Systemic Fracture: A Comprehensive Forensic and Sociological Analysis of the Events Precipitating the Death of George Floyd and the Subsequent Civil Unrest
Executive Summary: The Paradox of the "Trigger"
The inquiry into the "demonstrations that triggered the death of George Floyd" presents a fundamental paradox of causality that requires immediate and rigorous clarification. The historical and forensic record, established through exhaustive trial testimony, police dispatch logs, and bystander video evidence, confirms that there were no public demonstrations, protests, or civil unrest activities occurring at the intersection of 38th Street and Chicago Avenue in Minneapolis prior to the arrival of police on the evening of May 25, 2020. The streets were relatively quiet, marking the close of a Memorial Day holiday muted by the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and associated lockdown orders.
Therefore, the premise that a political demonstration triggered the police intervention is factually inverted. The death of George Floyd was not the result of crowd control gone wrong during a riot; rather, it was the genesis event that triggered the most widespread global demonstrations in modern history. The true "trigger" for the lethal encounter was a mundane, low-level transaction: the alleged passing of a counterfeit twenty-dollar bill at a neighborhood convenience store.
However, to address the user's query with the necessary depth and nuance, this report posits that a form of "demonstration" did occur during the arrest—a spontaneous, desperate "micro-demonstration" by bystanders on the sidewalk. This diverse group of citizens, witnessing the prolonged restraint of Mr. Floyd, engaged in a verbal protest against the actions of the officers. This interaction between the officers and the witnessing public became a central pillar of the subsequent legal defense (which argued the "hostile crowd" distracted officers) and serves as a critical sociological focal point for understanding the event.
This report provides an exhaustive, granular reconstruction of the events of May 25, 2020. It deconstructs the economic antecedents of the 911 call, analyzes the systemic dysfunctions in police dispatch and medical response, and examines the psychological and policy failures that allowed a routine forgery complaint to escalate into a fatal custodial encounter. It integrates overlooked details regarding the internal policies of Cup Foods, the specific dispatch priority codes of the Minneapolis Police Department (MPD), and the precise chronology of the medical response to provide a definitive account of the tragedy.
Part I: The Societal and Economic Precursors
To understand the mechanics of the event, one must first understand the environment in which it occurred. The encounter at Cup Foods did not happen in a vacuum; it was the product of specific economic pressures, public health constraints, and community dynamics that converged on that specific Monday evening.
1.1 The Context of Constraint: COVID-19 and Unemployment
By May 2020, the United States was in the grip of the initial wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Minnesota, like much of the world, was operating under strict lockdown measures. These public health mandates had severe downstream economic effects, particularly on the service and security industries. George Floyd, a 46-year-old African American man who had moved to Minneapolis from Houston, Texas, for a fresh start, had been employed as a security guard (bouncer) at a local bistro.1 However, the pandemic-induced closure of restaurants and bars resulted in the loss of his employment, placing him in a precarious financial position.
This economic context is vital for two reasons. First, it explains Floyd’s presence in the city and his vulnerability. Second, it contextualizes the alleged crime—the use of a counterfeit $20 bill. In an economy where cash flow had evaporated for many low-wage workers, the circulation of counterfeit currency often increases as a survival mechanism, or simply as a result of fewer electronic transactions. The "crime" that triggered the police response was a crime of poverty and survival, rooted in the economic desperation of the lockdown era.
1.2 The Venue: Cup Foods as Community Hub and Flashpoint
The location of the incident, Cup Foods, is a longstanding fixture in the South Minneapolis community. Located at the intersection of 38th Street and Chicago Avenue, it served as a primary grocery and convenience store for the neighborhood.2
On the day of the incident, Christopher Martin, a 19-year-old clerk, was working the counter. Martin lived in an apartment directly above the store, integrating his personal and professional life within the same physical footprint.2 This detail underscores the deep community ties inherent in the location; the people involved were neighbors, not strangers.
