But that would have caused him to lose consciousness, not complain about not bring able to breathe.
I believe you are exactly correct...Using a witness to excite and incite the jury with that blatant falsehood of the “blood choke” demonstrates the triumph of opinion (aka lies, in this case) over evidence...
Autopsy evidence will be heard when the defense has its turn, but the idea of a brutal “blood choke” is now and will remain firmly planted in the minds of the jury...An opinion offered by a layman witness, and not yet in evidence...