Return to Transcripts main page
The Situation Room
Second Day Of Testimony In Derek Chauvin Trial; Defense Cross- Examines Firefighter At Scene Of George Floyd's Death; Dramatic Testimony In Trial Of Ex-Officer Charged In George Floyd's Death: "I Believe I Witnessed A Murder". Aired 5-6p ET
Aired March 30, 2021 - 17:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[17:00:00]
GENEVIEVE CLARA HANSEN, MINNEAPOLIS FIREFIGHTER: Agonal gasps we see in patients that are dying, or pretty much dead. It's just kind of the body's, forgive me, I don't, I don't quite know, but it's a sign of death.
MATTHEW FRANK, PROSECUTION ATTORNEY: And have you seen that in other calls when you've been working?
HANSEN: Yes.
FRANK: And did you see something similar in Mr. Floyd?
HANSEN: I don't remember anymore, but -- I don't know.
FRANK: OK. So, during that time period, he did not regain consciousness that you saw?
HANSEN: No.
FRANK: And you stayed with him? Or I'm sorry, you -- were you there the entire time until he was loaded into the ambulance, correct?
HANSEN: Correct.
FRANK: And at some point you made -- well, I guess the question is this. You didn't pay close attention to Mr. Floyd at some point, because you knew he was unconscious?
HANSEN: Needing medical attention, there was no question.
FRANK: Right. And based on that, you focus more on trying to get the officers to allow you to help?
HANSEN: Correct.
FRANK: And at some point, did you start video recording the interaction?
HANSEN: Yes. Yes.
FRANK: And with your phone, I assume? HANSEN: Yes.
FRANK: And why did you do that?
HANSEN: It was -- I'm not sure why I chose to do it. It's an instinct.
FRANK: And so, you did record it?
HANSEN: Yes, sir.
FRANK: And based on that -- well, I guess I'll just ask it this way. At some point, after the incident, you were interviewed by law enforcement officers?
HANSEN: The PCAs (ph) or?
FRANK: Correct. Yes.
HANSEN: Yes, sir.
FRANK: And you made that video available to them, correct?
HANSEN: Correct.
FRANK: And why did you think it was important to record that?
HANSEN: Because memories of witnesses are never going to be as good as a video.
FRANK: And so you wanted to have it to preserve?
HANSEN: It wasn't conscious, but I'm sure that's why anybody takes a video.
FRANK: Yes. Sorry, just bear with me a second while I try to read my own handwriting. After recording that video you stopped recording at some point, correct?
HANSEN: I don't remember.
FRANK: OK. But obviously, you did stop at some point?
HANSEN: Well, yes.
FRANK: And eventually the ambulance took Mr. Floyd away?
HANSEN: Right.
FRANK: And then earlier, I said we'd come back to that moment in the previous video in Exhibit 11 when the ambulance left, and you were still standing on the sidewalk, right? Is it yes?
HANSEN: Yes.
FRANK: And we saw you just standing there. What's going through your mind as you're standing there? HANSEN: I'm not sure. I think I probably was in disbelief.
FRANK: And in shock?
HANSEN: Yes.
FRANK: And what -- and at some point then, did you also make a 911 call?
HANSEN: Yes.
FRANK: And it had to be sort of, like distressing was the word you had use before. Just when you're there and you're trying to help and couldn't, you have a feeling of helplessness?
HANSEN: Absolutely.
FRANK: Were you upset about that?
HANSEN: Yes.
FRANK: Did you feel that, you know, whatever the end result you could have tried to help?
[17:05:02]
ERIC NELSON, DEFENSE ATTORNEY FOR DEREK CHAUVIN: Objection, Your Honor.
JUDGE PETER CAHILL, PRESIDING JUDGE IN GEORGE FLOYD'S CASE: Sustained.
FRANK: Well, why did you feel helpless?
HANSEN: Because there's man being killed and I would have had -- I had access to a call similar to that. I would have been able to provide medical attention to the best of my abilities. And this human was denied that right.
FRANK: And so from that point, you know, we saw you standing there on the sidewalk, you know, just sort of standing still.
HANSEN: Yes.
FRANK: And from there did you stay in the area for a little while?
HANSEN: Yes.
FRANK: And at some point you made a 911 call?
HANSEN: Yes
FRANK: Why at that point did you call 911?
HANSEN: I think it all settled and that I wish I would have done that immediately because it may -- it was ridiculous that 17 station, Spire Station 17 was as close as it was and that they hadn't been there. I should have called 911 immediately but I didn't. And when things calm down I realized that I wanted them to know what was going on. I wanted to basically report it.
FRANK: And so you made that call, correct?
HANSEN: Correct.
FRANK: And a little bit more than a minute long, at some point they wanted to transfer you to a supervisor, correct?
HANSEN: Correct. I asked for that.
FRANK: And -- but then the call ends.
HANSEN: OK.
FRANK: Do you remember why the call ended at that point?
HANSEN: I don't know exactly, but there was kind of a lot going on. I was still worried about the witnesses on scene particularly because they were people of color and black men. I was worried about their safety. And their officers still on scene. But also fire came and it may have been that I ended the call because my coworkers were there and I could tell them what was going on.
FRANK: So, tell us about that. So, at some point when you're there at the scene still, did a fire truck come?
HANSEN: Yes.
FRANK: And they're coming to respond to the call?