The Store Policy on Counterfeit Currency:
Crucial to the sequence of events is the internal policy of Cup Foods regarding counterfeit money. According to testimony provided by Martin during the trial of Derek Chauvin, the store maintained a policy where employees were financially liable for any counterfeit currency they accepted. If a clerk accepted a fake bill, the value would be deducted from their paycheck.2
This policy created a perverse incentive structure. When George Floyd presented the bill to pay for a pack of cigarettes, Martin faced a choice: accept the loss personally or confront the customer/involve management. Martin initially accepted the bill, despite suspecting its inauthenticity. He described Floyd as appearing to be under the influence but generally pleasant and conversational.2 Martin later testified that he considered paying for the cigarettes himself to avoid conflict, a profound admission that highlights the discretionary power of private citizens.2 However, the structural pressure of the store's policy ultimately led him to report the transaction to his manager.
The manager’s instruction to retrieve the cigarettes or the money escalated the situation from a private transaction to a public dispute. When Floyd and his companions, who were seated in a vehicle across the street, refused to return to the store, the manager instructed a younger employee to call the police.3
Insight: The "trigger" for the death was arguably this specific store policy. Had Cup Foods absorbed the loss of counterfeit bills as a cost of doing business (as many larger retailers do), or had Martin felt financially secure enough to cover it, the 911 call would never have been placed. The mechanism of the state's lethal power was activated to recover twenty dollars for a private business.
Part II: The Activation of the State — The 911 Call and Dispatch
The transition from a commercial dispute to a police encounter occurred at 8:01 p.m. with the 911 call. This call is critical because it constructed the "subject" (Floyd) in the minds of the responding officers before they ever arrived on the scene.
2.1 The Construction of the "Subject" via Telephony
The transcript of the call reveals a framing that emphasized unpredictability and intoxication over criminality.
Transcript Analysis 4:
The Operator: "911 what's the address of the emergency?"
The Caller: "Um someone comes our store and give us fake bills... and he was also drunk and everything."
Behavioral Descriptor: "He is awfully drunk and he's not in control of himself."
Racial Identifier: "He's a black guy."
The Operator’s Summary: "So, this guy gave a counterfeit bill, has your cigarettes, and he's under the influence of something?"
The Caller’s Confirmation: "Something like that, yes. He is not acting right."
This dialogue transmitted a specific profile to the dispatch network: a black male, intoxicated, "not in control," and refusing to leave the premises (sitting in his car). In the lexicon of policing, "not in control" is a significant red flag. It suggests unpredictability and the potential for irrational resistance, which primes responding officers to adopt a "command presence" or defensive posture immediately upon arrival.
2.2 Dispatch Priorities and the "Forgery in Progress"
The Minneapolis Police Department (MPD) utilizes a priority system to triage calls.
Priority 0: Highest priority (e.g., baby not breathing, officer needs help).6
Priority 1: Imminent threat to life or crime in progress (e.g., assault, robbery).6
Priority 2: Crimes that have just occurred or where suspects are on scene but no immediate life threat exists.7
While forgery is a non-violent property crime (technically a federal offense under jurisdiction of the Secret Service 8), the fact that the suspect was still on the scene ("sitting on their car") likely elevated the call to a Priority 1 or high Priority 2 status. Police protocols prioritize apprehension. A "suspect on scene" represents a closing window of opportunity for arrest. This operational imperative—to catch the suspect before they leave—often supersedes the assessment of the crime's severity.
Consequently, the dispatch system allocated two squad cars (four officers) to a $20 forgery complaint. This disproportionate response is a systemic feature of modern policing, where the "success" metric is apprehension rather than resolution.
Part III: The Encounter — Escalation and the Failure of De-escalation
The police response unfolded in two distinct phases: the initial contact by junior officers and the arrival/takeover by senior officers.
3.1 Phase One: The Arrival of Lane and Kueng (8:08 PM)
Officers Thomas Lane and J. Alexander Kueng were the first to arrive at 8:08 p.m..9 Both were relatively new to the force; Lane had only been on the job for a few days following his training period.
