OK, my mistake. But let's review that context - when faced with police officers is an offender going to increase their culpability and add a new culpability into the mix or are they going to seek to keep their punishment exposure to a minimum?

"I ate too" vs "I ain't do"....

The linguist actually has a point here. It is more likely the second option, again, because to assume the first is to imagine a new entity (in this case, a separate rationalisation outside of the context of the interaction).

As to why you might be seeking to dispute such a moot point (as the question of the case isn't whether Floyd was intoxiated)... I leave that as a problem for the reader.