about being dispatched and you know the term code 4, correct?
STIGER: Correct.
SCHLEICHER: And were you aware that prior to the defendant arriving on the scene, that Officer Lane had called code 4?
STIGER: Yes, I believe so in reviewing some of the documentation and things of that nature.
SCHLEICHER: And what does that mean?
STIGER: That means that everything is OK, that we have the suspect in custody. SCHLEICHER: OK. So at least at the time the defendant arrived, he would have been aware based on the totality that code 4 had been called?
STIGER: Yes.
SCHLEICHER: I'd like to direct your attention to the moment in time when he would have arrived. You can pull Exhibit 43, which is for the record, Officer Lane's body-worn camera. And I'd like you to begin displaying at timestamp 20:17:20.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (INAUDIBLE).
SCHLEICHER: I'm sorry, I can't hear you, hold on.
(INAUDIBLE) 47, Exhibit 47. Apologize, 47.
All right. Well, we see that you can leave it at 20 -- you're wireless (ph). Yes, go ahead. All right, so we see in the still frame, now for the record, the timestamp is 20:17:20. At this point in time, we see Officer Thao and would be next to him, the defendant arrive, is that right?
STIGER: Yes, I believe you can see his shoulder and circle that, yes.
SCHLEICHER: And I'd asked to begin publishing to the jury.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GEORGE FLOYD, BLACK MAN KILLED IN MINNEAPOLIS: I'm not trying to win. I'm not trying to win. I'll get on the ground, anything.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Get in the car.
FLOYD: They know it. They know it (INAUDIBLE).
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Get in the car.
FLOYD: (INAUDIBLE).
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You get in this car. We can talk.
FLOYD: I mean, I'm claustrophobic. I'm claustrophobic.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I'm hearing you. That's not working with me.
FLOYD: Yes, I'm claustrophobic.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (INAUDIBLE) over here, I'm going to pull your (INAUDIBLE).
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Get in the car.
FLOYD: (INAUDIBLE), please.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No, you're not getting in the front. FLOYD: I'm claustrophobic.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Get in the car.
FLOYD: OK, men. OK. I'm not a bad guy, man.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Get in the car.
FLOYD: I'm not a bad guy. Oh man. Help.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCHLEICHER: You know, and you can take that down. Sir, in assessing an individual in the totality of the circumstances that would have been apparent at the scene, were you able to detect any indication that Mr. Floyd was under some sort of distress?
[12:50:16]
STIGER: Based on his comments and based on his actions, yes, it was a possibility.
SCHLEICHER: And is that something that would have -- apparently, Officer Chauvin, the defendant, would have seen that, is that correct?
STIGER: Yes.
SCHLEICHER: And would a reasonable officer have taken that into account?
STIGER: Yes.
SCHLEICHER: Sir, you've testified that the force that was used here during the restraint period by the defendant was, in fact, excessive, is that right?
STIGER: Yes.
SCHLEICHER: And you were asked on cross to distinguish between the standard or to comment on the standard of objectively reasonable force? Is it your opinion then to a degree of professional certainty that the force you've identified as applied by the defendant during the restraint period, was it objectively reasonable or not objectively reasonable?
STIGER: It was not objectively reasonable.
SCHLEICHER: And is that then the basis for saying it was excessive?
STIGER: Correct.
SCHLEICHER: You were asked about different techniques for deescalation and the telling of someone to relax. I'd like you to comment on the context in which Mr. Floyd was told to relax by the defendant.
STIGER: And it appeared in the video that he was told to relax as he was stating that he was in a medical distress, he couldn't breathe, and that he was in pain.
SCHLEICHER: And so, again, the context, the words of the defendant versus the actions telling someone to relax when you're sitting on top of them, is that an effective deescalation technique in your opinion?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Objection (INAUDIBLE).
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Overruled.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You can answer (INAUDIBLE).
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Go ahead (ph).
STIGER: Not necessarily.
SCHLEICHER: As to an officer, a reasonable officer, reassessing and reevaluating the situation, they also have to take in information related to a subject's potential medical condition, is that right?
STIGER: Yes.
SCHLEICHER: Do you agree with the statement in your custody in your care?
STIGER: Yes, I do agree.
SCHLEICHER: What does that mean?
STIGER: That means once you take someone into custody, then you're responsible for their care.
SCHLEICHER: And can you, as an officer, simply opt not to believe them?
STIGER: No.
SCHLEICHER: You have to consider the context, correct?
STIGER: Correct.
SCHLEICHER: And --
STIGER: And obligated to in most cases.
SCHLEICHER: I'm sorry, I cut you off. Could you please repeat that?
STIGER: I'm sorry, Your Honor. You're obligated to. It's part of your duty.
SCHLEICHER: And in the context that you saw here in which the -- Mr. Floyd was manifesting some distress, did you believe the defendant have an obligation to at least take that into consideration and the totality of circumstances when considering to continue the type of force he was applying?