They approached Floyd’s vehicle, a blue SUV. Officer Lane approached the driver's side. Almost immediately, Lane drew his firearm and pointed it at Floyd’s head through the open window.10
Analysis of the Gun Draw:
This action is the first major escalation point. MPD policy (and general police standards) typically permits the drawing of a firearm only when there is a reasonable perception of a deadly threat. Floyd was seated in a car, accused of a non-violent forgery. Lane’s decision to introduce lethal force within seconds of contact suggests a "warrior mindset" training response, possibly triggered by the "not in control" description from dispatch or by Floyd’s movements inside the car. Floyd, however, was visibly terrified, communicating that he had been shot before and pleading with the officer not to shoot him.11
The officers removed Floyd from the vehicle and handcuffed him. At this stage, Floyd was compliant with the handcuffing but visibly distressed. He was crying and hyperventilating.
3.2 Phase Two: The Struggle and the "Claustrophobia" Defense
The officers attempted to place Floyd in the back of their squad car (Squad 320). Floyd resisted entering the vehicle. He stiffened his body and refused to sit inside, repeatedly stating that he was claustrophobic and could not breathe.11
This moment is often cited by police apologists as "resisting arrest." However, legally and physically, there is a distinction between active aggression (fighting the officers) and passive resistance (non-compliance due to fear or physical inability). Floyd’s resistance was passive; he did not strike, kick, or threaten the officers. He communicated a medical/psychological barrier: claustrophobia.
MPD policy requires officers to de-escalate situations and consider medical issues. Instead, the officers engaged in a physical struggle to force him into the car, a struggle that proved futile given Floyd’s size and rigid posture.
3.3 Phase Three: The Arrival of Chauvin and Thao (8:17 PM)
At approximately 8:17 p.m., Officers Derek Chauvin and Tou Thao arrived.9 Chauvin was a Field Training Officer and the senior officer on the scene. His arrival fundamentally altered the dynamic. Rather than stepping back to assess why two officers were struggling with a handcuffed man, Chauvin escalated the physical control.
The decision was made to remove Floyd from the squad car (where he had partially been forced in) and restrain him on the ground. This decision is perplexing from a tactical standpoint; usually, once a suspect is partially contained, the goal is to complete the containment, not release it to engage in a ground struggle. However, the officers pulled Floyd out of the passenger side and placed him face-down (prone) on the asphalt of Chicago Avenue.10
Part IV: The Restraint — Anatomy of a Homicide (8:19 PM – 8:28 PM)
The events of the next nine minutes and twenty-nine seconds constitute the core of the incident. This period is the forensic smoking gun that converted a routine arrest into a homicide.
4.1 The Mechanics of the Restraint
George Floyd was placed in a prone position.
Derek Chauvin: Knelt on Floyd’s neck/upper back area.1
J. Alexander Kueng: Applied pressure to Floyd’s back/torso.10
Thomas Lane: Restrained Floyd’s legs.10
Tou Thao: Stood guard, managing the bystanders.10
Positional Asphyxia:
Medical experts and police training manuals have long warned against the prone restraint of handcuffed suspects due to the risk of positional asphyxia. When a person is face-down with pressure on their back, the chest wall cannot expand, and the diaphragm cannot contract effectively. This leads to a buildup of carbon dioxide and a depletion of oxygen (hypoxia).10
4.2 The "I Can't Breathe" Transcripts and the Misinterpretation of Speech
The body-worn camera transcripts reveal a chilling dialogue that underscores a fatal fallacy in police culture: "If you can talk, you can breathe."
