WEBVTT - Getting a Conviction in the George Floyd Case 0:00:00.560 --> 0:00:10.520 This is Bloombird Law with June Grassoe from Bloomberg Radio. 0:00:07.840 --> 0:00:14.240 Up across this country, thousands of people marched day after 0:00:14.360 --> 0:00:17.560 day to protest the death of George Floyd in police 0:00:17.600 --> 0:00:21.640 custody and racial injustice, And on Wednesday, many of them 0:00:21.680 --> 0:00:25.560 heard something they've been waiting for. The Minnesota Attorney General, 0:00:25.640 --> 0:00:30.000 Keith Ellison announced tougher charges against the former police officer 0:00:30.280 --> 0:00:33.559 who was seen in the now notorious video pinning Floyd 0:00:33.600 --> 0:00:36.479 to the pavement with his knee, and new charges against 0:00:36.479 --> 0:00:40.200 the three other police officers involved. But Ellison warned about 0:00:40.200 --> 0:00:44.000 the difficulties in getting a jury to convict police officers. 0:00:44.360 --> 0:00:48.280 Trying this case will not be an easy thing. Winning 0:00:48.280 --> 0:00:52.879 a conviction will be hard. In fact, County Attorney Freeman 0:00:53.040 --> 0:00:56.840 is the only prosecutor in the state of Minnesota who 0:00:56.880 --> 0:01:01.680 has successfully convicted a police officer for murder. Joining me 0:01:01.720 --> 0:01:05.920 as former federal prosecutor Elie Honig of Loewenstein Sandler Elly, 0:01:06.000 --> 0:01:09.720 Let's talk about how this was handled. Prosecutors initially charged 0:01:09.840 --> 0:01:12.920 just the one officer with a lesser charge. Could they 0:01:12.959 --> 0:01:16.160 have brought these new charges against all four officers from 0:01:16.160 --> 0:01:20.440 the start and perhaps helped to quail some of the protests. Yeah, June, 0:01:20.440 --> 0:01:22.560 they could have charged this as a second degree murder 0:01:22.560 --> 0:01:24.640 from the start, And I wrote a piece the day 0:01:24.680 --> 0:01:26.840 after the initial charge came out saying they should have 0:01:27.040 --> 0:01:29.760 charged second degree from the start. I'm not sure what 0:01:29.880 --> 0:01:31.720 impact that would have had on the riots. That's a 0:01:31.760 --> 0:01:34.680 complicated question. So the initial charge came from, This is 0:01:34.760 --> 0:01:38.319 important to understand from the Kennepin County Attorney, which is 0:01:38.319 --> 0:01:42.080 sort of the local DA, essentially a county level prosecutor, 0:01:42.319 --> 0:01:45.360 and I had some real questions about his approach. If 0:01:45.360 --> 0:01:47.960 you looked at that complaint, the initial complaints, it was 0:01:48.040 --> 0:01:51.680 baffling in some ways. He left out really important evidence 0:01:51.920 --> 0:01:55.720 of guilt. For example, the initial complaint lists some of 0:01:55.720 --> 0:01:58.720 the things that George Floyd said while he was pinned 0:01:58.720 --> 0:02:00.920 down by the officers knee to his neck, but it 0:02:01.040 --> 0:02:03.760 omits the most important things he said, which where I 0:02:03.800 --> 0:02:06.600 can't breathe and please don't kill me. As a prosecutor, 0:02:06.920 --> 0:02:09.800 that's inexplicable why you would leave that out. So I 0:02:09.880 --> 0:02:12.440 had my doubts about, at a minimum, the competency of 0:02:12.480 --> 0:02:15.320 the Hennepin County Attorney. Now a couple of days after that, 0:02:15.440 --> 0:02:18.799 the Minnesota state Attorney General took over the case, which 0:02:18.800 --> 0:02:21.120 I think was absolutely the right move, and then a 0:02:21.120 --> 0:02:24.880 few days after that he added a second degree murder charge, 0:02:24.880 --> 0:02:27.000 which I think was the right move. I think it's 0:02:27.000 --> 0:02:29.560 supported by the evidence and the way that the a 0:02:29.760 --> 0:02:33.040 G charge that second degree count. It's smart, it's clever, 0:02:33.120 --> 0:02:36.359 it's tactically smart. There's two ways you can prove a 0:02:36.440 --> 0:02:39.680 second degree murder charge under Minnesota law. The harder way 0:02:40.080 --> 0:02:42.880 is to prove an intentional killing. That's not the way 0:02:42.919 --> 0:02:45.839 he charged it. The easier way is to prove there 0:02:45.880 --> 0:02:49.200 was an intentional assault that resulted in a killing, and 0:02:49.240 --> 0:02:51.919 he charged it that way. So I think he's doing 0:02:51.960 --> 0:02:54.760 what every prosecutor should do. You look for the highest, 0:02:54.840 --> 0:02:58.760 most serious applicable charge that you feel confident you can prove, 0:02:59.440 --> 0:03:02.840 and so at trial, the jury will have the choice 0:03:03.120 --> 0:03:07.320 of finding the lesser included charge exactly. That's very important. 0:03:07.360 --> 0:03:10.800 Understand people hear this phrase lesser included offenses. So it's 0:03:10.840 --> 0:03:12.919 not going to be all or nothing yet or no 0:03:13.080 --> 0:03:16.000 on that second degree count, and that's it. Even if 0:03:16.040 --> 0:03:19.040 the jury finds not guilty or can't reach a verdict 0:03:19.040 --> 0:03:22.320 of guilty on the second degree charge, they still have 0:03:22.400 --> 0:03:25.480 the option to convict on the lower charges, including the 0:03:25.560 --> 0:03:27.320 third degree charge, the same one that was in the 0:03:27.360 --> 0:03:30.960 first complaint, and an even lesser manslaughter charge. So there 0:03:30.960 --> 0:03:33.560 are sort of safety net options here against from the 0:03:33.560 --> 0:03:37.000 prosecutor's point of view. Now, the other three officers have 0:03:37.120 --> 0:03:39.920 been charged with aiding and abetting second degree murder and 0:03:40.040 --> 0:03:43.920 aiding and abetting second degree manslaughter. In terms of proof 0:03:43.960 --> 0:03:47.120 at trial, what does the prosecutor have to prove? So 0:03:47.280 --> 0:03:49.440 aiding and abetting is an important concept. I used to 0:03:49.520 --> 0:03:52.160 charge it all the time as a prosecutor, and essentially 0:03:52.160 --> 0:03:54.720 the basic concept is a simple one. If you help 0:03:54.840 --> 0:03:57.360 someone else commit a crime, even in some small way 0:03:57.440 --> 0:04:00.360 knowingly you have to know what's going on, then you 0:04:00.480 --> 0:04:03.160 too are just as liable as the person who commits 0:04:03.200 --> 0:04:05.600 the crime with his own hands. Now the proof is 0:04:05.640 --> 0:04:09.160 going to be trickier on the other three police officers, 0:04:09.160 --> 0:04:11.560 because for each one of them, the prosecutors going to 0:04:11.640 --> 0:04:13.760 have to prove more than just the fact that the 0:04:13.760 --> 0:04:17.200 person was present. There's actually a defense called me or presents. 0:04:17.240 --> 0:04:19.440 In other words, you will hear some of these police officers, 0:04:19.520 --> 0:04:22.240 I believe, defend themselves by saying yes, I was there, Yes, 0:04:22.279 --> 0:04:24.640 I was present, but I was merely present, meaning I 0:04:24.680 --> 0:04:28.160 did not do anything to knowingly assist in this assault 0:04:28.200 --> 0:04:30.479 and the resulting debt. And so the prosecutors are going 0:04:30.560 --> 0:04:32.000 to have to really break it down for the jury 0:04:32.000 --> 0:04:34.080 and say for each of these officers. They're not gonna 0:04:34.080 --> 0:04:35.520 be able to lump of together. They're going to have 0:04:35.600 --> 0:04:38.240 to say, officer a officer, the officer, see, here's where 0:04:38.279 --> 0:04:40.520 he was at this moment, Here's what he did, Here's 0:04:40.520 --> 0:04:42.560 what he was able to see and hear, Here's what 0:04:42.640 --> 0:04:45.080 he did and did not do. And you could end 0:04:45.160 --> 0:04:48.520 up with varying degrees of proof against the varying officers. 