Meikles Limited (MEIK.zw) listed on the Zimbabwe Stock Exchange under the Industrial holding sector has released it’s 2008 annual report.For more information about Meikles Limited (MEIK.zw) reports, abridged reports, interim earnings results and earnings presentations, visit the Meikles Limited (MEIK.zw) company page on AfricanFinancials.Document: Meikles Limited (MEIK.zw) 2008 annual report.Company ProfileMeikles Limited is an established 100-year old company in Zimbabwe primarily invested in the agriculture, hotels and retail sector. The company operates six business segments; hospitality, retail stores which include department stores, supermarkets and wholesalers, and agricultural, financial services and security. Its well-known brands include the Meikles Hotel, Victoria Falls Hotel, TM Supermarkets, Meikles Stores and Tanganda Tea which produces, packs and distributes Zimbabwe’s famous tea brand aswell as Tinga Mira, a bottled spring water brand. Tanganda Tea Company also owns estates that produce avocados and macadamia nuts. Meikles Limited has department stores in three major cities in Zimbabwe which includes Barbours department store in Harare; and has a national footprint with 50 retail stores in towns and cities throughout Zimbabwe. Meikles Limited recently expanded into the mining and guarding sector and owns Meikles Centar Mining and Meikles Guard Services (Private) Limited in Zimbabwe. Meikles Financial Services offers mobile financial solutions and bill payment services to the retail and commercial sector in Zimbabwe; under the brand name My Cash. Meikles Limited is listed on the Zimbabwe Stock Exchange
About Howard Lake Howard Lake is a digital fundraising entrepreneur. Publisher of UK Fundraising, the world’s first web resource for professional fundraisers, since 1994. Trainer and consultant in digital fundraising. Founder of Fundraising Camp and co-founder of GoodJobs.org.uk. Researching massive growth in giving. He concludes that “there are four bids that are worth considering”. He will shortly be publishing his own submission to ICANN, and asks non-profits to respond and take action on it.His article ends with the conclusion that “I strongly believe that whoever is chosen to control the domain names of nonprofit organizations will need to be a genuine public trust. Most of these bids are not. They are land grabs.”Read The Power of Names: Why the .org Registry Matters by Michael C. Gilbert. Who controls the .org registry matters to all non-profits Howard Lake | 9 August 2002 | News The organisation that wins the right to control the .org registry at the end of this year will have tremendous power over non-profits on the Internet.Yet, according to Michael Gilbert of SocialEcology.org, “almost no non-profits are paying the least bit of attention.” Gilbert has written a plea to non-profits to take an interest and make their voice heard. His article “The Power of Names: Why the .org Registry Matters” appears on his Nonprofit Online News Web site.He analyses the 11 bids being made to manage the .org registry. Four he sees as straight for-profit proposals, and argues that they should not be awarded control because they are for-profit. He is sceptical of four bids “that look to me like for-profit ventures, hiding behind a nonprofit shell or partnership.” For example, of the DotOrg Foundation he says: “it reads to me as though its primary purpose is to help the aggressive Kintera Corporation sell more services to nonprofits.” Advertisement 14 total views, 1 views today AddThis Sharing ButtonsShare to TwitterTwitterShare to FacebookFacebookShare to LinkedInLinkedInShare to EmailEmailShare to WhatsAppWhatsAppShare to MessengerMessengerShare to MoreAddThis AddThis Sharing ButtonsShare to TwitterTwitterShare to FacebookFacebookShare to LinkedInLinkedInShare to EmailEmailShare to WhatsAppWhatsAppShare to MessengerMessengerShare to MoreAddThis
The American Soybean Association President says retaliation by China against U.S. tariffs would undercut prices received by soybean farmers, and further hurt a depressed farm economy. Testifying to lawmakers Thursday, ASA President John Heisdorffer asked members of Congress to help soybean farmers “be part of the solution,” rather than “collateral damage.” Heisdorffer, an Iowa farmer, highlighted the importance of maintaining China as a robust market for U.S. soybean exports, and the lasting effects implemented tariffs and a trade war would have on soybean farmers.Farm income has fallen by 40 percent since 2013, and Heisdorffer says “farmers cannot absorb additional hits to the farm economy.” In 2017, China imported 1.4 billion bushels of U.S. soybeans, 62 percent of total U.S. exports and nearly one-third of U.S. annual soy production. According to a study conducted by Purdue University, soybean exports to China could drop dramatically if China chooses to impose a 25 percent tariff on U.S. soybeans.Listen to our exclusive interview with ASA Chairman Ron Moore here Facebook Twitter By Hoosier Ag Today – Apr 12, 2018 SHARE ASA President Testifies to Congress Regarding Trade Tariffs SHARE Facebook Twitter Home Indiana Agriculture News ASA President Testifies to Congress Regarding Trade Tariffs Previous articleClosing CommentsNext articleTrump Tells Trade Team to Look Into Rejoining TPP Hoosier Ag Today