Floyd: "I can't breathe." (Repeated >20 times).13
Floyd: "Mama, I love you. Tell my kids I love them. I'm dead.".13
Chauvin: "It takes a heck of a lot of oxygen to talk.".11
Chauvin’s response indicates he believed Floyd was feigning distress. This belief is rooted in the physiological misunderstanding that speech equates to adequate respiration. While speaking requires air to pass through the vocal cords, it does not require the deep gas exchange in the alveoli necessary to oxygenate the blood. A person can speak in gasps while slowly suffocating.
4.3 The "Excited Delirium" Bias
During the restraint, Officer Lane asked, "Should we roll him on his side?" Chauvin replied, "No, staying put where we got him." Lane then mentioned, "I am worried about the excited delirium or whatever." Chauvin replied, "That's why we have him on his stomach".14
"Excited Delirium" is a controversial and scientifically disputed diagnosis often used to justify excessive force against suspects who appear agitated, sweating, or impervious to pain. Police training often depicts such individuals as having "superhuman strength," requiring maximal restraint. This bias led the officers to interpret Floyd’s desperate struggle for air as a sign of this condition, ironically prompting them to maintain the very position (prone restraint) that was killing him.
Part V: The "Bystander Demonstration" — The Crowd as Witness and Target
While no organized demonstration triggered the arrest, a spontaneous micro-demonstration emerged on the sidewalk. This interaction is essential to the comprehensive analysis of the event.
5.1 The Composition and Action of the Crowd
As the restraint continued, passersby began to stop. This group included:
Darnella Frazier: A 17-year-old who began recording the incident on her phone.
Genevieve Hansen: An off-duty Minneapolis firefighter and EMT.
Donald Williams: A martial arts instructor who recognized the "blood choke" hold being applied.
This group did not remain silent. They engaged in a vocal protest against the officers' actions.
Hansen identified herself as a firefighter and demanded the officers check Floyd’s pulse.14
Williams called out Chauvin for enjoying the position ("You're enjoying that, look at you!").
The crowd collectively chanted, "He's not moving," "Get off his neck," and "Check his pulse".14
5.2 The Police Reaction: The Hostile Crowd Theory
The officers, specifically Thao and Chauvin, reacted to this intervention not as a citizen oversight mechanism but as a threat. Thao positioned himself between the officers and the crowd, ordering them to stay back on the sidewalk. At one point, he dismissively told the crowd, "This is why you don't do drugs, kids".10
In the subsequent trial, Chauvin’s defense attorney, Eric Nelson, argued that this "hostile crowd" diverted the officers' attention and prevented them from rendering aid.16 This argument attempts to blame the "demonstration" (the witnesses) for the death. However, forensic video evidence showed Chauvin calmly looking at the crowd while maintaining pressure on Floyd’s neck, undermining the claim that he was too distracted to lift his knee.
Sociological Insight: This dynamic represents a complete breakdown of the Peelian Principle that "the police are the public and the public are the police." The officers viewed the community members not as partners in safety but as enemy combatants to be managed, even as those community members were correctly identifying a medical emergency that the professionals were ignoring.
Part VI: The Failure of the Medical Safety Net
The death of George Floyd was a multi-system failure. Following the police failure, the emergency medical response system also collapsed due to communication errors and the chaotic scene.
6.1 The Code 2 vs. Code 3 Confusion
The initial request for EMS was made by the officers early in the encounter, likely for the bloody lip Floyd sustained during the struggle in the car. This was coded as a Code 2 call—a non-emergency routine response without lights and sirens.17
At 8:21 p.m., as Floyd’s condition deteriorated, the officers radioed to upgrade the call to Code 3 (emergency, lights/sirens).18 However, there was a lag in the dispatch relay.
6.2 The Fire Department Delay
In Minneapolis, the Fire Department (MFD) often serves as a first responder for medical calls. However, they were not initially dispatched to the Code 3 upgrade effectively. Fire Engine 17 arrived at the scene without lights and sirens, delayed, and only after the ambulance had already arrived and departed.17
6.3 The "Load and Go" and the Broken Chain of Survival
Hennepin County EMS paramedics arrived at 8:27 p.m..9 By this time, Floyd had been pulseless for several minutes.
