Image source, Court TV

The defence is now touching on one of its main arguments: that you cannot judge a police officer's actions from afar.

It is important to consider "the totality of the facts and circumstances" as well as "the officer's own subjective state of mind", says Eric Nelson.

"The standard is not what should the officer have done, or what could the officer have done," he notes.

Officers take into consideration things "you and I don't think about", he tells the jury, including knowledge of the scene and how best to keep it secure.

A reasonable officer wants to keep the suspect, civilians and colleagues safe, Nelson says, but new information and observations create "a dynamic, ever-changing situation" that can change in an instant.

The phrase "beyond a reasonable doubt" has been often repeated during today's closing arguments. So what does it mean?

Defence attorney Nelson reminds the jury that they have a duty to presume Chauvin is innocent until proven guilty and only convict the former officer if they believe he is guilty “beyond reasonable doubt”.

In a criminal case in the US, "beyond reasonable doubt" is a level of proof needed to secure a conviction. Put simply, prosecutors must convince the jury that there is no other reasonable explanation for the crime committed, based on the evidence they've seen during the trial.

It means the jury must be 100% assured that the defendant is guilty.

So what is unreasonable doubt, then? Nelson equates this to capricious and fanciful doubt.

"Capricious means unpredictable," Nelson explains.

"Fanciful - space aliens flew in, inhabited the body of Derek Chauvin and caused this death. That’s fanciful."

Image source, Court TV

Defence attorney Nelson tells the jury that "proof beyond a reasonable doubt" in this case is the benchmark they must meet.

"Capricious and fanciful" suggestions cannot be enough to convict his client, says Nelson, and "single grain of sand" can tip the scales of evidence because the state must eliminate doubt that George Floyd did not die because of Derek Chauvin's action.

If the jury begins by presuming his client's innocence, he says, they will find "the state has failed to meet its burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt".

Chauvin, who was taking notes with his head down for much of the morning is now listening closely to what his lawyer is saying. He also has his mask off today, unlike earlier in the trial.

During their closing remarks, both sides have been highlighting previous testimony from their medical experts as they seek to answer the key question: what caused George Floyd's death?

Here's a look at those key points over the last few weeks.

The prosecution said that Floyd died from asphyxia or a lack of oxygen, and it called several witnesses to back that claim.

• Dr Martin Tobin, a pulmonologist, described in vivid detail - and with the help of 3D visual aids - how the manner in which Floyd was restrained led to the lack of oxygen.
• Tobin and others rebuked the possibility that Floyd died from a heart attack, a drug overdose or other sudden form of death, pointing out that he lost his life gradually and painfully.

The defence, however, asserted the opposite. They said that other factors, like Floyd's drug use, undoubtedly contributed to his death.

• Dr David Fowler, the former chief medical examiner in the state of Maryland - said he saw no evidence that Derek Chauvin's knee-on-neck restraint of George Floyd caused his death.
• Fowler said cardiac arrest was the likely cause of death, though the official autopsy report on Floyd's death said otherwise.

Tara McKelvey
BBC News, Minneapolis

For people who live and work near the courthouse, the trial has affected every part of their day - their morning commute, when they walk past the National Guard, and lunchtime, when they search for one of the few restaurants that have remained open, and at night, too.

Lorick Andersen, 33, an ophthalmologist who has an apartment nearby, says that she could hear the protestors after dark, marching on the streets below.

Every time she leaves the house, she says, she is reminded of the trial.

"It’s heartbreaking to see," she says, describing it as a daily reminder of George Floyd’s death. "It really gets to me."

We're back from a short break and the defence is now presenting its closing argument to the court.

Lead attorney Eric Nelson begins by reminding the jury that his client Derek Chauvin carries the presumption of innocence until he is found guilty.

Earlier, prosecutor Schleicher showed the jury an image with a timeline of Floyd's arrest.

It shows key moments from the nine minutes and 29 seconds prosecutors say Chauvin had his knee on Floyd's neck.

You can see the image shown to the court below - warning, it does contain upsetting images - and for more on what we know about the arrest, read our timeline here.

Image source, Court TV

We've just heard the final arguments from state prosecutors seeking to convict Chauvin of murder and manslaughter.

