"The danger in presenting a defense case, especially in a prosecution that is so video-dependent, is that it allows the prosecutor..."

"... through leading questions on cross-examination, to walk witnesses through the video, explaining to the jury moment-by-moment exactly what the prosecution’s theory of the case is. If he does this skillfully, the prosecutor turns his 'questioning' into the equivalent of a summation.... In addition to stressing Chauvin’s patent awareness that Floyd was in pain, the prosecutor had the witness concede that the defendant had been told by his fellow officers that Floyd had lost consciousness, ought to be rolled over on his side (to facilitate breathing), and had no pulse. While defense attorney Eric Nelson had made much of the crowd presence and the possibility that it could pose a threat to the police, Schleicher had Brodd conceding that the crowd was small and posed no threat to the police.... The foundation of Chauvin’s defense is that he had reason to fear that Floyd would regain consciousness and begin resisting arrest again. Schleicher elicited from Brodd the explanation that there is a difference between a threat and a risk: Police may use force to counter a threat they perceive based on some affirmative act by a detainee; but they may not use force based on a mere risk that a detainee might pose a threat at some future point."

From "Chauvin Defense Expert Destroyed on the Stand" by Andrew McCarthy (at National Review). 

FROM THE EMAIL: Omaha1 writes:

I agree that things are not looking good for Chauvin at this point. But the defense part of the trial is just starting. Legal Insurrection has been covering the Chauvin trial and there many defects in the prosecution's case, which are not being covered in the mainstream media. My prediction is that Chauvin will be convicted of manslaughter. The jurors will be afraid to acquit him entirely, fearing that an acquittal could fuel further violent, nationwide riots, for which they might be held responsible. Of course for the media more riots would be beneficial, more clicks, more exciting footage of burning and looting. So in my humble opinion the media is trying to make it seem like some kind of murder conviction is inevitable, and if this does not happen it is evidence of racist jurors or unfairness in the judicial system.