Which independent autopsies were performed and how did their conclusions differ from the official report?
Executive summary
Two autopsies were released after George Floyd’s death: the Hennepin County Medical Examiner’s official autopsy and a separate autopsy commissioned by Floyd’s family conducted by two independent forensic pathologists; both labeled the death a homicide but diverged sharply on mechanism — the county found no physical evidence of strangulation and listed cardiopulmonary arrest complicating restraint and neck compression, while the family’s exam cited asphyxiation from sustained pressure as the cause of death [1] [2].
1. Which independent autopsies were performed
The family of George Floyd commissioned an independent postmortem examination performed by two forensic experts (described in local reporting as independent pathologists retained by the family), and that report was released alongside the Hennepin County Medical Examiner’s official autopsy report [1] [2]. The county autopsy and the family‑commissioned autopsy together became the central medical documents cited in criminal complaints and national coverage [2].
2. How the independent autopsy’s conclusions differed from the official report
Both autopsies concluded the manner of death was homicide, but they differed on the proximate mechanism: the county medical examiner wrote that Floyd died of “cardiopulmonary arrest complicating law enforcement subdual, restraint, and neck compression,” and explicitly reported “no physical findings” to support a diagnosis of traumatic asphyxia or strangulation [1]. By contrast, the family’s independent autopsy concluded Floyd died of “asphyxiation from sustained pressure,” placing primary causal weight on external compression asphyxia rather than the mixed cardiopulmonary and medical factors emphasized by the county [1] [2].
3. Additional differences in ancillary findings (toxicology, heart disease, COVID)
The official report listed other significant medical conditions and findings — including arteriosclerotic and hypertensive heart disease, an enlarged heart, and the presence of fentanyl metabolites, cannabinoids and methamphetamine in toxicology — and noted a prior positive COVID‑19 test as well as recent drug exposures, all of which the county cited as contributing or complicating factors [1] [2]. The family’s report foregrounded external compression as the lethal mechanism and did not center those chronic or toxicologic contributors in the same causal formulation [1] [2].
4. Why expert autopsy opinions can legitimately diverge
Independent autopsies and official medical‑examiner reports frequently reach different emphases or even different proximate causes because the interpretation of external trauma, internal pathology, toxicology, and cardiac disease involves judgment calls about which factors were sufficient, necessary, or merely contributory; medical literature and reviews document regular discrepancies between clinical and autopsy diagnoses and note that autopsy interpretation has inherent uncertainty and occasional disagreement among pathologists [3] [4] [5]. Those methodological realities help explain how two competent examinations can both rule a death a homicide yet disagree about whether asphyxia or a combination of restraint plus cardiopulmonary disease and drug effects constituted the fatal mechanism [3] [5].
5. Alternative perspectives, hidden agendas and reporting limits
Coverage showed competing narratives: the county report’s focus on underlying disease and drugs has been read by some as shifting responsibility away from restraint, while the family‑commissioned autopsy — supported publicly by advocates and attorneys — emphasized a single, arrest‑related cause; both readings carry potential institutional or advocacy agendas that shape which findings are emphasized in public statements [1] [2]. Reporting available here does not include the full, detailed autopsy documents for exhaustive comparison (for example, histology slides, raw toxicology data, or bench notes), so this analysis relies on published summaries and contemporaneous news reporting rather than primary autopsy files [1] [2].
6. Bottom line
Independent experts retained by George Floyd’s family conducted an autopsy that concluded death by asphyxiation from sustained pressure, while the Hennepin County Medical Examiner concluded a homicide from cardiopulmonary arrest complicating restraint and neck compression but found no physical evidence of traumatic asphyxia or strangulation; both called the death a homicide, but they diverged on what mechanism was primary and on the role of underlying disease and drugs [1] [2]. The divergence illustrates both the medical complexity of some deaths and the fact that different experts can read the same body and tests through different forensic frameworks [3] [4].