He was really weird. Really really weird. but he always showed up and was super motivated. I was like "why is this guy working at a pizza place?" and then somebody told me about his drug habits and I'm like "oh yeah, that makes sense".

I'd be surprised if he isn't dead yet honestly.

This. And this is the greatest failure of both the state, the officers, and the system itself, that leads to this kind of bullshit incident happening over and over and over again.

If we stop trying to spend so damned much time controlling other people's personal actions, and making anything related to "self-harm" illegal, and instead focus on help and alternatives, we might get to a point where it's no longer us vs them.



Longest recorded time without sleep is 11 days. Effects of sleep deprivation can become permanent after just a few days. But honestly, for a heavy addict, an eighth (3.5 grams) spread out over 2-3 days really isn't that much. The "high" doesn't last long, though the effects do. So while users may be under the influence, they'll use more and more to get the euphoria. Data I'm reading suggests that heavy addicts who snort/smoke the substance can average anywhere from 2-4 grams/day. Seems like your coworker was more than casual, but less than a heavy addict. Did it negatively impact his quality of work, or communication skills? Mildly interested. Been a long time since I worked with a dedicated tweaker. Back in the day, there were some who seemed honestly more functional on it, others who became completely useless.

This post was edited by InsaneBobb on Apr 9 2021 12:19pm

Yes, and yes. He was always "awake", but never very good at, like, talking to people, and couldn't stay focused on his job. He always tried to do everybody's job and I'm like "ELI JUST WASH THE DISHES".

I'm being hyperbolic of course. I was working full time and right in the middle of my chemistry degree, so most everything else was a mile away. I just know what I heard from his roommate at the time and from what I saw at the job.

I'm having trouble with this detail. He died from a lack of oxygen not an OD. Even though there was a deadly level of fent found in his blood. And one side effect of being overdosed shuts down your breathing to the point of stopping.

I guess my question is - was the amount he had in his system actually a deadly amount or not? After a bit of research I found there is no ld50 for humans.

I highly doubt that the amount Floyd had in his system would have been deadly no matter what, even if he had received the timely medical attention which Chauvin refused to give him.


That's like... you're driving down a desert road and stop for a guy walking on the side of the street. He tells you he was bitten by a rattlesnake. You proceed to shoot him in the body and leave him to die. Afterwards, you argue "nah, I didnt murder him, he was a dead man walking. Besides, the poison in his system exacerbated the gun wound, wouldnt have been deadly without it."

my question was seeking facts, not how you 'feel about a certain amount of mg/dL' etc etc


(also that's a fucking really stupid analogy bro)

This post was edited by proccy on Apr 9 2021 06:11pm

"Deadly amount if untreated" is VERY different from "deadly amount in spite of reasonable medical efforts to save his life".
The relevant question for this case is the latter.


My example is chosen to illustrate how a "he was a dead man walking"-defense, which you implied with your question, is weaksauce. Particularly in a situation where there's a clear denial of assistance or violation of 'duty of care'.

That's a good example to use as a framework for the discussion. But there is more nuance in our situation. There isn't necessarily just one gunshot and one snakebite, each of which are 100% lethal. The questions here are:

1- At what point did the Chauvin's use of force become illegally excessive? Was it when he handcuffed Floyd and put him in the prone position? Was it when the knee had been on the neck for 2 minutes? 4 minutes?

2- At what point did the combination of factors seal Floyd's fate? As soon as he was on the ground? After being kneeled on for 2 minutes? 7 minutes?

A defense lawyer could argue (to be clear this is not my personal argument!) that Chauvin's use of force didn't become excessive until Floyd became unresponsive (~4minute mark) and that Floyd's fate had already been sealed by that point. Therefore, the portion of force that was excessive didn't cause the death (the death was instead caused by the legal, non-excessive force).

This is why the case hinges on arguments of the nuances on both of those spectrums. When did Chauvin's use of force become excessive and when did the damage to Floyd become fatal.

This post was edited by Kayeto on Apr 9 2021 06:42pm

I get your point, but I think you're really underselling the "duty of care"-argument. Chauvin had Floyd subdued and handcuffed, form this moment, it was Chauvin's responsibility to care for Floyd's well-being. Floyd was drawing his attention to a potential health issue which requires medical attention, but Chauvin ignores it for 7+ minutes and refused Floyd to go into a recovery position or be tended to by paramedics.

Irrespective from the question of excessive force or the exact fentanyl levels in Floyd's blood, the fact that Chauvin violated his duty of care in this egregious fashion should be enough to convict him for involuntary manslaughter. And reading the legal definition of third degree murder in the Minnesota constitution, I believe that Chauvin's behavior meets the standard of "evincing a depraved mind and disregard for human life".

I'm not underselling it because I never put a price tag on it. The duty of care argument is just one of the many factors that a person could argue for their stance on the the first point. A person could use that to argue that Chauvin had already used too much force as soon as he put Floyd on the ground (a possibility I included in my previous post). A different person could use that argument to place Chauvin's actions at different point in the spectrum, such as saying that he exceeded his allowed force when he had been on the neck for 30 seconds.



Most people agree with that. Even Chauvin himself was willing to plead guilty to those charges. The whole debate here is about the murder2 charge. That's the line of demarcation where this case will be "won or lost".

This post was edited by Kayeto on Apr 9 2021 07:04pm