Derec
Contributor
It has been widely reported in right wing propaganda, that is.
Right-of-center sources are the only ones willing to say anything critical of the hero George Floyd.
The point is that it doesn't have to be proven that he died of an overdose. To rightly acquit Chauvin and others of any homicide crime, all you need is reasonable doubt.1) "lethal dose". The problem is opioids do not have a lethal dose. That is not to say you can't overdose on them, it's that you can't reasonably define the point of overdose--what's a lethal dose to someone not habituated to them doesn't mean much to a regular user.
Note also that it's not just the dose. He had liquid fill the parenchyma of his lungs so that they were twice the weight of a normal lung. That is common with overdoses and would obviously have made it difficult to breathe.
Source?2) Opioid overdose is a quick thing. He's not going to walk into the store, then get hauled out of it, then die of an overdose.
All this really means is that he was a regular user of opioids. It very well might have some bearing on his death--that level of opioids is going to mess with your behavior and very well might have led to the police administering a bit of "justice", but it didn't cause his death.
I disagree. I think it is more likely than not that drugs caused his death and it is certainly likely enough to serve as reasonable doubt.
It is notable that all these restraint-type deaths involve people on drugs, with severe health issues or both. George Floyd was both. He was on meth and fentanyl and he had health issues like an enlarged heart and 90% blockage of his right coronary artery.