8:24 p.m.: Floyd stopped moving.
8:25 p.m.: Officer Kueng checked for a pulse and stated, "I couldn't find one".9
Despite the lack of a pulse, Chauvin did not remove his knee. He maintained the restraint for another minute after the ambulance arrived, only moving when the paramedic physically signaled him to do so.9
Crucially, the paramedics did not begin resuscitation (CPR) immediately on the pavement. Citing the "agitated" crowd and the "volatile" scene, they opted for a "load and go" strategy. They loaded Floyd into the ambulance and drove two blocks away to 36th and Park Avenue before stopping to fully administer advanced life support.18 This delay of several minutes in starting effective CPR on a pulseless patient is often fatal. The "demonstration" on the sidewalk, therefore, was used as a justification for compromising the standard of medical care (which prioritizes immediate resuscitation), further sealing Floyd’s fate.
Part VII: The Aftermath — Blue Walls and Burning Precincts
George Floyd was pronounced dead at 9:25 p.m. at Hennepin County Medical Center.3 The events that followed illustrate the struggle between the official police narrative and the "ground truth" recorded by the community.
7.1 The "Medical Incident" Press Release: Anatomy of a Cover-up
Shortly after midnight on May 26, the MPD Office of Public Information released a statement titled: "Man Dies After Medical Incident During Police Interaction".11
The Official Narrative Claimed:
"Officers were able to get the suspect into handcuffs and noted he appeared to be suffering medical distress."
"Officers called for an ambulance."
"At no time were weapons of any type used by anyone involved."
The cause of death was framed as a "medical incident," implying an internal physiological failure rather than an external application of force.
This statement is a classic example of bureaucratic sanitization. It technically avoided falsehoods (no firearms were used) while completely misrepresenting the reality (lethal force was used via the knee). Without video evidence, this would have likely become the historical record.
7.2 The Video as Catalyst
The true "trigger" for the global demonstrations was the release of Darnella Frazier’s video on social media on May 26.11 The stark contrast between the MPD’s "medical incident" press release and the 10-minute video of a man being slowly asphyxiated ignited a firestorm of public outrage.
7.3 The Actual Demonstrations (May 26 – Onward)
The protests began locally on May 26 at the intersection of 38th and Chicago. They were initially peaceful vigils. However, the response from the police—using tear gas and flash-bangs—coupled with deep-seated community grievances regarding prior police killings (Jamar Clark, Philando Castile), led to a rapid escalation.11
May 26: Protests begin; MPD Chief fires the four officers.19
May 27: Protests spread; looting begins on Lake Street.20
May 28: The MPD 3rd Precinct is overrun and burned.14
The user's query about "demonstrations triggering the death" may also stem from a confusion with the anti-lockdown protests that had been occurring in various states during May 2020. There were protests in Minnesota regarding the Governor's COVID-19 executive orders.21 However, these were distinct and unrelated to the events at Cup Foods.
7.4 Disinformation and the "Staged" Narrative
In the wake of the event, disinformation campaigns attempted to rewrite the history. Conspiracies circulated claiming Floyd was not dead or that the event was staged.22 These narratives preyed on the confusion caused by the initial false police statement and the chaotic nature of the protests. This underscores the fragility of truth in the digital age, where even video evidence is contested.
Part VIII: Systemic Analysis — Policy vs. Practice
A forensic review of MPD policy reveals that the death was not just a tragedy of individual errors, but a systemic failure where written policy was ignored or contradicted by cultural practice.
8.1 Use of Force Policy: The "Reasonableness" Gap
MPD policy (and the Supreme Court standard from Graham v. Connor) dictates that force must be "objectively reasonable".23
Policy: Officers must use the minimum force necessary.
Policy: Officers have an affirmative duty to de-escalate.24
Practice: Chauvin used a technique (neck restraint) that, while technically permitted for "active aggression" in some older manuals, was applied to a passive, handcuffed, and unconscious subject. The "reasonableness" standard failed because the officer's subjective fear (or anger) overrode objective risk assessment.
