Chauvin trial - where are we at?

By pretty much all accounts, the prosecution had a rough day. When it appears that the entire team of State attorneys got out-maneuvered and out-smarted by Chauvin's one man team, that says something. Perhaps Court TV will start to revive the idea that the State is purposely throwing the case. 

But after seven days of statements and testimony, where are we at? What has the prosecution proved or attempted to prove so far.

• We have seen a bunch of witnesses to testified as to how the whole ordeal made them feel. We even had a nine year old girl provide testimony that was identical to two additional minors who testified. We also had one self proclaimed nosey older gentleman who broke down crying on the stand. If nothing else, the state has made a good case that most everyone there was upset by what transpired.
• We have seen a whole lot of police officers and such tell us that what Officer Chauvin did was not by the book. But to pretty much a person, they admitted under cross examination that the actual neck restraint is actually a known police move and that the degree of how it is used is generally fluid. The best qualified of the bunch (a trainer) admitted that he has had occasion in the past to hold a suspect down for as long as necessary and that that time might even push upwards of ten minutes depending. On top of that we had a bystander with some MMA training who suggested that Chauvin's knee to the neck was a "blood choke hold". He even claimed to have seen some variant of the move in MMA matches. File that under things that make you go hmmm.
• We have had several medical personnel testify under oath that Floyd died of asphyxiation with implication that it was due to some form of strangulation or choke. Under direct they downplayed the idea that Floyd could have been suffering from a drug overdose, but under cross examination they seemed unable to draw any reasonable medical certainty to that opinion. At least one of them admitted that they never received any information or indication that there was drug use at the time they examined Floyd, so they hadn't considered it. This particular witness even admitted that much of what he saw in the examination was consistent with a possible opioid overdose.

Now, we are only in the infancy of this trial and one has to figure that the prosecution has better witnesses in their back pocket. Certainly would want to save their best for last as they say. But I think it's fair to say that they are a long way from proving their case beyond a reasonable doubt. One might even suggest that an honest judge would have to consider if the state met any part of it's burden if they rested tomorrow. They have spent more time trying to prove that Chauvin was acting out of line with proper procedure than actually trying to prove that he committed the sort of assault necessary to convict, much less that that assault actually murdered someone. They seem highly motivated to appeal to the emotions of the jury, without appealing much to any logic. 

What does the prosecution need (in my humble opinion) to start to push towards proof beyond reasonable doubt. The first would be more tangible evidence and less opinions. Let's see the medical evidence that points to strangulation, rather than clearly well rehearsed opinions. Let's see some objective third party medical research that shows that not only can someone safely ingest the amount of drugs that Floyd took, but that it's unlikely beyond any reasonable association to have caused his problems. Let's see some other known examples of this knee to the neck restraint resulting in strangulation or death. This cannot possibly be the very first knee to the neck strangulation murder every committed or tried, can it? 

Again, we have a long ways to go. But so far this is more O.J. Simpson, George Zimmerman, than anything else. Which is to say that there are ton of people convinced he is guilty, but it's very possible that the members of the jury who are actually paying close attention to the details are not necessarily drawing that same conclusion.