HANSEN: They're going to respond to the call and they went into Cup Foods to actually look for a victim, which is unique for that -- there to be that much miscommunication.
FRANK: So, let me ask you just a little different question. So, when they came, those firefighters, did you know them?
HANSEN: I knew two of them.
FRANK: And how many total came?
HANSEN: Four. Driver, two firefighters, and captain
FRANK: So, the two that you knew, how did you know them?
HANSEN: Crossing paths at work.
FRANK: So, they knew who you were?
HANSEN: Yes.
FRANK: So, you knew that members of the Fire Department knew you were on scene as well?
HANSEN: Yes.
FRANK: But off duty of course?
HANSEN: Yes
FRANK: And so, what you had a conversation with them while they were there a Cup Foods?
HANSEN: Yes
FRANK: And you also had some conversations with other people who had stuck around afterwards?
HANSEN: Yes. And the two, the driver and the other firefighter that weren't in the ambulance came back and I also spoke to them.
FRANK: I have no further questions, Your Honor.
CAHILL: Mr. Nelson.
NELSON: Your Honor, can I have one minute to review something.
CAHILL: Yes.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (INAUDIBLE) just stand and stretch in your place if you like.
[17:10:00]
WOLF BLITZER, CNN HOST: All right we're waiting for the judge in this case, Judge Peter Cahill to resume this trial. The defense attorney Eric Nelson asking for a minute to review something.
This has been extremely powerful, very emotional testimony from Genevieve Clara Hansen. She was an off duty and Minnesota firefighter at the time. Happened to be walking by the scene when this a former police officer Derek Chauvin had his knee on the neck of George Floyd. And she delivered a really powerful very emotional explanation of what she saw.
She could have engaged in emergency help to try to save the life of George Floyd. She wanted to. She asked the police officers there on the scene if she could intervene to try to get him some sort of life support.
Hold on a minute. Let's go back.
NELSON: We set some follow up questions for you. Thank you for being here with us today.
You testified that you've been a firefighter now for two years approximately?
HANSEN: Correct.
NELSON: And I see you're wearing your uniform today. HANSEN: Correct.
NELSON: And that would be like your dress uniform or your Class A uniform?
HANSEN: Correct.
NELSON: That's common to wear when you testify in court?
HANSEN: Correct.
NELSON: Fair to say that you were not wearing your Class A or any uniform on May 25, 2020?
HANSEN: Correct. I was off duty.
NELSON: Right. OK.
Being a firefighter is this a stressful job?
HANSEN: Correct.
NELSON: You testified about your experience as an EMT. We didn't talk much about your firefighter training.
HANSEN: OK.
NELSON: So you said you went through a four month academy, correct?
HANSEN: Correct.
NELSON: And in that academy I assume you learn like the basics of fire, right?
HANSEN: Correct.
NELSON: Like different types of back drafts and whatever.
HANSEN: Everything, construction, right.
NELSON: Right. How to approach a fire. How to, you know, where to aim the hose, I guess.
HANSEN: Yes. But fire is fire.
NELSON: Right. So, sometimes you probably got to come from the top down or from the bottom up, right?
HANSEN: I've been -- yes, different always.
NELSON: Right. And you learned about like going into a burning building, right?
HANSEN: Right.
NELSON: Being safe, being cautious. HANSEN: Right.
NELSON: So, again, part of what you have to learn is how to deal with the stress of being a job -- of being a firefighter?
HANSEN: Right.
NELSON: Do they -- do in either in the academy or in your continuing training, do you have trainings that focus on how to deal with the physical reaction to stress?
HANSEN: We do go over that in our trainings throughout the continuing ed. Also, I think you're suited or not for the job.
NELSON: Sure. Takes a certain type of person to do the job, right?
HANSEN: Right.
NELSON: But breathing becomes important, right?
HANSEN: Right.
NELSON: You put on an oxygen tank, a mask.
HANSEN: Yes.
NELSON: You've got to know how to breathe properly.
HANSEN: Controlling your breathing, right.
NELSON: And sometimes you may go into a situation it's not totally on fire and you may not have your mask on, you're running upstairs to get -- to save someone's life, again controlling your breathing, right?
HANSEN: Right.
NELSON: And you learn about -- do you -- have you ever heard the term tunnel vision as a part of fire training?
HANSEN: Not necessarily -- not necessarily as a part of fire training, but I know what tunnel vision is.
NELSON: So, when you're stressed you kind of focus on a particular thing?
HANSEN: Right.
NELSON: Right? And it kind of changes your peripheral vision and you become hyper focus, right?
HANSEN: Right.
NELSON: So, you're familiar with that and you may have experienced that in the context of your firefighting?
HANSEN: Yes. NELSON: And obviously and unfortunately I'm assuming that sometimes you're not able to save everyone, right?
HANSEN: Correct.
NELSON: And that there's a level of trauma that comes with that, right?
HANSEN: Sometimes.
NELSON: Right. Depending on the circumstances?
HANSEN: Correct.
NELSON: You also testified that you have both a national and state certification as an EMT, right?
HANSEN: Correct.
NELSON: And that stands for Emergency Medical Technician?
[17:15:01]
HANSEN: Correct.
NELSON: That's basic first responders stuff, right? Medical training for first responders.
HANSEN: I believe that there is more basic, I mean, I think the police officers are not emergency medical technicians.
NELSON: Right. But then it's not as high as like a paramedic, right?