These are the key points to know:

• "Use your common sense...believe your eyes," the prosecution encouraged jurors, saying that what they had seen in the video - rather than allegations about drug use and pre-existing health issues - would be the best guide in determining their verdict.
• They claimed that all George Floyd needed on the day he died was "compassion" but "none was shown" by the officers who arrested him.
• Floyd showed no "superhuman strength" and did not resist the officers except when he was afraid to get in the back of their squad car, they said.
• Chauvin "chose pride over policing", prosecutors said. He "betrayed his badge" because his interaction with Floyd did not reflect his formal training in use of force and crisis intervention.
• Prosecutors say Chauvin "knew better, he just didn't do better" and employed "unlawful force" against Floyd with purpose and intention, ignoring the pleas of both the suspect and the bystanders watching them.
• They called on the jury to convict Chauvin of all three charges because the case is "not policing, it was murder".

"Only you have the power to convict the defendant of his crimes and in doing so declare: this use of force was unreasonable, it was excessive, it was grossly disproportionate," Schleicher says as his argument comes to a close.

"This case is exactly what you thought when you saw it first - when you saw that video."

He urges the jury to convict Derek Chauvin on all three counts of murder and manslaughter.

With that, the prosecution ends. Judge Cahill has now called for a brief recess.

Samantha Granville
BBC News, Minneapolis

Image source, Getty Images

Downtown Minneapolis is quiet this morning - very quiet. People are waiting anxiously for the verdict.

Businesses all around the city have boarded up. Many are closed and don’t plan on opening again until everything is settled after the verdict and any protests to follow.

I talked to one woman who was decorating the walls of boarded-up businesses. She spent her weekend crocheting colorful flowers that she’s stapling to the wood. She said she wanted to put a smile on peoples’ faces when they walked by, and provide some "sunshine during these troubling times for the city".

Every other day during the trial there had been a small, but consistent showing of activists and community organisers outside the courthouse.

This morning though, no one was there. All the supplies (blankets, waters, snacks) that were there for protestors were gone. There were just signs of support for justice for George Floyd.

There was one lone sign holder on a busy street lining the side of the courthouse. She held a sign that read "no breaths, no pulse, three and a half minutes".

She told me she was standing out in the cold because everyone inside the courthouse needed to know that this movement for racial justice is still going strong.

Schleicher again shows the court the clip of the crowd that gathered on the pavement as Floyd was being restrained on the ground.

One argument advanced by the defence was that Chauvin was distracted by a "hostile" crowd during the arrest and therefore wasn’t able to give medical aid to Floyd.

Schleicher argues that members of the crowd repeatedly expressed concern for the welfare of Floyd, who repeatedly said he could not breathe.

"It was plain and apparent to everyone who was there what was happening," Schleicher says. "He’s going unresponsive, he’s passed out, he’s not talking."

"We know the defendant chose not to listen to bystanders, but how about to fellow officers on the scene?"

Schleicher then shows body camera footage from one of the officers restraining Floyd.

In the video, one officer asks Chauvin whether they should "roll him on his side".

"He’s staying put where we got him," Chauvin can be heard saying.

Schleicher says Chauvin "knew better" but "he just didn’t do better".

Media access inside the court has been limited, so some of our best visuals come from courtroom sketch artists.

Here's a look inside Derek Chauvin's trial over the past few weeks.

Image source, Retuers

Image source, Reuters

Image source, Reuters

Image source, Reuters

In vivid detail, Schleicher reiterates that the prosecution's argument is that Chauvin's method of restraint killed Floyd.

"It was as if Mr Floyd was breathing through a straw," Schleicher says. "Not enough oxygen could get to the lungs - and that’s what killed George Floyd."

He dismisses the testimony of a medical expert called by the defence who said Floyd died of a "sudden cardiac arrhythmia".

"This wasn’t a sudden cardiac arrhythmia," Schleicher says.

He says four medical experts called by prosecutors - Dr William Smock, Dr Lindsay Thomas, Dr Jonathan Rich, and Dr Martin Tobin - agreed with this conclusion.

In Dr Rich’s assessment, he reminded the jury, there was no evidence that the death originated from the heart.

"Over the course of this case you’ve heard a lot of things that didn’t happen, hypotheticals that don’t apply. You know why George Floyd died," Schleicher says pointedly.

Image source, Court TV

Throughout the trial Derek Chauvin has remained largely silent and inscrutable, sitting beside his lead attorney Eric Nelson and taking regular notes on a yellow legal pad.

Last week, he declined an opportunity to take the witness stand, instead invoking his constitutional right to not answer questions for fear of self-incrimination, commonly known as "pleading the fifth amendment".

Today, as prosecutors deliver their closing arguments, Chauvin is seen again taking note after note on the pad in front of him, barely looking up from his writing.

Schleicher has addressed one of the key arguments made by the defence last week.

