Sky : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j8uWCAf4H_w
(That link may continue to work throughout the trial)
ABC : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgWZl7HNHmg
(These guys have predetermined the outcome: their commentary promotes the prosecution case and derides points made by the defence)
Fox 9 : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHPMZvQ38XE
(Yeah, it's Fox, but it's the local Minnesota version)
Also available on CourtTV in US and UK if that's a TV channel you can access.
Other live streams are available. Note that at the time of posting this the trial is not being broadcast - coverage expected to start at 10.30am ET.
The MMA clown is wearing a Black Lives Matter tee under his light dress shirt, like nobody would notice. I don't know who's dumber, this maroon or the prosecutor who thought he'd make a credible witness.
A lot of people thought him very controlled and credible.
The undershirt has been described as reading 'Black Excellence'. Being racist doesn't however exclude him from being a witness.
The prosecution played on his MMA background and tried to use that as justification for his interpretation of events.The defence used his presence and actions towards the police to bolster their opening statement suggestion that onlookers were posing a risk to the police officers, and distracting them from providing full care and attention to Floyd.
Defence Lawyer : "You called him a fucking pussy ass bitch?"
Witness : "If that's what you heard on the video, then yes I did."
That was part of the defence asking if he was angry, something he vehemently denied, saying he was professional and in control. Comically the prosecution returned and literally described him as 'increasingly angry'.
The defence did miss a trick though. During the initial testimony yesterday the witness said he pulled back another onlooker, away from the police. Asking why he felt the need to do that, and exploring whether he considered the other onlooker was about to engage with the police officers would have either demonstrated that there was a risk to police, or that this witness was acting physically for no discernible purpose. Either would help the case that onlookers posed a risk.