WhatsApp Previous articleUN: Over 2 million Yemeni children may starve in 2021Next articleIHP Capital Partners Acquires 4.9-Acre Infill Site for New Residential Development in North San Diego County Digital AIM Web Support Facebook Facebook Twitter Pinterest WhatsApp Pinterest TAGS Twitter By Digital AIM Web Support – February 12, 2021 Altria Group Joins The Valuable 500 in Support of Individuals with Disabilities Local NewsBusiness
The Week Ahead: Nearing the Forbearance Exit 2 days ago in Daily Dose, Featured, Investment, Market Studies, News, Print Features Previous: FinTech’s Influence on Home Financing Next: Why Did Mortgage Delinquencies Rise? Servicing Success, One Step at a Time Tagged with: Banks Finances Servicing Banks Finances Servicing 2019-07-22 Seth Welborn Print This Post Demand Propels Home Prices Upward 2 days ago July 22, 2019 1,951 Views Subscribe Related Articles Courtney Thompson is the SVP and Director of Default Servicing Operations for Flagstar Bank. Thompson is responsible for all consumer default assets at Flagstar, including default call center and the design and operation of Flagstar Bank’s component default servicing oversight model—including the management of the specialty servicing vendor partners as well as Flagstar’s crossfunctional oversight team. Governmental Measures Target Expanded Access to Affordable Housing 2 days ago Data Provider Black Knight to Acquire Top of Mind 2 days ago Home / Daily Dose / Servicing Success, One Step at a Time The Best Markets For Residential Property Investors 2 days ago Demand Propels Home Prices Upward 2 days ago Servicers Navigate the Post-Pandemic World 2 days ago Share Save About Author: Courtney Thompson The Best Markets For Residential Property Investors 2 days ago Servicers Navigate the Post-Pandemic World 2 days ago Data Provider Black Knight to Acquire Top of Mind 2 days ago Governmental Measures Target Expanded Access to Affordable Housing 2 days ago Sign up for DS News Daily With default volumes reaching historical lows, servicers nationwide are looking to get their houses in order by enhancing control environments, tightening processes, and redesigning or implementing new technologies to manage operations more efficiently while mitigating the risk to scale quickly in the next market downturn. While there is a massive push in the industry to tech-up with process automation, artificial intelligence, robotics, big data solutions, and the latest and greatest workflow tools, the cost to implement is high, the business requirements are complicated, and people with the right skills required to implement them are either non-existent or in excruciatingly high demand, especially with the default workforce steadily shrinking to meet operational bottom lines. We have learned through trial and error that sometimes the high-cost of technological enhancement is the best answer. For instance, after conducting a deep dive into all of the available end-to-end loss mitigation options for better consistency and control in the loss mitigation workflow, Flagstar was unable to find a solution that met our goals. As a result, we are committing substantial resources to build our a proprietary tool that will be nimble enough to keep up with the bank’s conservative perspective on loss mitigation requirements, while maintaining the quality of a thorough evaluation with a robust audit package to meet regulatory needs in advance of a request. We anticipate that our solution will eliminate 10 days from the final conversion process but remain so user-friendly that even I could underwrite a loss mitigation application. Learning From the BestIn the stability that a lower volume environment created, the Flagstar default team swapped our jackets for cardigans and slippers and took the time to develop better solutions to manage our bottom line. Taking a page out of philosophical history (also a luxury in the mortgage servicing business), we leveraged Occam’s Razor and tried our best not to overcomplicate it. Academically credited to William of Ockham, a 13-14th-century friar, philosopher, and theologian, Occam’s Razor supposes that the best strategy among competing hypotheses is the one with the fewest assumptions. Others agree. Aristotle is first credited with the idea that, when capturing the inherent value in the simple solution, “we may assume the superiority, other things being equal, of the demonstration which derives from fewer postulates or hypotheses.”The forefather of infectious