STIGER: Absolutely. As the time went on, clearly in the video, you could see that Mr. Floyd's medical -- his health was deteriorating, his breath was getting lower, his tone of voice were getting lower, his movements were starting to cease. So at that point, as a officer on scene, you have a responsibility to realize that, OK, something is not right, something has changed drastically from what was occurring earlier. So therefore, you have a responsibility to take some type of action.\
SCHLEICHER: Sir, you were shown some training materials that included photographs of officers in positions in which they would have their legs on the subject's back and the base of the neck, is that right?
STIGER: Yes.
SCHLEICHER: And in the photograph, you were shown that subject was not yet handcuffed, was he?
STIGER: No, he was not.
SCHLEICHER: And the purpose of situating oneself on a subject is to gain control in order to handcuff the individual?
STIGER: Yes.
SCHLEICHER: And what is the officer supposed to do after they handcuff the individual?
STIGER: Immediately set the person up or put him on the side recovery position?
SCHLEICHER: You were asked to comment on sort of the notion that some things that law enforcement do, have to do, uses of force, are not attractive to the public, is that right?
STIGER: Correct.
SCHLEICHER: And, in fact, you were asked about a presentation that you had given relative to that called that awful but lawful?
[12:55:08]
STIGER: Yes.
SCHLEICHER: OK. And to be lawful, the force must be objectively reasonable, correct?
STIGER: Correct.
SCHLEICHER: And if there -- and if it isn't lawful, then what's left?
STIGER: Well, the whole premise of the presentation was that in certain situations, based on a policy or a particular law, even though the situation may be deemed lawful in the community's eyes, the use of force is awful. So it was stating that, hey, in these situations, you can have a situation where by law it looks horrible to the common eye, but based on the state law, it's lawful.
SCHLEICHER: But if it's not objectively reasonable, and it's not lawful, then it's just awful.
STIGER: Correct.
SCHLEICHER: All right, nothing further.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Any recross?
(OFF-MIC)
NELSON: You were not personally there that day, correct?
STIGER: The day of this incident?
NELSON: Correct.
STIGER: Correct.
NELSON: And you would not have known how people were feeling, correct?
STIGER: Correct.
NELSON: You would not know how they felt in terms of their perception, correct?
STIGER: Correct.
NELSON: You would not know how Mr. Floyd's body felt at that moment, correct?
STIGER: Only what he was verbalizing.
NELSON: I'm talking about in terms of the stiffness or tension of his body.
STIGER: Correct.
NELSON: And again, in terms of your use of force reviews in the past, you said you're a peer reviewer, how many reviewers look at the -- an incident in terms of a use of force?
STIGER: From start to finish? Numerous. So, in Los Angeles Police Department, it starts with the sergeant who's doing the investigation. Then from there, it will go to the watch commander who happens to be typically a lieutenant or another sergeant and the training coordinator. Then they make recommendations, and then they send it to the captains of the division. And at that point, the captains would then send it to the bureau. And that's where I was at one point as well, then the bureau makes recommendations, and then it gets sent up to another unit and they make the final recommendation in that.
In regards to more serious ones where I was a peer member, it goes from the investigators to the Use of Force Review Board, which is five-member board, four command staff and a peer.
NELSON: And that peer review board, the five people, they make recommendations to move up the chain, right? STIGER: Yes. So they make recommendations -- I'm sorry.
NELSON: No, I'm just touching my face.
STIGER: They make recommendations to the chief of police, then the chief of police reviews it and he makes recommendations to the police commission. And the inspector general's office also reviews all the evidence as well and they make recommendations. In most cases, they concur with the chief, for some cases, they disagree. And then finally, a presentation is made to the police commission and the police commission, at that point, makes the final decision.
NELSON: So there's layers of review, right?
STIGER: Correct.
NELSON: And ultimately, in terms of just that five member review board, right, the one that you were describing?
STIGER: Right.
NELSON: Are those decisions always unanimous?
STIGER: No.
NELSON: As to whether or not it was a reasonable use of force?
STIGER: No, sir.
NELSON: And sometimes those five people, they may disagree with each other, right?
STIGER: Yes, we have something what we call a minority report. I've actually written a couple of those myself, but yes. If one person or a number of people on that board will disagree, then that -- the ones that disagree, the minority have to do a report basically telling what their case is and why they disagree.
NELSON: Right. So even within that process, there is five potential police officers who can disagree with each other.
STIGER: Correct.
NELSON: All right. I have no further questions.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: OK. All right. Thank you, Sergeant.
STIGER: Thank you, sir.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We appreciate your time. You are excused.
STIGER: Thank you.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Let's do one more witness. At least start.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Your Honor, the state would call special agent James Ryerson to the stand.
[13:00:00]