0:04:48.600 --> 0:04:51.400 For example, one of the officers in the initial complaint, 0:04:51.400 --> 0:04:54.159 it says he said, shouldn't we roll? Meaning Mr Floyd, 0:04:54.160 --> 0:04:56.400 shouldn't we roll him on his side? And at one 0:04:56.400 --> 0:04:58.440 point he says I should take his pulse. I mean, 0:04:58.480 --> 0:05:01.040 that's gonna be a harder charge to make than against 0:05:01.040 --> 0:05:04.240 some of the other officers. But things like helping to 0:05:04.279 --> 0:05:06.960 pull George Floyd out of a car, which appeared to 0:05:07.000 --> 0:05:09.600 have happened because the police car, the other officers who 0:05:09.680 --> 0:05:12.080 knelt on top of George Floyd, that's going to be 0:05:12.080 --> 0:05:14.840 the kind of evidence prosecutors are looking at. Let's talk 0:05:14.880 --> 0:05:19.039 about the medical examiners reports, because there are two medical 0:05:19.080 --> 0:05:23.080 examiners reports, and there are differences in them. They both 0:05:23.120 --> 0:05:26.560 conclude it was homicide. Tell us about the differences and 0:05:26.720 --> 0:05:30.120 how the defense might use that. Yeah, this is a boy. 0:05:30.279 --> 0:05:32.440 As a prosecutor, you just sort of roll your eyes 0:05:32.440 --> 0:05:35.000 and go off, No, not this, because you never want 0:05:35.080 --> 0:05:39.320 competing medical examiners reports because then it becomes an issue 0:05:39.320 --> 0:05:41.600 in the case when it doesn't really need to be. So, 0:05:41.760 --> 0:05:44.240 as I understand, one of the reports concluded that the 0:05:44.279 --> 0:05:47.359 cause of death was essentially a heart attack or some 0:05:47.520 --> 0:05:51.039 combination of a pre existing medical condition along with the 0:05:51.080 --> 0:05:53.400 physical actions taken by the police, that it was sort 0:05:53.400 --> 0:05:56.839 of a combination. That was the original report, and then 0:05:56.960 --> 0:05:59.400 the later report, the quote unquote independent report that the 0:05:59.440 --> 0:06:03.479 family had done, says it was asphyxiation, suffocation, cut off 0:06:03.480 --> 0:06:05.719 of oxygen or blood to the brain. That's I think 0:06:05.760 --> 0:06:08.039 the more logical conclusion. So there will be a fight 0:06:08.080 --> 0:06:10.280 over which one of those is real. But the bottom line, though, 0:06:10.400 --> 0:06:13.880 is either way, the prosecution should be fine because even 0:06:13.880 --> 0:06:16.880 if you use the original report, the one that defense 0:06:16.960 --> 0:06:20.240 is going to like that or the mixed causes autopsy report, 0:06:20.440 --> 0:06:22.840 as long as you can show that the officers actions 0:06:22.839 --> 0:06:25.880 were a significant contributing factor. In other words, I would 0:06:25.960 --> 0:06:28.400 argue to a jury, look, George Floyd wasn't going to 0:06:28.520 --> 0:06:31.360 die on that day if not for what this police 0:06:31.400 --> 0:06:35.240 officer did. This police officers actions, even under their theory, 0:06:35.400 --> 0:06:38.599 combined with whatever helps conditions he had to cause the debt. 0:06:38.680 --> 