disease, Theodore Woodward, once stated, “When you hear hoofbeats, think of horses, not zebras.” Albert Einstein’s perspective? “Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler.”Said another way, the simplest solution is often the correct one. The best news? We found that adopting this strategy in default servicing operations is a veritable gold mine. We looked at the rules, the people, our P&L, our service providers, and our customers. We evaluated expensive technologies and cringed at implementation calendars. We scratched our heads. And then, we endeavored to define a series of small wins—simple changes—that have yielded significant returns. Keep It SimpleMost significant among the small wins in our new strategy was connecting our two favorite groups of lawyers—our internal legal department and our business line foreclosure/bankruptcy attorney network (the “business line attorney network”). At many servicers, the foreclosure and bankruptcy departments carry the responsibility to manage the contested foreclosure or adversary proceedings, by leveraging the business line foreclosure and bankruptcy attorney network managed by the business. For matters that fall outside the general contested rubric, the bank’s in-house legal department will review the matter to determine whether its intervention of a file is warranted—based on risk factors such as a proactive claim against the bank. If the matter meets the criteria and is escalated, then the legal department will take jurisdiction and manage the matter through their process. In turn, the legal department appropriately leverages their network of attorneys to manage these files—these attorneys are typically not in the business line foreclosure and bankruptcy attorney network and carry a multi-state or national presence. Although this strategy generally works, we learned that it was not the best approach in all cases.When we evaluated our litigation expense budget and the litigated matters portfolio for default loans, we found it largely consisted of cases arising from a foreclosure or bankruptcy matter, and the crux of that litigation was residing within the foreclosure or bankruptcy matter itself—comprised of an attempt to avoid the underlying foreclosure. We realized that, instead of leaving the foreclosure avoidance matters with the business line attorney network firm managing the actual foreclosure or bankruptcy, we were moving them to another law firm—one residing in the corporate legal department network. Typically, these firms are used to charging the hirer hourly rates to support the management of matters of much greater diversity and complexity (requiring independent research, and time spent by associates), and of much higher operational, reputational, or financial risk to the bank. In partnership with our trusted legal department partners, we posed a simple hypothesis, which becomes a key cost savings initiative that was put into action through a pilot program wherein we believe, conservatively, that we will reduce our litigation expense budget by at least 30% for these matters within the next year. The Case for Cost SavingsWhat if we leveraged the line of business attorney network (the litigation department at an assigned foreclosure firm) instead of the corporate legal department network (frequently national firms, with enhanced cost structures)? Said another way, what if we did nothing and left the cases where they were? Total timeline to implement: Hours. Comprised of coordinating the right partners both internally and externally, and conducting the steps necessary for the legal department to leverage the business unit attorney network. Total cost to implement: $0The total effort on behalf of the BU: NothingKey factors leading to the success of this program include: It is not only what you know, but who you know that is important in matters having a geographic origin. Default matters are sensitive, deserve compassion, and are frequently litigated in the counties and municipalities where our customers live. Banks and servicers are outsiders, and when it comes to default, especially, we are often viewed as the bad guy. Frequently, the outcome of a matter is dependent not only on the merits of a case, but also on geography, local practice, judicial disposition, judicial appointment practice, and many other characteristics tied to the community wherein they are litigated. Firms in your business foreclosure and bankruptcy network have inherent ties to the states, communities, and municipalities in which they operate. Compared to a firm with a multi-state or national presence who may either hire a local attorney to achieve the above objectives (thus increasing the cost); or send a young associate to a neighboring state where they happen to have a bar card to manage the matter in an unfamiliar court—which can be detrimental and undermine the increased expenditure. The firm in the business