HANSEN: Correct
NELSON: So, a paramedic has even more training than an EMT?
HANSEN: Yes.
NELSON: Right. And obviously maybe the CPR you learned to become a lifeguard was less, less intensive than what it took to become an EMT, right?
HANSEN: I took, I took it much more seriously because I was practicing it and using it. But it's the same.
NELSON: Yes. But in your EMT training you also learn like tourniquets and splinting and --
HANSEN: Right. Like I mentioned before.
NELSON: Yes. All of these sort of assessment and emergency first response of care?
HANSEN: Yes.
NELSON: OK. And you testify that you because you've only been a firefighter for two years, you've been in several burning buildings?
HANSEN: Correct.
NELSON: Now, have you ever been in a burning building or outside, let's say you're outside, let me ask you a hypothetical question. You're outside of a burning building and you're spraying the hose on the fire, right, has anyone ever tried to come up to you and say you're doing it wrong?
HANSEN: No.
NELSON: Do you think that has anyone ever stopped to film you to -- when you're fighting a fire?
HANSEN: Yes.
NELSON: OK. So, you see someone, you're fighting the fire --
HANSEN: Yes.
NELSON: -- and someone starts to film you, does that -- I'm sorry.
CAHILL: You don't have to interrupt each other.
HANSEN: It's not conscious.
NELSON: Yes.
CAHILL: It's not normal that way.
HANSEN: Yes.
CAHILL: So, limit (ph).
HANSEN: OK.
NELSON: We all started talking at one time, you know.
HANSEN: OK.
NELSON: And so, it's unusual but I'm sorry and I'll try to slow down too, OK?
So, you're fighting a fire, right, and you may notice a citizen filming what you're doing.
HANSEN: Correct.
NELSON: And that would not necessarily interfere with your ability to fight a fire, correct?
HANSEN: No.
NELSON: Have you ever had a citizen start to yell at you while you're fighting a fire?
HANSEN: No.
NELSON: Do you think it would make your job fighting the fire harder if someone started yelling at you and telling you that you were doing it wrong?
HANSEN: I'm very confident in the training that I've been given. So, I would not be concerned about somebody that was not trained to the extent I have been. And I would continue to fight the fire the way I would.
NELSON: Right. But do you think it would be distracting?
HANSEN: No.
NELSON: What if there were 12 people yelling at you and telling you that you were doing it wrong.
HANSEN: I think a burning structure in a city where there are buildings and homes and people living on either side is much more concerning than 20 people time tell me to do something different.
NELSON: Right. But you wouldn't be distracted by that at all?
HANSEN: No.
NELSON: What if they started calling you names?
HANSEN: Like I said, I know my job and I would be confident in doing my job and there's nothing anybody could say that would distract me.
NELSON: OK. So, what if they started to physically threaten you?
HANSEN: I'll repeat myself because I'm confident in my job and what I do and what needs to be done and my training, so I would continue to do that.
NELSON: What is staging -- what does it mean when a fire department stages at an incident?
HANSEN: There -- it's always different, but we can stage to wait for someone to assess what's exactly going on and what -- how we need to tackle that particular call.
NELSON: OK. So, let's assume there's a call and the police are on the scene at the call, right? And then --
HANSEN: Are you -- sorry to interrupt. Are you talking about a medical call? We stage for different things.
NELSON: Sure. Let's leave it as a medical call.
HANSEN: OK.
NELSON: And there are some trouble at the scene, does -- do you just come right in into that emergency call or does fire stage until police clear the scene? HANSEN: We stage and wait for police to give code four.
NELSON: Right.
HANSEN: Yes.
NELSON: Code four means all clear?
HANSEN: Safe. Yes.
NELSON: Right. So, in a situation where there is trouble and the police are dealing with that trouble and they know they need a medical personnel to come into the scene.
HANSEN: Yes.
NELSON: Medical won't come into the scene until it is called code four, right?
[17:20:00]
HANSEN: Correct.
NELSON: All right. And you said in your experience you've been on numerous calls throughout the two years, you've been a firefighter, right?
HANSEN: Correct.
NELSON: And what -- would you agree that a fair number of those may have been calls that started out as call where the police responded first?
HANSEN: Correct.
NELSON: So it's usually the police that are there first, they do some assessment, and they will call for medical.
HANSEN: Correct.
NELSON: Have you ever been called to a scene where the police didn't call you? Meaning, the police were present and they weren't the ones that called you?
HANSEN: Can you repeat the question?
NELSON: Sure. It's a little confusing. Police go to a scene, right? And whatever is happening at the scene, and they just don't ever call for medical, even though there's a medical situation.
HANSEN: Well, I wouldn't know because that means I wasn't called to it.
NELSON: Precisely, right? So, if you go to a scene, it's because you're responding to a call, right?
HANSEN: Correct.
NELSON: And the reason that you are there is because the police call you.
HANSEN: If the police are on the scene first.
NELSON: Right, if the police are on the scene first. And so, in a situation where you see someone having a medical emergency, right, wouldn't it be reasonable to assume that the police had already called for medics?
HANSEN: It would also be reasonable to assume that if the patient was cuffed --
NELSON: I'm going to ask you, I'm going to -- I'm going to say objection, nonresponsive.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Wait for the question, and then answer the question that is asked.
NELSON: It's a yes or no question, ma'am. Is it reasonable to assume that if a patient is having a medical emergency, and the police are present, that they have called for EMS?
