Skip to main content
Complete Olympic Games coverage at your fingertips
Your inside track on the Olympic Games
Enjoy unlimited digital access
$1.99
per week for 24 weeks
Complete Olympic Games coverage at your fingertips
Your inside track onthe Olympics Games
$1.99
per week
for 24 weeks
// //

Officer Derek Chauvin had his knee on George Floyd’s neck area – and was bearing down with most of his weight – the entire 9 1/2 minutes the Black man lay facedown with his hands cuffed behind his back, a use-of-force expert testified Wednesday at Mr. Chauvin’s murder trial.

Jody Stiger, a Los Angeles Police Department sergeant serving as a prosecution witness, said that based on his review of video evidence, Mr. Chauvin applied pressure to Mr. Floyd’s neck or neck area from the time officers began pinning Mr. Floyd to the ground until paramedics began to move him to a stretcher.

“That particular force did not change during the entire restraint period?” prosecutor Steve Schleicher asked as he showed the jury a composite of five still images.

Story continues below advertisement

“Correct,” replied Sgt. Stiger, who on Tuesday testified that the force used against Mr. Floyd was excessive.

Mr. Chauvin’s lawyer Eric Nelson countered by pointing out what he said were moments in the video footage when Mr. Chauvin’s knee did not appear to be on Mr. Floyd’s neck but on his shoulder blade area or the base of his neck. Sgt. Stiger did not give much ground, saying the officer’s knee in some of the contested images still seemed to be near Mr. Floyd’s neck, though he agreed his weight might have shifted at times.

The defense attorney for the former Minneapolis police officer on trial in the death of George Floyd has tried to show that Floyd yelled “I ate too many drugs” as officers pinned him to the ground. The Associated Press

In other testimony, the lead Minnesota state investigator on the case, James Reyerson, initially agreed with Mr. Nelson that Mr. Floyd seemed to say in a police body-camera video of his arrest, “I ate too many drugs.”

But when a prosecutor played a longer clip of the video, Mr. Reyerson said he believed what Mr. Floyd really said was “I ain’t do no drugs.”

Mr. Chauvin, 45, is charged with murder and manslaughter in Mr. Floyd’s death May 25. Mr. Floyd, 46, was arrested outside a neighbourhood market after being accused of trying to pass a counterfeit $20 bill. A panicky-sounding Mr. Floyd struggled and claimed to be claustrophobic as police tried to put him in a squad car, and they pinned him to the pavement.

Bystander video of Mr. Floyd crying that he couldn’t breathe as onlookers yelled at Mr. Chauvin to get off him sparked protests and scattered violence around the U.S.

Mr. Nelson has argued that the now-fired white officer “did exactly what he had been trained to do over his 19-year career,” and he has suggested that Mr. Floyd’s drug use and his underlying health conditions are what killed him, not Mr. Chauvin’s knee, as prosecutors contend. Fentanyl and methamphetamine were found in Mr. Floyd’s system.

Story continues below advertisement

Breahna Giles, a state forensic scientist, testified Wednesday that pills found in the SUV Mr. Floyd was driving contained methamphetamine and fentanyl. Another witness, forensic chemist Susan Meith, testified that remnants of a pill found in the back of the police squad car also contained methamphetamine and fentanyl. Earlier testimony revealed that this pill contained DNA from Mr. Floyd’s saliva.

Earlier, Mr. Nelson asked Sgt. Stiger about uses of force that are commonly referred to by police as “lawful but awful.” Sgt. Stiger conceded that “you can have a situation where by law it looks horrible to the common eye, but based on the state law, it’s lawful.”

Mr. Nelson has argued, too, that the officers on the scene were distracted by what they perceived as an increasingly hostile crowd of onlookers.

But Sgt. Stiger told the jury, “I did not perceive them as being a threat,” even though some bystanders were name-calling and using foul language. He added that most of the yelling was due to “their concern for Mr. Floyd.”

Mr. Nelson’s voice rose as he asked Sgt. Stiger how a reasonable officer would be trained to view a crowd while dealing with a suspect, “and somebody else is now pacing around and watching you and watching you and calling you names and saying (expletives).” Mr. Nelson said such a situation “could be viewed by a reasonable officer as a threat.”

“As a potential threat, correct,” Sgt. Stiger said.

Story continues below advertisement

Mr. Chauvin’s lawyer noted that dispatchers had described Mr. Floyd as between 6 feet and 6-foot-6 and possibly under the influence. Sgt. Stiger agreed it was reasonable for Mr. Chauvin to come to the scene with a heightened sense of awareness.

Sgt. Stiger further agreed with Mr. Nelson that an officer’s actions must be judged from the point of view of a reasonable officer on the scene, not in hindsight. Among other things, Mr. Nelson said that given typical emergency medical response times, it was reasonable for Mr. Chauvin to believe that paramedics would be there soon.

In other testimony, Sgt. Stiger said that as Mr. Floyd lay pinned to the ground, Mr. Chauvin squeezed Floyd’s fingers and pulled one of his wrists toward his handcuffs, a technique that uses pain to get someone to comply, but Mr. Chauvin did not appear to let up.

“Then at that point it’s just pain,” Sgt. Stiger said.

Sgt. Stiger was asked by prosecutors whether Mr. Chauvin had an obligation to take Mr. Floyd’s distress into account as the officer considered how much force to use.

“Absolutely,” Sgt. Stiger replied. “As the time went on, clearly in the video, you could see that Mr. Floyd’s ... health was deteriorating. His breath was getting lower. His tone of voice was getting lower. His movements were starting to cease.”

Story continues below advertisement

“So at that point, as an officer on scene,” he continued, “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.”

During the testimony of Mr. Reyerson, the state investigator, prosecutors stopped and started multiple videos and examined time stamps in an attempt to show the jury how long Chauvin held his position after Floyd stopped talking and moving. Mr. Reyerson testified that Chauvin’s knee was on Floyd’s neck for minutes after Floyd went silent.

Our Morning Update and Evening Update newsletters are written by Globe editors, giving you a concise summary of the day’s most important headlines. Sign up today.

Your Globe

Build your personal news feed

  1. Follow topics and authors relevant to your reading interests.
  2. Check your Following feed daily, and never miss an article. Access your Following feed from your account menu at the top right corner of every page.

Follow topics related to this article:

View more suggestions in Following Read more about following topics and authors
Report an error
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

If you do not see your comment posted immediately, it is being reviewed by the moderation team and may appear shortly, generally within an hour.

We aim to have all comments reviewed in a timely manner.

Comments that violate our community guidelines will not be posted.

UPDATED: Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

To view this site properly, enable cookies in your browser. Read our privacy policy to learn more.
How to enable cookies