line attorney network has both a history with the file and a vested interest in the litigation resolving well. Foreclosure avoidance lawsuits, more often than not, arise out of an attempt by a borrower to delay what is often inevitable, the loss of their home through a foreclosure process. Given the fact that real harm to borrowers in servicing is rare, frequently borrower’s counsels are left with the only strategy they have to accomplish their clients’ goals. They challenge the veracity of the underlying foreclosure process itself, whether at the servicer or at the foreclosure firm. We have learned that the most interested party in defending a compliant foreclosure, is the party conducting it—the foreclosure firm used in the underlying foreclosure action. The foreclosure firm is responsible for ensuring under their state’s legal framework and federal law that files are in ship shape at every juncture of the process. Who better to address challenges to the underlying action, then the firm that did the doing? Additionally, the business line firms are incentivized to succeed because their business depends on client service to generate referrals. With low default volume, the competition is fiercer than ever, and the business line firms are keenly aware that the stakes are high. Would you rather pay a legal expert $20,000 to resolve your lawsuit, or a foreclosure legal expert $10,000 to resolve your lawsuit? This is neither news nor a shocking revelation. Your business line foreclosure and bankruptcy attorney network are regulated by governmental agencies requiring caps on the fees and expenses associated with litigation. Their rates are fundamentally lower. In a high-level cost analysis of our legal spend in 2018, we found that, for an average foreclosure avoidance matter, we would spend between $15,000 and $25,000 on legal fees (on matters not going to trial). Applying the same files to the capped foreclosure/bankruptcy firm hourly rate structure would yield at 30-50% savings, by simply keeping the file with the local experts—the business line firms. Assuming you close 100 matters in a year, this initiative could save you $500,000 annually, with zero overhead associated with changing this strategy. Et cetera. While the straightforward math and the limited implementation cost yields a direct financial benefit to the bottom line, there are some potential intrinsic benefits to leveraging the business line attorney. We can also hypothesize cost savings in the approach to file management. Namely, your foreclosure and bankruptcy network firms are in the business of practicing foreclosure and bankruptcy law—it is what they know. Further, in any given state, this also means that you are allowed to have a much higher expectation of efficiency with the management of your matter—this is what they do. Your business line foreclosure and bankruptcy attorney network should know the players (both plaintiff’s counsel, and the judiciary), have the experience with the right arguments to plug and play into your matters (brief banks), and have previously synthesized almost every legal issue that could be presented. In short, you should not be billed for excess legal research, motion practice, and brief writing. Finally, and the key to the underlying resolution of these matters, they tend to have a higher level of expertise with investor/insurer level requirements—they recognize the stakeholders in the case. The business-line firm’s operations are evaluated by these requirements, and thus, the firm’s ability to maintain a viable practice depends on this knowledge. As more than half of these matters resolve with some sort of loss mitigation solution, this is important. In potential contrast, the legal department networks are frequently comprised of lawyers from national firms, with a recognizable name, with smart and capable lawyers from notable law schools; they will likely do a good job. These service providers are legal experts, no doubt. However, because they are typically used to managing larger, high-stakes, high-dollar matters, they are not spending their hours becoming experts in state-level foreclosure matters, developing the brief banks, or developing a relationship with the local bar. Moreover, it doesn’t make financial sense for these firms (with multiple locations, and generally higher paid associates), to reduce their hourly rates for less complex matters. There are cases that come through the door that will be best managed by these firms and some that aren’t. Knowing the difference is key.In philosophy, a razor is a rule of thumb that allows one to avoid unnecessary actions. In default servicing, the best solution is often the quickest solution, which has a clear potential of mitigating risk and reducing cost. We would suggest “doing nothing” like us, and adding your business line foreclosure and bankruptcy firms to your legal department network.