HANSEN: Your question is unclear because you don't know my job. So, I can't answer it.
NELSON: OK. Sure. So, let's take this scene, right? May 25, 2020, you walk upon a scene, you see someone having a medical emergency, right? You did not call 911 to get the medics there, right?
HANSEN: Right.
NELSON: Would it have been reasonable to assume that medics had already been called based on what you saw when you first arrived?
HANSEN: Yes.
NELSON: And in fact, paramedics did respond, right? You saw the ambulance come up?
HANSEN: Yes. That's not their normal response time.
NELSON: OK. And so, you notice there was some abnormal response time for medics?
HANSEN: Right. And I also noticed that that is precisely the kind of call that fire would respond to and station 17 is just a couple blocks away.
NELSON: OK. So, do officers on scene decide, do we call for medic or fire?
HANSEN: I don't believe so. I believe that's dispatch. They call for medical attention. NELSON: So, if attention police call dispatch, and they say EMS, we need EMS code three. It's dispatch who decides, do we send medics or fire?
HANSEN: Well, it would be medic, it would be fire with medics not just fire ever. I don't know the answer to that.
NELSON: Very well. But ultimately, medics did arrive. Right?
HANSEN: Yes, eventually.
NELSON: And you have no frame of reference of when police called paramedics, do you?
HANSEN: No, but I know how long it takes for medics to get to calls, typically, and I know how long it takes to drive three blocks in an emergency fire vehicle.
NELSON: That presumes that the fire vehicle was not on another call, right?
HANSEN: It would have been a different station that was -- we would -- the nearest, the nearest to other stations would have been able to respond that call in three minutes.
NELSON: So, if you first walked on scene at 8:26:29, that was what we just saw.
HANSEN: OK.
NELSON: 8:26:29.
HANSEN: OK.
NELSON: And paramedics had been called at 8:21, that's an abnormal response time based on your experience.
HANSEN: What time did you say around?
NELSON: 8:26:29
HANSEN: And the medics arrived at what time?
NELSON: The medics were called at 8:21, code three.
[17:25:00]
HANSEN: I don't believe that.
NELSON: But again, you'd have no frame of reference, right? Then you've not seen any police reports, you've not looked at the cabs, you've not heard the 911 calls, you didn't listen to dispatch that night, did you?
HANSEN: That night? No, not that night.
NELSON: OK.
HANSEN: But I -- that's totally abnormal.
NELSON: All right.
HANSEN: And fire would have been added to that call, because we go to calls like that all the time.
NELSON: Right. And so, it was abnormal, it would be completely and totally abnormal, in your experience, for it to take that long to get to the scene.
HANSEN: Absolutely.
NELSON: All right. And are you familiar with the term load and go?
HANSEN: Yes.
NELSON: And I believe you had a conversation with the BCA agents shortly after this incident. And you described what you observed, as far as the paramedics doing was what's called the load and go, right?
HANSEN: Correct.
HANSEN: And that is essentially, as I understand it, paramedics arrive, something is amiss at the scene. So, we put them into the ambulance, and we move the ambulance to another --
HANSEN: Safe location to address that need.
NELSON: And that's what you observed here, right?
HANSEN: Correct.
NELSON: And that's because there were quite a few people and those people were all fairly upset, right?
HANSEN: Correct.
NELSON: And so, in your mind as a paramedic with the experience of --
HANSEN: EMT.
NELSON: Oh, I'm sorry, as an EMT, I apologize. But as an EMT, you've done load and goes before?
HANSEN: We've done load and goes, yes.
NELSON: Right. And so, the reason that the medics did not commence, at least as far as you understood, commence resuscitative efforts for Mr. Floyd was because they were doing a load and go, get them away.
HANSEN: Correct.
FRANK: Objection, (INAUDIBLE) to the knowledge of this witness.
CAHILL: Overall.
NELSON: That's what you told the agents, right?
HANSEN: I don't remember exactly what I told the agents, but that would -- it looked like a load and go to me.
NELSON: OK. Now, in terms of your, again, personal experience or, excuse me, on that day, the paramedics drove off. And then at some other point, a couple minutes later is when the truck, the fire truck arrives, right?
HANSEN: Right. And that's how I knew there was something wrong when requesting medical assistance.
NELSON: OK. Because the Fire Department showed up at Cup Foods, and the ambulance had already left and gone to another location?
HANSEN: No, more because the fire, whether it's 17 or a different station would have been able to respond to that call much sooner than medics were.
NELSON: All right. So, in a -- I mean, you kind of form that opinion on that day. But there were some miscommunications between medics and fire and police.
HANSEN: Right, which I mean, not to the fault of medics or fire. It's, we get a call and we go.
NELSON: OK.
HANSEN: So, it was, it was police and dispatch that that miscommunication would have come in.
NELSON: Right. OK. And again, that five or six minute delay is just unheard of in your experience.
HANSEN: Yes. Not by medics but backfires specifically.
NELSON: Are you trained as an EMT in the use of Narcan?
HANSEN: Yes, sir.
NELSON: Can you explain what Narcan generally is?
HANSEN: It's an opioid reversal medication. We give it intravenously. But a lot of people on the street have injectable form.
NELSON: Kind of like an epi pen almost, right?
HANSEN: Yes, kind of.
NELSON: You testified that the firehouse that you work at you deal with a lot of overdose calls.
