The jury was not present during discussion about the prosecution potentially introducing new evidence about George Floyd's carbon monoxide blood levels, legal analyst Laura Coates explained. Judge Peter Cahill ruled that the prosecution cannot use this new evidence in their rebuttal case.
"That seed of reasonable doubt has not been planted," she said.
"Here's the thing. You and I and all of us are in the court of public opinion, not in the courtroom. That entire transaction just now, that exchange, did not take place in front of the jury. So the jury does not know that this has now happened. It is a good thing for the prosecution and also a good thing for the defense if they believe, that of course, this data that undermines their theory," Coates said.
The judge reached a compromise with the prosecution that they can discuss George Floyd's oxygen levels instead, but they cannot bring up the test results at all or a mistrial will be ruled.
"Judges don't want to give the prosecutors two bites at the apple. They don't want redundant testimony. If you could have raised it earlier, you should have, you had the chance, sit down. This time the prosecution is saying that when Dr. Fowler raised the issue of carbon monoxide poisoning, and although we had some semblance of what the theory might be, you presented some new theories, 'So, we're not asking for a second bite of the apple, Your Honor, we want a first bite of at the apple based on this new theory.' The problem is the prosecution made a mistake. They did not take seriously the thought of carbon monoxide poisoning as potentially being a viable claim to be raised by this doctor. They may have overlooked the data and did not present it through their own witnesses to rebut and preempt this," Coates continued.