I do not know how factual the stated “facts” are, but that is something that can be left to the lawyers. My un-researched responses from my skeptical mind give the following:
“Fact” 1: I did not see any instruments being used that could measure one’s cardiopulmonary distress level. How was this determined? Almost anyone being arrested would be subject to some level of psychological distress, so how was a level relevant to applying the knee on his neck determined? Is this just a vague diagnosis that aids officers in justifying even inappropriate actions?
“Fact” 2: He was already in handcuffs, how “dangerous” was his resistance to those officers. Why couldn’t de-escalation have been used rather than using dominance?
“Fact” 3: Since he was already in handcuffs, how much of a threat was he even if he suffered from “ExDS”? Was it really an “extreme” threat? Are the officers properly trained to psychologically evaluate a subject in order to diagnose him as having ExDS? Is this just a vague symptom that aids officers in justifying even inappropriate actions?
“Fact” 4: Do the regulations really require the restraint to continue until paramedics arrive, even when the restraint leads to unconsciousness??? What about if the detained person dies, does the restraint need to continue until paramedics arrive? Why is such poorly conceived regulation not questioned and revised?
“Fact” 5: The officers had not known the results of the autopsy while they were restraining him, and their actions should not be excused simply because it probably would have been nonlethal if used against a healthy individual. The mention of a “potentially lethal dose of fentanyl” is not really relevant because he did not die from fentanyl overdose, he dies from asphyxiation!
“Fact” 6: As above, the officer’s actions should not be excused simply because it probably would have been nonlethal if used against a healthy individual. Were they so poorly trained that they could not recognize physical distress even when the suspect directly told them that he was suffering from physical distress? Are officers taught to ignore their prisoners or suspects?
Why do readers believe this writer when he states that he is presenting “facts”? I do not know him, but I suspect that he is NOT simply trying to objectively present information; he is more likely propagandizing for some reason. I personally do not trust his objectivity.