0:06:42.320 So legally that's enough. But it's a needless complication from 0:06:42.320 --> 0:06:45.240 the prosecutor's perspective, and it gave me flashbacks to when 0:06:45.279 --> 0:06:47.520 things like this would happen. You, Oh no, why couldn't 0:06:47.520 --> 0:06:50.080 they just get it right? For first, the Minnesota A. G. 0:06:50.360 --> 0:06:53.440 Keith Allison said that winning a conviction will be hard. 0:06:53.560 --> 0:06:56.200 People will look at this video and say, oh, how 0:06:56.240 --> 0:06:59.040 can this not be a slam dunk case. But in 0:06:59.080 --> 0:07:04.400 the past, we've had lots of cases of police officers 0:07:04.400 --> 0:07:08.480 exerting violence, perhaps leading to death against black men, and 0:07:08.880 --> 0:07:11.760 the juries have acquitted the officers time and time again. 0:07:12.160 --> 0:07:15.760 So how do you get over that? Chief Ellison? The 0:07:15.760 --> 0:07:20.560 Attorney general is nobody should assume that this is going 0:07:20.600 --> 0:07:23.520 to be an easy conviction. And I'll tell you why. 0:07:23.520 --> 0:07:25.840 A couple of reasons Number one. Anyone who tells you 0:07:25.880 --> 0:07:28.320 any jury trial is a sure win or a sure 0:07:28.400 --> 0:07:31.280 loss doesn't know what they're talking about. Haven't tried enough cases. 0:07:31.640 --> 0:07:35.200 No jury trial at certain juries are inherently unpredictable. They 0:07:35.200 --> 0:07:40.320 are comprised of twelve everyday, regular, normal human beings, and 0:07:40.400 --> 0:07:43.400 you have to get them unanimous beyond a reasonable doubt 0:07:43.400 --> 0:07:44.960 in order to convict. I mean, and now, if you're 0:07:44.960 --> 0:07:47.600 trying to get twelve people to agree on a pizza topic, 0:07:47.760 --> 0:07:51.160 that that's hard to do, never mind on something like this. Second, 0:07:51.280 --> 0:07:54.680 police cases tend to be even more unpredictable because people 0:07:54.720 --> 0:07:57.240 tend to sometimes like the police. They're brought up to 0:07:57.480 --> 0:08:00.720 respect and look up to the police. And also police 0:08:00.760 --> 0:08:04.080 officers sometimes have defenses available to them that normal people 0:08:04.080 --> 0:08:06.120 don't have, which is, he was trying to do his job, 0:08:06.200 --> 0:08:08.560 he was in difficult circumstances. And then you add on 0:08:08.640 --> 0:08:10.120 top of that the fact that this is going to 0:08:10.160 --> 0:08:13.840 be a racially charged case and a massive media case, 0:08:14.000 --> 0:08:17.000 and that throws in another element of uncertainty. So if 0:08:17.000 --> 0:08:19.400 you're a prosecutor, you're right, June that there is, of 0:08:19.440 --> 0:08:23.040 course the history of inexplicable and I think unjust verdicts. 0:08:23.080 --> 0:08:27.040 In police cases, and especially in racially charged police cases. 0:08:27.240 --> 0:08:29.760 The best you can do here as a prosecutor is 0:08:29.800 --> 0:08:32.840 to keep your jury focused and just say, this is 0:08:32.840 --> 0:08:35.280 not about all the hype that's out there in the world. 