HANSEN: Correct.
NELSON: And so, you've had a lot of experience dealing with people who are overdosing --
HANSEN: Correct.
NELSON: -- from opioids or from other controlled substances?
HANSEN: Correct.
[17:30:00]
NELSON: And you have seen -- you have seen or dealt with many people who come out of an opiate overdose because of Narcan.
HANSEN: Correct. If I didn't have Narcan though, we still give -- if -- will it monitor a pulse and give compressions as necessary. I've never not had Narcan but I would be able to get medical attention to somebody that had overdosed on opioid and lost their (INAUDIBLE).
NELSON: OK. So let me ask you, is it Fire Department policy when you are going to a call of an overdose, that police are also dispatched to that call?
HANSEN: I believe so, yes.
NELSON: And that is because when people are revived from that, they often become combative, right?
HANSEN: Not often.
NELSON: I'm sorry?
HANSEN: Not often.
NELSON: But it happens.
HANSEN: I've seen it happen.
NELSON: Now I'm going to just kind of talk to you a little bit about your testimony about May 25th of 2020. You were out for a walk, because it was your day off, right?
HANSEN: Mm-hmm.
NELSON: Said yes.
HANSEN: Yes.
NELSON: Sorry. You're out for a walk and you're walking down -- you're walking westbound on 38th Street and you see the lights and you said it's not uncommon to see lights there?
HANSEN: In my neighborhood. Not on that corner, but in my neighborhood.
NELSON: OK.
HANSEN: Or in the city. NELSON: Right. OK. And as you walked, what would be the south east corner of 38th in Chicago, you talk to -- you heard a woman yelling that they are killing him, right?
HANSEN: Right.
NELSON: And so you did this kind of circle loop to visualize and see what was going on, right?
HANSEN: Right.
NELSON: And at the point that you came on scene, Mr. Floyd was already on the ground, right?
HANSEN: Correct.
NELSON: And, Mr. Floyd, you saw what you -- what your memory told you was four police officers on him, right?
HANSEN: Correct.
NELSON: But you now know that it was three, right?
HANSEN: Correct.
NELSON: And I think you made some reference about why you videotaped because our memories are fallible, right?
HANSEN: Correct.
NELSON: And, again, a stressful situation can impact your memory, right?
HANSEN: Absolutely. That's why we're lucky it was a videoed.
NELSON: Right. It's also fair to say that once you kind of came, you first talked to Officer Thao and you'd said that you identified yourself as a Minneapolis firefighter, right?
HANSEN: Correct.
NELSON: And Officer Thao asked you to step onto the curb and you did that, right?
HANSEN: Correct.
NELSON: And you would agree that when you first arrived on scene, your own personal, I'm just talking about you personally, your own personal demeanor was much more calm?
HANSEN: Correct.
NELSON: And as you were there between 8:26 and 8:30, so in about those four minutes, you would agree that your own demeanor got louder and more frustrated and upset.
HANSEN: Frustrated, I'm not sure is the word I would use.
NELSON: Angry?
HANSEN: More desperate.
NELSON: You call the officers a bitch, right?
HANSEN: Yes. I got quite angry after Mr. Floyd was loaded into the ambulance. And there was no point in trying to reason with them anymore because they had just killed somebody.
NELSON: So in terms of the time that you were there, you have no idea what those officers were doing on the side of the car, right?
HANSEN: Standing -- the officers that I couldn't see from my vantage point, is that what you're asking?
NELSON: Right.
HANSEN: Right --
NELSON: You don't know what they were doing?
HANSEN: I couldn't see the two junior officers except for maybe like their shoulders up.
NELSON: And so it's fair to say you don't know what they were doing.
HANSEN: Correct.
NELSON: You don't know what they were talking about?
HANSEN: The two of them? No.
NELSON: And there was, again, you described a fairly large crowd 10, 12 people that were all in that general area. And several people were yelling, right?
HANSEN: Right.
NELSON: And some people were yelling louder than others, right?
HANSEN: Right.
[17:35:00]
NELSON: And some -- a lot of people were saying things like get off of him, right?
HANSEN: Right.
NELSON: And a lot of people you, yourself, were saying I want to notice pulses.
HANSEN: Yes.
NELSON: Right? And some people were swearing?
HANSEN: Absolutely.
NELSON: And would you describe other people's demeanors as upset or angry?
HANSEN: It's --I don't know if you've seen anybody be killed, but it's upsetting.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (INAUDIBLE) the answer.
NELSON: Yes, I was just going to object.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, that's argumentative and then proceed.
NELSON: I'm going to just ask you to answer my questions as I asked them to, OK?
You also talked about how -- when you first approached, you saw the complete and total body weight of all three officers on Mr. Floyd --
HANSEN: I never said all three officers. I -- their body weight was on him. And the two in the back, their full body weight was seeming to be on him, but that's not something that would kill.
NELSON: All right. And the -- but you testified that --
HANSEN: OK, yes.
NELSON: -- body weight. My question was --
HANSEN: Yes, their body weight. Yes.
NELSON: -- was on.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (INAUDIBLE) just answers questions if you could.
HANSEN: OK.
NELSON: So just to be clear, for the record is clear. You testified --
HANSEN: Yes.
NELSON: Let me finish my question.
HANSEN: Finish question.
NELSON: You testified that when you first arrived, you observed the weight of all three officers on Mr. Floyd? Yes or no?