8.2 The Duty to Intervene
MPD policy explicitly requires officers to intervene if they witness another officer using excessive force.15
The Failure: Officers Lane and Kueng were junior officers. The hierarchical paramilitary structure of policing often discourages rookies from challenging senior training officers (like Chauvin). Lane asked twice if they should roll Floyd over ("Should we roll him on his side?"), but he was overruled by Chauvin.13 He did not physically intervene.
Implication: This highlights the failure of "peer intervention" policies when they conflict with the cultural hierarchy of the department.
8.3 The Counterfeit Currency Policy Gap
There is no MPD policy that mandates arrest for a counterfeit bill. Officers have discretion. They could have seized the bill, taken a report, and issued a citation, or simply warned Floyd.24 The decision to arrest (custodial detention) rather than cite-and-release for a non-violent misdemeanor was a discretionary choice that carried lethal consequences.
Table 1: The Discretionary Gap — Policy vs. Action
Decision Point
Policy/Option
Action Taken
Consequence
Store Clerk (Martin)
Refuse bill; Pay personally
Reported to Manager
Initiated police contact.
911 Dispatch
Code as non-priority theft
Coded as Priority 1 (Suspect on Scene)
Escalated response speed/intensity.
Initial Contact (Lane)
Verbal engagement
Drawn Firearm
Immediate escalation to lethal threat.
Arrest vs. Citation
Issue citation (misdemeanor)
Custodial Arrest
Physical struggle ensued.
Restraint
Side recovery position (CPR)
Prone (face-down) restraint
Positional asphyxia.
Medical Response
Immediate CPR on scene
"Load and Go"
Delay in resuscitation.
Part IX: Conclusion
The death of George Floyd was a singularity formed by the collision of macro-economic forces and micro-level policy failures.
It was not triggered by demonstrations. It was triggered by the economic desperation of the COVID-19 lockdown, which made a $20 bill a matter of survival for both George Floyd and the store clerk, Christopher Martin. It was triggered by a corporate policy at Cup Foods that shifted financial liability to low-wage employees. It was triggered by a 911 dispatch system that prioritized the apprehension of a "drunk" black man over the de-escalation of a petty crime. And ultimately, it was triggered by the specific, discretionary choices of Officer Derek Chauvin to maintain a lethal restraint on a dying man, ignoring both the pleas of the subject and the "demonstration" of the witnesses standing feet away.
The "demonstrations" the user inquires about are the result, not the cause. However, the bystander demonstration at the scene serves as the crucial link. It was the ignored testimony of the community—the very people the police are sworn to serve—that defined the tragedy. The officers' refusal to heed the warnings of the crowd ("He's not moving") reflects a systemic alienation between the police and the public that the subsequent global uprising sought to address.
By correcting the causal chain, we see that the event was not a reaction to civil unrest, but a demonstration of the structural violence that creates it.