0:08:35.600 --> 0:08:38.920 This is about this videotape and what these police officers 0:08:39.160 --> 0:08:42.280 did to George Floyd on that corner on that day. 0:08:42.559 --> 0:08:44.760 That to keep dry on the ball, focus on it, 0:08:45.000 --> 0:08:48.560 focused on the evidence and that video above. All two 0:08:48.600 --> 0:08:53.560 of the officers have had several misconduct complaints against them. 0:08:53.760 --> 0:08:56.800 Will that come in a trial against them? That's gonna 0:08:56.840 --> 0:08:59.720 be one of the motions that will likely be fought 0:08:59.720 --> 0:09:03.079 out in pre trial motions. I think it's it depends 0:09:03.080 --> 0:09:07.959 on the nature of those prior complaints. Now here's here's 0:09:08.000 --> 0:09:11.959 the problem. The defense lawyers are gonna say, that's prejudicial, 0:09:12.000 --> 0:09:16.360 meaning that's this is evidence of things that my my clients, 0:09:16.480 --> 0:09:19.920 this former police officer had done, did it completely different times, 0:09:19.920 --> 0:09:23.000 completely different places. It's just intended to inflame the jury 0:09:23.000 --> 0:09:26.559 and tell the jury he's generally a bad guy. Um, 0:09:26.559 --> 0:09:29.480 when that's not the relevant legal question. The relevant legal 0:09:29.520 --> 0:09:31.720 question is did he commits this crime on this state? 0:09:32.040 --> 0:09:35.360 I think the prosecutor may are you. Well, but it's 0:09:35.360 --> 0:09:38.360 admissible because it goes to a broader pattern of conduct 0:09:38.400 --> 0:09:41.920 that goes to his m so to speak, his motus operandi. 0:09:42.320 --> 0:09:44.679 But if I had to guess, most judges are going 0:09:44.720 --> 0:09:46.840 to keep that kind of evidence out there, going to 0:09:46.840 --> 0:09:50.760 say it's undo, be prejudicial to the defendant, and it's 0:09:50.920 --> 0:09:54.800 it's not probitive enough. It doesn't tell you enough that's 0:09:54.920 --> 0:10:00.520 relevant about what happened on the date of the charge crime. 0:10:00.559 --> 0:10:02.480 But that's going to be a heated battle in the 0:10:02.520 --> 0:10:06.960 pre trial motions for sure. So, um, the US Justice 0:10:06.960 --> 0:10:11.840 Department Civil Rights Division is also investigating Floyd's death. What 0:10:12.040 --> 0:10:16.400 charges might they be looking at? Yeah, so I think 0:10:16.440 --> 0:10:19.760 they are looking at a charge called deprivation of civil rights. 0:10:19.800 --> 0:10:22.120 It's a little misleading because the word civil is in 0:10:22.160 --> 0:10:25.080 the title. But it is a crime. And here's what 0:10:25.160 --> 0:10:27.360 the crime is. It is a crime for somebody acting 0:10:27.800 --> 0:10:30.920 under color of law. And that just means anyone exercising 0:10:30.920 --> 0:10:35.880 any public authority, police officers, unquestionably qualified. If a person 0:10:35.960 --> 0:10:40.560 acting under color of law deprive somebody, willfully deprive somebody 0:10:40.600 --> 0:10:43.760 of a constitutionally protected right. Now hear you would think, well, 0:10:43.800 --> 0:10:46.520 what's the right I mean it's the right to be alive. 0:10:46.880 --> 0:10:48.880 But the technical way you would phrase that would be 0:10:49.080 --> 0:10:52.839 the right to be free of unreasonable police seizure. So 0:10:53.000 --> 0:10:55.520 we do see cases like this. Sometimes the d o 0:10:55.600 --> 0:10:59.360 J has brought charges against police officers officers for using 0:10:59.360 --> 0:11:02.720 excessive sometimes I think famously they declined to do so 0:11:03.080 --> 0:11:06.079 in the Eric Garner case. Um, but they've given off 0:11:06.200 --> 0:11:08.480 d o J has given off pretty strong signals that 0:11:08.520 --> 0:11:10.880 they intend to charge it. That's how I read the 0:11:10.920 --> 0:11:13.280 statements that are coming out of d o J. And 0:11:13.320 --> 0:11:17.960 so also important to know you can have state charges 0:11:18.040 --> 0:11:22.000 and federal charges simultaneously, or for or for the same crime. 