Gardai continue to investigate Kilmacrennan fire A DUP member of the Dungannon South Tyrone Council says he is the victim of a concerted series of attacks, and the SDLP and Sinn Fein are not using their influence enough to stop it.Blackwater Cllr Sammy Brush, who is based in Ballygawley, says an attack on his car over the weekend was the 40th he has had to endure.Police have confirmed that Councillor Sammy Brush’s car was “physically moved” overnight and collided with another parked car in Ballygawley.It is believed the attackers may have used a tractor to move the car.Last week, the bonnet of his car was damaged in an overnight attack.Cllr Brush said it was part of an on-going campaign, and accused nationalist and republican politicians in the area of not doing enough to stop these incidents.Dungannon based MLA Maurice Morrow said this is the 40th such attack on Cllr Brush. He added this clearly took a degree of pre-planning, and there is no way it was not witnessed. By admin – August 24, 2014 WhatsApp Twitter Google+ Twitter News Man arrested on suspicion of drugs and criminal property offences in Derry WhatsApp RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR Pinterest 365 additional cases of Covid-19 in Republic Further drop in people receiving PUP in Donegal Previous articleTwo men arrested following Strabane attack are freed without chargeNext articleKerry and Mayo to replay after epic semi final admin Facebook Main Evening News, Sport and Obituaries Tuesday May 25th Ballygawley DUP councillor targeted for the 40th time Google+ Facebook 75 positive cases of Covid confirmed in North Pinterest
Pool via ABC NewsBy BILL HUTCHINSON, ABC News(MINNEAPOLIS) — A Minneapolis firefighter broke down in tears on Tuesday at the murder trial of Derek Chauvin, testifying that she felt helpless and “desperate” when the police prevented her from giving medical aid to George Floyd as he lay handcuffed on the ground in physical distress with the weight of three police officers on top of him.Genevieve Hansen, 28, who has been a firefighter for two years and holds both state and national certifications in cardiopulmonary resuscitation, said that when she first noticed Floyd’s condition as she walked up to the scene of his attempted arrest on May 25, 2020, she was immediately concerned.“I was concerned to see a handcuffed man who was not moving with officers with their whole body weight on his back and a crowd that was stressed out,” Hansen, wearing her dress firefighter’s uniform, testified in Hennepin County District Court in Minneapolis.She said she was off duty that day and not in uniform when she walked over to the officers, identified herself as a firefighter and asked if she could provide medical help or at least show them how to check for a pulse and perform first aid.“It didn’t take me long to realize that he had an altered level of consciousness,” she said of Floyd. “In our training, that is the first time that somebody needs medical attention. So my attention moved from Mr. Floyd to how can I gain access to this patient and give him medical attention or direct the officers.”Hansen described Floyd’s face as “puffy and swollen” and that she saw fluid she assumed was urine coming from Floyd’s body, explaining that patients often release their bladder when they die.“What I needed to know is whether or not he had a pulse anymore,” she said.Hansen said she was immediately ordered by officer Tou Thao to get on the sidewalk and was told “if you really are a Minneapolis firefighter you know better than to get involved.”“First I was worried that he wasn’t going to believe me and not let me help,” she said. “That’s not right. That’s exactly what I should have done. There was no medical assistance on scene and I got there and I could have given medical assistance.”Instead, she said she could only watch as Floyd’s life faded away and call 911 to report what she had just witnessed.When prosecutor Matthew Frank asked how it made her feel to not be allowed to help Floyd, Hansen said, “totally distressed.”“In my memory, I tried different tactics of calm and reasoning. I tried to be assertive. I pleaded and was desperate,” Hansen said breaking into tears.She said she began raising her voice and directed foul language at the officers.