I'm not a doctor, and I am not sure exactly how "complicating" is used in the medical sense, but that seems to be used more in the sense of "this guy died while being restrained," not "this guy died
due to being restrained."
The "Final Diagnoses" section reinforces my interpretation: " 46-year-old man who became unresponsive
while being restrained by law enforcement officers..." (emphasis mine)
Under "III. No life-threatening injuries identified," the following items support the notion that the restraint process did not kill Floyd:
- "No facial, oral mucosal, or conjunctival petechiae" (no burst blood vessels that occur during strangulation)
- "No injuries of anterior muscles of neck or laryngeal structures" (no damage to his windpipe or neck)
- " No chest wall soft tissue injuries, rib fractures" (no lung or rib injuries)
Do you have a different interpretation of those? (Asking honestly, not trying to pick a fight.)
Yes, because for some reason these aren't written in plain english. When they say complicating, they don't mean making the latter section harder, they mean they are complicating factors tot he former. So when they say "X complicating Y" they mean "X was made worse by Y".
You point out a couple good points, so let me point out a couple more. First though, an explanation of some misunderstandings:
When they say "no life threatening injuries" they mean "There is nothing here to point to it being the primary cause of death", hence why brain injuries is included despite there being no question on that, same for checking if there was anything wrong with his ass. "Incision and subcutaneous dissection of posterior and lateral neck, shoulders, back, flanks, and
buttocks negative..."
The section is checking for ANY possible primary cause of death, not checking for the neck specifically. In total, that section is read as "He didn't have his windpipe crushed, nor is there any sign that he was poisoned, brain damaged, or anything else elsewhere" The issue is, as noted in the Case Title, the heart not the neck.
So, what else is in there?
I'd point you down first to the bottom of page 9, respiratory system. It notes the lungs were a "deep red-purple" in all other areas, and were ".. diffusely congested and edematous (swollen). This right here is a clear indication that the lungs were working overtime, likely due to restricted airflow from the neck hold. NOT, noteably, enought o cause suffocation on its own, this likely goes hand in hand with,
Page 10, top, Cardiovascular system: This is where the meat is, it notes that several arterys were heavily plaqued, and that the heart itself was -fucked-. To do a quick and rough translation of the medical-ese, dude died of a heart attack, but something of note is that both ventricular cavities were dialated. This means, again to make a very alrge simplification, dude died while his heart was beating really fast.
Combine the prior two, heart is desperately working to get oxygen, but airflow is restricted, and so both heart and lungs get a bit fucked.
That right there is your contributing factor from the officer.
Now, the question rises, and the autopsy does not decide either way, if he'd have died without the knee, but the symptoms and cause of death line up well with an obstruction of the respiratory system being a complicating factor in the death.
So, why does it say "WHILE being restrained.."
Simply put, its not the coronors job to perscribe blame. For reference, a guy stabbed 18 times by a meth addict would be described as "Sustaining multiple lacerations while in a drug related conflict" or some shit. Its just how these are written, specifically so slimey lawyers can't point to them and say "SEE the autopsy says X"