0:11:22.040 --> 0:11:24.920 That's not a double jeopardy problem. The U. S. Supreme 0:11:24.920 --> 0:11:28.080 Court actually just ruled last year in that you can 0:11:28.240 --> 0:11:31.880 have charges in the coming from the federal government's Department 0:11:31.880 --> 0:11:34.240 of Justice and the state government as well. And I 0:11:34.240 --> 0:11:36.840 think it's likely we'll see that. So that's another sort 0:11:36.840 --> 0:11:40.120 of safety net, I guess, um for people who want 0:11:40.160 --> 0:11:42.080 to see a conviction here and believe that that's that's 0:11:42.120 --> 0:11:47.120 what justice requires. Are are a federal civil rights charges 0:11:47.640 --> 0:11:51.480 more almost more of a political decision or partially a 0:11:51.520 --> 0:11:55.800 political decision, because as you mentioned, Eric Garner, they didn't charge, 0:11:56.280 --> 0:11:59.599 and they didn't charge um Freddy Gray's death in Maryland. 0:11:59.720 --> 0:12:03.360 In so some of the very controversial ones we didn't 0:12:03.400 --> 0:12:08.200 see federal civil rights charges. Well, the no prosecutes, no 0:12:08.320 --> 0:12:11.320 prosecutorial decision is ever supposed to be political, And I 0:12:11.360 --> 0:12:15.120 think every every prosecutor in office will tell you that 0:12:15.160 --> 0:12:16.720 this is all about the facts in the law, and 0:12:16.760 --> 0:12:20.359 that's as it should be. As a practical matter. Prosecutors 0:12:20.360 --> 0:12:22.200 are human beings. I mean, I was a prosecuted for 0:12:22.240 --> 0:12:25.640 fourteen years. Everyone reads the papers, everyone watches TV and 0:12:25.760 --> 0:12:28.520 listens to the radio. And you wouldn't beat human if 0:12:28.559 --> 0:12:31.520 you did if if you didn't consider, um, what's the 0:12:31.559 --> 0:12:33.839 effect of this going to be in in the real world. 0:12:34.160 --> 0:12:37.040 Another thing to keep in mind is every case stands 0:12:37.040 --> 0:12:40.319 on its own merits in different cases have different levels 0:12:40.360 --> 0:12:44.160 of sort of culpability, and um, you know, you could 0:12:44.160 --> 0:12:46.959 well see a different determination made now. I mean, look, 0:12:47.040 --> 0:12:48.880 this case is similar in a lot of ways in 0:12:48.920 --> 0:12:51.280 the Eric Garner case, but it's not identical. And same 0:12:51.360 --> 0:12:54.480 goes with the Freddie Gray case. Also, you have different 0:12:54.480 --> 0:12:57.760 people making the decisions. I mean, right, the Freddie Gray 0:12:57.800 --> 0:13:00.720 case was under a different administration. Eric Garner was under 0:13:00.720 --> 0:13:04.240 this presidential administration, but a different attorney general, so you 0:13:04.280 --> 0:13:07.400 have different decision makers. So, UM, I think you're right 0:13:07.440 --> 0:13:09.240 to know, and it's important to be aware of the 0:13:09.360 --> 0:13:12.240 history of the Justice Department in deciding to bring these 0:13:12.280 --> 0:13:15.960 kind of charges or declining. Um. And I will obviously 0:13:15.960 --> 0:13:18.920 see what they do here. But I'm fairly confident, and 0:13:18.960 --> 0:13:21.120 this is not based on inside information. This is just 0:13:21.160 --> 0:13:23.800 based on reading the tea leaves from the public statements. 0:13:23.840 --> 0:13:28.000 I'm fairly confident they will charge UH, at least officers Chauvin. 0:13:28.800 --> 0:13:33.360 President Obama called on mayors to review their police department's 0:13:33.520 --> 0:13:37.680 use of force policies. Does it depend on states calling 0:13:37.760 --> 0:13:43.400 for new legislation to overhaul police procedures to ban show colds? 