HANSEN: Yes.
NELSON: But, again, once you were ushered or commanded or directed, whatever term you want to use to the curb, you again, as far as the other two officers, you are not watching who had their weight where or what. HANSEN: Correct, you could not see the other two officers, I could see them and they were not talking much and (INAUDIBLE).
NELSON: Lot of people were yelling.
HANSEN: Right.
NELSON: And, again, you were not paying attention to what they were saying.
HANSEN: Here in there.
NELSON: OK. So do you remember what the officers were talking about?
HANSEN: Oh, the officers, no, I have no. They weren't talking.
NELSON: OK. All right. You also testified that, as you were observing Mr. Chauvin on George Floyd, that you form the opinion that Mr. Chauvin's hand was in his pocket.
HANSEN: Correct.
NELSON: And you described him as comfortable.
HANSEN: Correct.
NELSON: You also testified that you observed what you thought to be fluid coming from Mr. Floyd's body and you assigned that or you believed that to be urine?
HANSEN: I consider that it was and took that as a sign.
NELSON: Do you recall telling the agents that it was his urine?
HANSEN: I don't recall.
NELSON: When you said that you testified that your focus became really sort of zoomed in on trying to get the attention of the officers, right?
HANSEN: Not the attention so much as trying to reason with them and gain access to get medical attention.
NELSON: And you testified that you believe that the other voices, the voices of other people, interfered with you getting their attention.
HANSEN: I was worried about it. But I know that Thao could hear me talking because he was responding to me directly.
NELSON: Now, in terms of your -- the statement that you gave, you were interviewed by agents Lund, Matthew Lund, and agent James Ryerson, do you recall those names?
HANSEN: No.
[17:40:04] NELSON: Do you dispute me if I'm telling --
HANSEN: No.
NELSON: OK. And would you dispute me if I told you that that interview took place on May 28th of 2020?
HANSEN: No.
NELSON: And before coming into court, did you have an opportunity to review your statement at all?
HANSEN: I had the opportunity to but I didn't.
NELSON: OK. You never read the transcript of your statement or --
HANSEN: I chose not to.
NELSON: I just want to just ask you a few questions. You said that Officer Thao, at some point, said if you're really a firefighter, you should know better, right?
HANSEN: Correct.
NELSON: Have you been to other scenes where people are trying to interfere with police officers doing their jobs?
HANSEN: No, not really. Not that I can recall.
NELSON: Do you remember telling the agents that you believe that Officer Chauvin had his hands in his pocket?
HANSEN: I'm vaguely remembered saying that.
NELSON: Do you recall telling the agents that you were pretty certain the fluid was coming from Mr. Floyd's body and that's what made you think he was dead?
HANSEN: I'm sure I said that. Pretty sure.
NELSON: Do you recall describing the crowd as a heavy crowd?
HANSEN: No, I don't recall.
NELSON: Would it refresh your recollection to review the transcript of your statement?
HANSEN: I don't want to.
NELSON: OK. Would you dispute me if I told you that you told the agents, it was a heavy crowd?
HANSEN: I -- no, I guess not.
NELSON: Do you recall after paramedics took Mr. Floyd and then you had a conversation with the firefighters that arrived, how you described the physical appearance of Mr. Floyd?
HANSEN: I don't recall.
NELSON: Do you recall telling them that he --
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I object, (INAUDIBLE).
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I don't want an argument. What's your grounds?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (INAUDIBLE) cross examination.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Sustained. You may impeach if you wish.
NELSON: All right. I know you don't want to look at your transcript, but may I approach the witness?
Ms. Hansen, (INAUDIBLE) page 11 of (INAUDIBLE). I'm just going to ask you to read the underlying questions (INAUDIBLE).
HANSEN: Yes.
NELSON: Is that refreshing (INAUDIBLE) this conversation?
HANSEN: Yes.
NELSON: Did you describe Mr. Floyd as a small, slim man?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (INAUDIBLE) objection.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Overrule.
HANSEN: Yes, it appeared -- with three grown men on top of somebody appeared that he was small and frail.
NELSON: OK.
HANSEN: But I know that --
NELSON: There's no question.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: There's no question.
HANSEN: I was finishing my answer.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (INAUDIBLE).
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Please --
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (INAUDIBLE).
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Counsel remain. Witness remain.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Be seated.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We're outside the hearing of the jury, Ms. Hansen. I'm advising you, do not argue with counsel. And specifically do not argue with the court.
[17:45:03]
HANSEN: Is the (INAUDIBLE)? Are they (INAUDIBLE).
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No, they are not. We're on the record.
HANSEN: OK.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You will not argue with the court, you will not argue with counsel. They have the right to ask question. Your job is to answer right.
HANSEN: I was finishing my answer.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I will determine when your answer is done.
HANSEN: OK, well --
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And so do not argue with the court, do not argue with counsel. Answer the questions. Do not volunteer information that is not requested. The attorneys for the state have redirect. They can ask you questions if they think that certain things were left out.
HANSEN: OK.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It is council's prerogative to ask you leading questions and for you to answer those and that volunteer additional information.
HANSEN: OK.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Are we clear on this?
HANSEN: OK.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Thank you. Come back tomorrow at 9:30.
HANSEN: All right. Good night (ph).
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Do we have a person with a cell phone? Could we arrange to have that person come now? Somebody from the state can access to that person? If you can have that person come in.