Works cited
George Floyd - Wikipedia, accessed on November 23, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Floyd
'I allowed myself to feel guilty for a very long time': the teenage ..., accessed on November 23, 2025, https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/may/23/christopher-martin-george-floyd-minneapolis-cup-foods
Minneapolis releases transcript of 911 call that led to George Floyd's fatal encounter with police - Star Tribune, accessed on November 23, 2025, https://www.startribune.com/minneapolis-releases-transcript-of-911-call-that-led-to-george-floyd-s-fatal-encounter-with-police/570852432
Transcript of 911 Call Leading to Floyd's Arrest - Famous Trials, accessed on November 23, 2025, https://www.famous-trials.com/george-floyd/2641-transcript-of-911-call-leading-to-floyd-s-arrest
Minneapolis releases transcript of George Floyd 911 call - CBS News, accessed on November 23, 2025, https://www.cbsnews.com/news/george-floyd-death-911-transcript-minneapolis-police/
MPD Staffing Study Response Presentation - Legislative Information Management System, accessed on November 23, 2025, https://lims.minneapolismn.gov/Download/RCAV2/46010/MPD-Staffing-Study-Response-Presentation_Jul-10-2024.pdf
441.05 Radio Call Priorities | Saint Paul Minnesota, accessed on November 23, 2025, https://www.stpaul.gov/books/44105-radio-call-priorities
Counterfeit Currency Incidents - PowerDMS, accessed on November 23, 2025, https://public.powerdms.com/MESAPD/documents/271085
Timeline of the Arrest of George Floyd - Famous Trials, accessed on November 23, 2025, https://www.famous-trials.com/george-floyd/2647-timeline-of-the-arrest-of-george-floyd
Murder of George Floyd - Wikipedia, accessed on November 23, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_George_Floyd
Timeline: George Floyd's Death, Unrest In Minneapolis And The Derek Chauvin Case, accessed on November 23, 2025, https://www.cbsnews.com/minnesota/news/george-floyd-timeline/
Bill Smock: George Floyd died 'because he had no oxygen in his body', second forensic medical expert says | The Independent, accessed on November 23, 2025, https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/george-floyd-cause-of-death-b1828809.html
George Floyd told officers 'I can't breathe' more than 20 times, transcripts show, accessed on November 23, 2025, https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jul/08/george-floyd-police-killing-transcript-i-cant-breathe
Timeline of events since George Floyd's arrest and murder | AP News, accessed on November 23, 2025, https://apnews.com/article/death-of-george-floyd-minneapolis-police-reform-d109eb0d3094119ddbcb560676467f19
Three Former Minneapolis Police Officers Convicted of Federal Civil Rights Violations for Death of George Floyd | United States Department of Justice, accessed on November 23, 2025, https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/three-former-minneapolis-police-officers-convicted-federal-civil-rights-violations-death
Trial for George Floyd death Day 3: Former store clerk who encountered counterfeit bill testifies - YouTube, accessed on November 23, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YlAvXebRJuY
Dispatch recordings: George Floyd was in cardiac arrest when EMS arrived - EMS1, accessed on November 23, 2025, https://www.ems1.com/fatal-incidents/articles/dispatch-recordings-george-floyd-was-in-cardiac-arrest-when-ems-arrived-xtikhsaX8aF14EFn/
Explainer: How long did it take medics to reach Floyd? | MPR News, accessed on November 23, 2025, https://www.mprnews.org/story/2021/04/07/explainer-how-long-did-it-take-medics-to-reach-floyd
Timeline: What happened in Minnesota after police murdered George Floyd | MPR News, accessed on November 23, 2025, https://www.mprnews.org/story/2025/05/22/timeline-what-happened-in-minnesota-after-police-murdered-george-floyd
Aftermath of the George Floyd protests in Minneapolis–Saint Paul - Wikipedia, accessed on November 23, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aftermath_of_the_George_Floyd_protests_in_Minneapolis%E2%80%93Saint_Paul
George Floyd protests in Minneapolis–Saint Paul - Wikipedia, accessed on November 23, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Floyd_protests_in_Minneapolis%E2%80%93Saint_Paul
Fake news, disinformation and the George Floyd protests - LSU Faculty Websites, accessed on November 23, 2025, https://faculty.lsu.edu/fakenews/about/protestfakenews.php
Use of Force Policy in Minneapolis - Wilson Center for Science and Justice at Duke Law, accessed on November 23, 2025, https://wcsj.law.duke.edu/news/use-of-force-policy-in-minneapolis/
Minneapolis Police Department Policy and Procedure Manual - NationBuilder, accessed on November 23, 2025, https://assets.nationbuilder.com/cuapb/pages/1/attachments/original/1737914580/Stop__Search_and_Arrest_Policies.pdf?1737914580
Sec. 609.632 MN Statutes, accessed on November 23, 2025, https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/609.632