The defence called a retired pathologist who suggested that heart disease and drug use contributed to Floyd's death.

In a combative tone, Schleicher dismisses these suggestions as "nonsense".

"He chose that moment to die of heart disease? Is that common sense or is that nonsense?" Schleicher asks the jury.

"You know that George Floyd struggled with drug addiction. You know that requires a tolerance. You know what the toxicology report says in terms of the levels [of drugs in his system] and you know what the testimony was about that."

"He didn’t die of a drug overdose. That’s not common sense, that’s nonsense. Believe your eyes - what you saw happen, happened."

Schleicher, once again, argues that it was Chauvin's restraint of Floyd that caused his death.

"The defendant pressed down on George Floyd so his lungs did not have the room to breathe," Schleicher says.

The prosecution is continuing to place Derek Chauvin's actions in the context of his training.

As witnesses have testified, Chauvin - who was a 19-year veteran of the Minneapolis police force - had received 40 hours of training plus refresher courses.

Steve Schleicher says "he chose pride over policing" because he was not going to let George Floyd challenge his authority or to allow the crowd to dictate his behaviour.

Schleicher reminds the jury of eyewitness Charles McMillian, who repeatedly told Floyd to get in the car because "you can't win".

At the time, Floyd told McMillian he wasn't trying to win, and Schleicher points out "he looked like he had seen a monster" and was clearly afraid to get into the car.

"A reasonable officer in the defendant's position should have recognised and understood he wasn’t trying to escape," says Schleicher.

"Use your common sense. Believe your eyes. What you saw, you saw."

Prosecutor Steve Schleicher is still working hard to emphasise that the state's case is not aimed at the police as a whole, but at one former officer.

Derek Chauvin "betrayed the badge and everything it stood for", Schleicher says. "He did what he did on purpose and it killed George Floyd."

The prosecution reminds the jury of the de-escalation techniques that police officers are supposed to rely on - a frequent topic at this trial.

How Chauvin behaved is "not how they're [police] trained, it's not following the rules", Schleicher says.

The prosecutor also earlier hearkened back to the testimony of Minneapolis Police Chief Medaria Arradondo, who said the way Chauvin restrained Floyd was not in line with training and "certainly not part of our ethics and our values".

Tara McKelvey
BBC News, Minneapolis

Outside the courtroom, shops are boarded up, and many businesses are closed.

But one vendor, Dave Magnuson, who sells Chicago-style hot dogs and pretzels in a mall near the courthouse, has kept his place open.

Leaning against a counter, Magnuson tells me that he is waiting for a verdict, with trepidation. The only other time that he can remember being this anxious, he says, was after the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001 in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania.

Back then, no one knew whether another attack would follow, in another US city.

"There were so many unknowns at that point. We had never been through that before," he says, throwing out his hands. "Sort of like this."

Once the verdict is announced, he says, there could be more protests and violence. He would have to leave his shop quickly.

"I can be out of here in 20 minutes," he says. "Everything just goes in the cooler."

Today, like others in the downtown area, he is waiting for an announcement from the courthouse, and wondering what will come next.

Image source, Reuters

Prosecutor Steve Schleicher is revisiting the defence's argument that George Floyd did not comply with their orders.

He points out officers told him to "get the [expletive] out" of his car within moments of the initial interaction.

He says Floyd did not resist when the officers took him out of his car, set him down on the curb and took him towards their squad car.

But, he adds, Floyd was "a big guy" and the back of the car likely looked like "a cage" to him.

“They wanted him to get into the back of this little car, and he just wasn’t able to do it. He just wasn’t able to do it,” says Schleicher.

Floyd repeatedly told officers he had anxiety and claustrophobia, and the prosecution is arguing that Derek Chauvin and his fellow officers had enough crisis intervention training to recognise Floyd was in duress.

Schleicher is making a last attempt to convince the jury that the prosecution's case is not anti-police.

"This is not a prosecution of the police, this is a prosecution of the defendant," he says, referring to Chauvin.

"There's nothing worse for good police than bad police."

He says the way in which Chauvin knelt on Floyd's neck for more than nine minutes "killed him". He emphasises the need for proper training of officers.

"Policing is a most noble profession," he continues.

"This is not an anti-police prosecution. It's a pro-police prosecution."

George Floyd's death led to worldwide protests, with many calling for an overhaul of police departments and a "defunding" of police.

In his closing argument, Schleicher is attempting to convince the jury that the prosecution's case is not against all police, but against one "bad" cop: Derek Chauvin.

George Floyd death: Seven solutions to US police problems