BLITZER: I'm Wolf Blitzer in THE SITUATION ROOM. We've been watching CNN's continuous live coverage of the trial of Derek Chauvin. And we just turned very emotional, very powerful testimony from an off-duty firefighter describing a very vivid and heartbreaking detail, what she saw at the scene of George Floyd's death. So far, multiple witnesses on this day, they have offered very compelling, very consistent accounts of Floyd's final moments there on the ground.
One man telling the court he felt like he was witnessing a murder, other witnesses revealing that Chauvin seemed to kneel on Floyd's neck even harder and harder as onlookers begged him to simply stop. Chauvin's defense team insists he was distracted by the crowd. Let's get right to our Senior National Correspondent Sara Sidner, she's covering this trial for us in Minneapolis. Sara, the testimony from today's witnesses, and we just heard very, very painful, emotional testimony from this off-duty police -- firefighter, I should say, it paints a disturbing picture of Chauvin's actions during the final minutes of George Floyd's life.
SARA SIDNER, CNN SENIOR NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Not only a disturbing picture but in an incredibly clear picture. The witnesses that we have heard from today including Genevieve Hansen, who was the EMT and firefighter who happened to walk by the scene, she happened to see these officers on top of George Floyd and she saw Derek Chauvin in particular on George Floyd's neck with his knee pressing down.
And you could hear how frustrated she was because of her training, because she is a trained EMT, she said she was looking at George Floyd's face and that it looks swollen and that his face looked like it was pressed very hard into the ground and she felt that something needed to happen. She felt like he was coming to the end of life and the fact that she was unable to do anything because the police were not letting her near George Floyd even though she was asking them again and again, did you check his pulse, did you check his pulse, did you check his pulse.
And every time she asked, when they didn't do it, she got more and more frustrated, angry as she said, watching this play out because she felt helpless and she had the training to try and help if the police would have just let her try and help. So you can hear her frustration on the stand.
And then she is cross examined by Chauvin's attorney who starts to question her training which she did clearly did not like. And question whether she remembered what she really remembered or not and she kind of said, look at least there's video, so at least somebody, thank goodness, somebody was taking video.
But there was an admonishment at the very end there from the judge because there was a bit of combativeness between her and Chauvin's attorney who was asking her questions about whether she was upset, for example, seeing what was happening to George Floyd and she says, well, he was dying, so wouldn't you be upset. They were killing him.
The judge admonishing her telling her that she just has to answer the questions, that it is their right to ask the questions. But clearly her testimony was incredibly powerful not only because of what she said but she is sitting there in her uniform, she is obviously a professional, she is obviously an EMT and a firefighter. She had all the answers to her training and that is going to have a huge impact, I imagine, on this jury. Wolf?
BLITZER: Yes, at one point she said that she saw what she was seeing on the ground there, she saw a man, she said there's a man being killed. She said, I wanted to help when she said this human was denied that kind of help.
[17:50:06] And then later she said they had just killed somebody. I don't know if you've ever seen somebody being killed, but it's upsetting. She was very, very strong in making those comments. And at one point, we all saw her break down. She had a wipe-away tears.
SIDNER: Yes, and we've seen that over and over and over again today, Wolf. She, again, you can't help but imagine the ripple effects of not only the world saw this, right. These are individuals who were there in person watching this happen and feeling helpless. And you saw her tear up break down on the stand. And this is a person who deals with difficult situations, medical situations on a regular basis. But this particular situation really struck her and that is going to also strike the jury.
She called 911. And she told the 911 dispatch, that they are killing someone, that the police are killing someone. That is going to resonate, it resonates with those who are watching the trial outside and it certainly is going to resonate with those who are sitting there, the 14 jurors, 12 jurors and two alternates watching this play out. But she was just one of several people who had incredibly vivid, emotional, strong testimony for the prosecution today. Wolf?
BLITZER: Very powerful witnesses, very emotional and you're absolutely right, Sara. Stay with us. I want to bring in CNN Political Commentator Bakari Sellers, he's an attorney. And Natalie Jackson, a wrongful death attorney is also with us.
Bakari, tell us what you thought at the end of this dramatic exchange of that this witness, Genevieve Clara Hansen, this off-duty firefighter, had with the defense attorney Eric Nelson. We heard the Judge Peter Cahill, he was upset, he was angry at her, explain that.
BAKARI SELLERS, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, I think that you saw the witness become somewhat unraveled as the testimony went through. A lot of it has to do with the fact that this is very emotional. A lot of it has to do with the fact that the cross examination, sometimes it just gets on your nerves. But you begin to see that at the end, and she was being impeached.
What you saw was the fact that she had made a statement to law enforcement officers and her testimony wasn't consistent with that statement, which is why the defense attorney went up to the podium, ask that you want to read her statement, and he asked her multiple times to go back and actually say what you stated to law enforcement because it is not what you're testifying to in court.
That's when you saw the combativeness when she was being impeached. I thought that she had some great moments today, I thought that she was very emotional today, she talked about the fact that it was very difficult seeing someone being murdered. But the fact is, she was there to talk about, they wouldn't let or law enforcement wouldn't let her give him care.
And the defense did a good job of bringing out the fact that they had already called EMTs, whether or not she believed it or not with the timestamps will have to show but I thought that she became unraveled as this went on. And the jury in the room saw that.