“I was desperate to help and wasn’t getting what I needed to do, which was gaining access,” she said.She said that at the same time she saw Chauvin continuing to press his knee into the back of Floyd’s neck.Hansen, who video recorded some of the episode, said Chauvin, who did not speak to her, “seemed very comfortable” with the majority of his weight balanced on top of Floyd’s neck.“In my memory, he had his hand in his pocket he looked so comfortable,” Hansen said.Under cross-examination from Chauvin’s attorney, Eric Nelson, Hansen conceded that she didn’t know that paramedics had already been called and that she was unaware if the officers on top of Floyd had checked his pulse.Nelson also asked if she and the other bystanders were getting angry and hostile toward the officers.“I don’t know if you’ve seen anyone killed but it’s upsetting,” she answered.Nelson objected to her answer and Judge Peter Cahill had it stricken from the record and after dismissing the jury for the day, the judge scolded Hansen for being argumentative with the defense attorney.She is scheduled to return to court on Wednesday to resume her testimony.Chauvin is charged with second-degree attempted murder, third-degree murder and manslaughter. He has pleaded not guilty.He is being tried separately from three other former police officers involved in Floyd’s death. Thao, J. Alexander Kueng and Thomas Lane are each charged with second-degree aiding and abetting felony murder and second-degree aiding and abetting manslaughter. They have pleaded not guilty and are scheduled to go on trial in August.‘He had a cold look, heartless’Also called to testify on Tuesday was a teenage bystander who took a viral video of Chauvin with his knee on Floyd’s neck.To protect her identity, Judge Cahill allowed the young witness, who is now 18, to testify off-camera in the televised trial and to use only her first name, Darnella, during her stint on the witness stand.Asked by prosecutor Jerry Blackwell how her life has changed since she took the 10-minute video and uploaded it on Facebook, she struggled through tears to explain.“When I look at George Floyd, I look at my dad, I look at my brothers, I look at my cousins, my uncles because they’re all Black,” Darnella testified. “And I look at that and I look at how that could have been one of them.”She said she has spent nights agonizing over what she saw on May 25, 2020, and wishes she could have done more to save Floyd, a 46-year-old Black man she had never met.“I stayed up apologizing and apologizing to George Floyd for not doing more and not physically interacting, not saving his life,” Darnella said.She said she came upon the incident while walking her 9-year-old cousin to the Cup Foods store to buy snacks, and asked her cousin to go into the store while she circled back to where police officers had the handcuffed Floyd prone on the ground next to a patrol car. She identified Chauvin in court as the officer she saw with his knee on the back of Floyd’s neck.Darnella said she immediately pulled out her cellphone and started recording video.Asked by Blackwell to describe what she saw, Darnella said, “A man terrified, scared, begging for his life.”“It wasn’t right,” she said. “He was suffering. He was in pain. I heard George Floyd saying, ‘I can’t breathe. Please get off of me.’ He cried for his mom. It seemed like he knew it was over for him.”She said that when she started recording, she was the only bystander around. Soon a crowd gathered and began yelling at the officers to get off of Floyd, she said.Asked by Blackwell if she witnessed any violence at that particular instance, she said, “Yes, from the cops.”She said that the more bystanders pleaded with Chauvin to relent, the more he seemed to use force.“If anything, he was actually kneeling harder. He was shoving his knee into his neck,” she said of Chauvin.She said at one point, Chauvin and a fellow officer, Tou Thao, put their hands on their Mace canister, apparently to prompt the crowd to back up as witnesses grew louder and shouted expletives at the officers. She said nothing the bystanders said to Chauvin seemed to matter.