0:13:43.480 --> 0:13:48.440 Is that where it starts? So? I worked on police 0:13:48.600 --> 0:13:51.599 reform for five years as a prosecutor. When I was 0:13:51.640 --> 0:13:53.880 with the new Jersey Attorney General, we worked very closely 0:13:53.880 --> 0:13:57.240 with police departments on reform. I don't think there's any 0:13:57.360 --> 0:14:00.559 one answer. I think it needs to start at the 0:14:00.640 --> 0:14:04.280 highest levels, from from our elected officials in Washington, d C. 0:14:04.480 --> 0:14:06.920 But the real action, the real rubber hits the road. 0:14:07.040 --> 0:14:09.800 I believe at the local levels of state, county, and 0:14:09.920 --> 0:14:13.000 local level. And there there are a whole range of 0:14:13.040 --> 0:14:16.520 readily available police reforms out there, whether it's changing your 0:14:16.600 --> 0:14:18.960 use of force policy, when is it okay to use 0:14:19.240 --> 0:14:21.840 what level of force up to an including lethal force? 0:14:22.160 --> 0:14:27.320 Can you you know can UM? Chokeholds and strangleholds should 0:14:27.360 --> 0:14:30.320 be I think barred in and they are barred in 0:14:30.400 --> 0:14:33.520 some but not all police departments. UM use of body 0:14:33.560 --> 0:14:37.560 warrant cameras, UM, training police officers to recognize individuals with 0:14:37.640 --> 0:14:40.920 mental health problems. UM. I mean there there's just there's 0:14:40.960 --> 0:14:44.880 there's many reforms out there that can be adopted. I 0:14:44.880 --> 0:14:48.080 think legislation is part of it, I think, but but 0:14:48.200 --> 0:14:50.800 not by itself the answer. I think the real leadership 0:14:50.840 --> 0:14:54.880 has to come from police leaders, from mayors, from local prosecutors. 0:14:54.920 --> 0:14:57.880 And the key thing is building relationships between those leaders. 0:14:57.880 --> 0:15:00.760 And you're real community leaders, You're real clear g your 0:15:00.760 --> 0:15:03.280 people who the community will listen to. Because when a 0:15:03.320 --> 0:15:05.400 crisis like this happens, and I'm proud to say in 0:15:05.440 --> 0:15:07.720 New Jersey we've actually had a very good response. We've 0:15:07.720 --> 0:15:12.400 had enormous spirited protests in Newark and Camaden around the state, 0:15:12.760 --> 0:15:15.280 and very little violence and I think a big reason 0:15:15.320 --> 0:15:17.960 for that is because we have strong police leaders, like 0:15:18.080 --> 0:15:21.000 strong local leaders, they already have the relationships. You can't 0:15:21.000 --> 0:15:23.040 just pick up the phone and try to figure out 0:15:23.040 --> 0:15:25.480 who the leader of the religious community is in New 0:15:25.560 --> 0:15:27.440 York for the first time when this happens, you have 0:15:27.480 --> 0:15:29.640 to already know each other. And you can see that 0:15:29.720 --> 0:15:32.080 happening a bit in New Jersey, and I think there's 0:15:32.080 --> 0:15:34.360 a good model there to follow. Thanks for being on 0:15:34.360 --> 0:15:38.200 Bloomberg Law Alley. That's former federal prosecutor Ellie Honig of 0:15:38.360 --> 0:15:41.880 Lowenstein Sandler. And that's it for this edition of Bloomberg Law. 0:15:42.200 --> 0:15:44.320 Remember you can always get the latest legal news by 0:15:44.320 --> 0:15:46.880 going to our Bloomberg Law podcast. You can find them 0:15:46.920 --> 0:15:51.800 on iTunes, SoundCloud for Bloomberg dot com, slash podcast Slash Law. 0:15:52.200 --> 0:15:54.880 I'm John Rossel. Thanks so much for listening, and remember 0:15:54.920 --> 0:15:57.440 to tune to the Bloomberg Law Show weeknights. Attend them 0:15:57.480 --> 0:15:59.320 Easter right here on Bloomberg Radio.