Now there going to be a lot of points, a lot of people keeping score, saying, oh, my gosh, she did this, she did that. But you have to look at the totality of this. This is just one witness. And I thought that the other witnesses today were really, really good.
The young ladies who were there who were watching the young girl, my heart broke, the young man who was testifying earlier today. And he talked about them trying to make him angry. He was just open and honest. But I thought you saw her unravel as we gotten to the end when she was being impeached by the defense.
BLITZER: Yes, that's an important point. You know, Natalie, what did you make of the line of questioning? We heard from the defense attorney, the argument seems to be that the officers were distracted, they claimed, by people trying to help George Floyd.
NATALIE JACKSON, WRONGFUL DEATH ATTORNEY: I think that that's the wrong road to go down. I think that, you know, what his argument is is that people who were trying to save someone from being killed were distracting the killer. And I'm not sure if that is a good argument to make. And to go back to Genevieve Hansen, I thought she was very effective. She's the only witness that is on their level. She's a public servant, just like them. She has a duty to the public to protect and serve just like them.
I feel that hurt her, her being angry about this situation and imputing that anger onto the defense attorney because he's the closest thing to Derek Chauvin (ph). That, to me, really kind of -- I think that was all -- that will that will really stick to the jury in the fact that, you know, she felt this was wrong. She felt that Derek Chauvin actually killed George Floyd. And she said it.
BLITZER: And the fact is that she, herself, and this is pretty extraordinary on the scene made of 911 call herself, right, Natalie?
JACKSON: Yes, that's -- I mean, that's extraordinary. What we've seen is exactly what the prosecution is promised. We've seen people being brought to the stand who call the police on the police. Every one of these witnesses, which is pretty extraordinary to me. And you've seen this bouquet of humanity.
[17:55:02]
You've seen people break down and cry exactly what he said in opening that he was going to present a bouquet of humanity. And that's what we saw. People trying to save George Floyd's life.
BLITZER: And it was so heartbreaking, Bakari, earlier in the day, earlier witnesses, young people, we couldn't see their faces, because they were not adults, but we heard their voices. Several of them were simply saying, it was so upsetting to them to this day, they have trouble sleeping, wondering, could they have done more. That was a heart-wrenching moment.
SELLERS: That was a heart-wrenching moment. And, you know, I think that the point was brought up, which is probably the most important point thus far in the trial, which is this. You know, when you promise something in opening statement, you have to deliver, and the prosecution has delivered on everything they promised.
And what they're doing is, and I think this is probably even more valuable, by showing all of these individuals who themselves, whether or not they were EMTs or firefighters, whether or not they were just bystanders, but them making that call of -- calling the police on the police, like she said, is extremely, extremely powerful.
But even more importantly, the prosecution is and I can see them drawing this line that they'll bring up in closing, all of these people who witnessed this, from the youngest young ladies that we saw, to firefighters to whom ever watch this, all had compassion for this man, compassion that law enforcement did not. And so, I see that line being drawn right now. And this is just day two. I mean, we have to realize that all of these little pieces fit into a puzzle and the jury is going to consume all of this as we move towards a verdict, hopefully a guilty verdict for murder.
BLITZER: You know, Sara, the -- this -- as Bakari says, this trial is only just beginning, it could go on for several weeks right now, but what specifically jumped out at you during this day?
SIDNER: So many things, Wolf. Donald Williams, you want to talk about, you know, I know, we don't like using the term star witness, but he was one of their star witnesses because he spoke so passionately, and so very clearly about how he was feeling at the time and then what he said to 911 dispatch. I mean, he's telling the dispatchers, they're killing him. They're killing him over and over and over again. And when he is asked, well, why did you call 911? He said, I was calling the police on the police.
And then he was asked by the prosecutor, well, why were you doing that? He said, because they had just killed a man. Like that is an incredibly powerful prose in the entire jury, and anyone who was listening to that would have sat up in their chair to hear that because it is such an unusual thing to hear somebody say they called 911 on the police officers who are already there.
I talked to a prosecutor who talked about the fact that he'd never heard that in his 20 years of being in trial. So that really stood out to me. You know what else stood out to me? The emotion that you heard on this -- the girl who was 17 years old, the one that took the viral video that the entire world saw, when you heard her struggling in her everyday life, wondering if she could have done more for George Floyd. If that did not break somebody's heart, I don't know what would.
That was incredibly compelling. It told you about the deep humanity of this young person who recognize that something was absolutely wrong. And yet, the police officers who are grown men did not see the same thing that is hard to believe, that they couldn't see what a young person was seeing. And then we heard from a nine-year-old girl who said it made her sad and it made her mad what she was seeing. Words from a child's mouth were as clear and as powerful as the adult who spoke. And smartly, the defense did not cross examine that child. Because what can you say to a child when she is simply telling you that she knew what she saw was bad that it made her sad and mad. Those are the things that stood out to me today. And I think those are the things that will stand out to the jury at this point in time, Wolf.
BLITZER: Yes. Seeing the video over and over again, but hearing the eyewitness accounts, especially from those young people, you know, it was heartbreaking to know that for the rest of their lives, they're going to question themselves, wonder, did they do enough to try to save this man's life.
Everybody standby. We're only beginning our special coverage here in THE SITUATION ROOM.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is CNN breaking news.
BLITZER: And welcome to our viewers here in the United States and around the world. I'm Wolf Blitzer in THE SITUATION ROOM. It's now the top of the hour.