“He just stared at us, looked at us,” she said. “He had a cold look, heartless. He didn’t care.”She said Chauvin refused to let up even when paramedics initially arrived and attempted to check Floyd’s pulse.She said a paramedic “checked his pulse first while Chauvin’s knee still remained on George Floyd’s neck.”Under cross-examination from defense attorney Nelson, Darnella conceded that she did not witness any part of what happened prior to her arrival, nor did she hear the conversations between the officers.Nelson asked her about all the cursing and shouting at the officers from bystanders, asking if the crowd became louder and hostile as the incident went on.“More so as he [Floyd] was becoming more unresponsive,” she said.Darnella’s 9-year-old cousin was also called to testify off-camera. She said that when she emerged from Cup Foods, she saw Chauvin with his knee on Floyd’s neck. When an ambulance arrived, she said she saw paramedics ask Chauvin to get up so they could check Floyd’s pulse.“I was sad and kind of mad cause I felt like he was stopping him from breathing,” she said of Chauvin.Mixed martial arts fighter says Chauvin used ‘blood choke’A professional mixed martial arts fighter who testified in graphic detail about seeing Floyd’s life being squeezed out of him by a “blood choke” returned to the witness stand on Tuesday, presenting the defense with what legal experts said was an uphill battle to discredit him.Donald Williams II — a 5-foot-6, 135-pound bantamweight who fights under the nickname “DWill II” — testified for the prosecution on the first day of the trial. He said he was headed to the Cups Foods store in Minneapolis when he was drawn to a commotion. He said he saw police officers pinning a handcuffed Black man to the ground and Chauvin, who is white, grinding his knee into the back of Floyd’s neck.Williams testified that he has been a competitive wrestler since he was in high school and turned professional mixed martial arts fighter in 2009. Given his training, he was allowed leeway by Hennepin County District Court Judge Peter Cahill to describe the hold he said he recognized Chauvin was using on Floyd.He said Chauvin was using a “blood choke,” applying pressure with his knee on the side of Floyd’s neck and cutting off the blood flowing to his head.“His breathing was getting tremendously heavy and tremendously harder for him to breathe,” Williams said of Floyd. “You actually could hear him, you could see him struggling to actually gasp for air while he was trying to breathe. He barely could move while he was trying to get air.”In his opening argument, prosecutor Blackwell played for the jury a bystander video showing Chauvin with his knee on the back of Floyd’s neck for what he said was 9 minutes and 29 seconds as two other officers helped hold Floyd down. Another, identified as Thao, kept Williams and other witnesses at bay as they pleaded with Chauvin to relent.Blackwell told the jury that Chauvin “betrayed his badge” when he dug his knee into Floyd’s neck “until the very life was squeezed out of him.”Williams said he locked eyes with Chauvin at one point during the street encounter.“He looked at me. It was the only time he looked at me when I said it was a blood choke,” Williams testified.He said Chauvin was also using what fighters call a “shimmy” to tighten his hold on Floyd.Williams added that he had gone fishing earlier that day with his son. Seeing the life drain out of Floyd reminded him of how he suffocated the fish in a plastic bag.He said he saw Floyd “slowly fade away like the fish in the bag” with his eyes rolling back in his head until he stopped begging for his life and went unconscious.During cross-examination, Nelson grilled Williams about the foul language he directed at Chauvin and Thao, asking if he and other bystanders were getting angry at the officers.Williams, who also worked in security and as a nightclub bouncer, said he was angry because the officers were not listening to him. He tried to maintain his “professionalism” and in one instance stepped off the curb to approach the officer only for Thao to place his hand on his chest and direct him back.On direct examination from prosecutor Matthew Frank, Williams said he called 911 after an unresponsive Floyd was taken away from the scene in an ambulance.Asked by Frank, who played Williams’ 911 call for the jury, why he reported what he saw to authorities, Williams replied, “Because I believed I witnessed a murder.”Copyright © 2021, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.