An alternative explanation for the “you weren’t supposed to kill me” quote could be that Floyd had done something to double cross his bosses and had been hiding out. He got word that the boss wanted him to be found and brought in so he could talk to him. Floyd knew the boss was going to discipline him but didn’t think he was going to be killed.
In case anyone was wondering, the Eric Schmitt referenced in Q4399 is not the same person as Eric Schmidt, former Executive Chairman of Google.
Not that I give Ellison any credit for having Brain #1, but his elevation of charges from murder 3 to murder 2 seems pretty dumb. Especially since he has no idea what the totality of evidence is going to be yet. I looked at the Minnesota statute, and the relevant part of the charge is this:
“causes the death of a human being with intent to effect the death of that person or another, but without premeditation”
So now, he has to prove “intent”, in contrast to 3rd degree murder which is causing death without intent. I guess we’ll see how good a lawyer he is (i.e. can hire) or how easily the jury can be bought if the evidence turns out to be not as clear-cut as many think.
I speed-watched this video by a doctor who make no bones about the fact that he thinks the cops killed George Floyd. But his explanation of the anatomy and how cause of death is determined is objective and informative:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0oqEp63duIc
But the real reason I post the link is relevant to these elevated charges. Even Dr. Baden said “police are under the impression that if you can talk, you are able to breathe”. Which the doctor argues with, but the point is, if the cops claim that’s what they thought, and that’s what they were trained to treat as factually correct, then how can you prove “intent” when they continued to restrain a man who was able to talk? (At least for some of the time).