1
00:00:03,160 --> 00:00:07,960
Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg Law with June Brussel from Bloomberg Radio.

2
00:00:10,440 --> 00:00:13,160
Speaker 1: The killing of George Floyd and the viral video of

3
00:00:13,200 --> 00:00:16,800
Speaker 1: the police officer kneeling on the black man's neck sparked

4
00:00:16,800 --> 00:00:20,840
Speaker 1: a movement for racial justice. This week, that former Minneapolis

5
00:00:20,840 --> 00:00:23,640
Speaker 1: police officer goes on trial in a case that will

6
00:00:23,680 --> 00:00:27,080
Speaker 1: combine elements of the trial of l A police officers

7
00:00:27,280 --> 00:00:30,520
Speaker 1: in the beating of Rodney King and the media spectacle

8
00:00:30,560 --> 00:00:33,800
Speaker 1: of the O. J. Simpson trial, all against a backdrop

9
00:00:33,880 --> 00:00:37,400
Speaker 1: of the Black Lives Matter movement. The challenges in selecting

10
00:00:37,400 --> 00:00:40,839
Speaker 1: a jury in such a well known case are illustrated

11
00:00:40,840 --> 00:00:44,760
Speaker 1: by exchanges like this between potential jurors and the defense attorney,

12
00:00:44,880 --> 00:00:48,680
Speaker 1: Eric Nelson. Do you attribute responsibility for that to my

13
00:00:48,800 --> 00:00:54,120
Speaker 1: client sitting here today based on the media presentation, I

14
00:00:54,120 --> 00:00:56,920
Speaker 1: don't think I can say one way or another. I mean,

15
00:00:56,960 --> 00:00:59,480
Speaker 1: not here. You know, maybe at the time I have

16
00:00:59,600 --> 00:01:02,440
Speaker 1: an opinion in but with some distance, I don't think

17
00:01:02,440 --> 00:01:06,000
Speaker 1: I can say. Joining me as former federal prosecutor Robert Mints,

18
00:01:06,040 --> 00:01:10,560
Speaker 1: a partner McCarter and English. There are protesters holding signs

19
00:01:10,600 --> 00:01:14,399
Speaker 1: outside the courthouse, No justice, no Peace, speakers asking the

20
00:01:14,520 --> 00:01:16,920
Speaker 1: jurors to do the right thing. How do you get

21
00:01:16,959 --> 00:01:20,800
Speaker 1: a jury that is not influenced by that or has

22
00:01:20,840 --> 00:01:25,080
Speaker 1: informed an opinion about the video of Chauvin kneeling on

23
00:01:25,160 --> 00:01:29,720
Speaker 1: Floyd's neck. That's a great question because this trial is

24
00:01:29,760 --> 00:01:32,640
Speaker 1: certainly shaping up to be one of the trials of

25
00:01:32,640 --> 00:01:35,480
Speaker 1: the sanctuary. You know, we first had the Charles Lindbergh

26
00:01:35,520 --> 00:01:39,760
Speaker 1: trial involving the kidnapping of the aviator's son in Hope Ow,

27
00:01:39,800 --> 00:01:42,520
Speaker 1: New Jersey. Then we had the O. J. Simpson trial,

28
00:01:42,720 --> 00:01:46,199
Speaker 1: and now we have the trial of former Minneapolis police

29
00:01:46,200 --> 00:01:49,880
Speaker 1: officer Derek Schilvin, which could be the next big trial

30
00:01:49,920 --> 00:01:53,040
Speaker 1: of the sanctuary. They're gonna be televisions in the courtroom,

31
00:01:53,080 --> 00:01:55,200
Speaker 1: which is going to be a first for the state

32
00:01:55,240 --> 00:01:59,480
Speaker 1: of Minnesota. And it's a case that is very difficult

33
00:01:59,520 --> 00:02:02,320
Speaker 1: in terms of picking a jury because so many people

34
00:02:02,640 --> 00:02:06,320
Speaker 1: have seen the video of the officer with his knee

35
00:02:06,520 --> 00:02:10,160
Speaker 1: on the neck of Mr Floyd, and so many people

36
00:02:10,400 --> 00:02:13,120
Speaker 1: have formed an opinion one way or the other about

37
00:02:13,120 --> 00:02:16,640
Speaker 1: whether this police officers conduct led to the death of

38
00:02:16,680 --> 00:02:21,000
Speaker 1: George Floyd. So what kinds of questions do the attorneys

39
00:02:21,080 --> 00:02:23,639
Speaker 1: asked to try to get a juror who is going

40
00:02:23,680 --> 00:02:27,040
Speaker 1: to be able to look at the evidence in the

41
00:02:27,080 --> 00:02:30,440
Speaker 1: case and not what they know from media. In the

42
00:02:30,480 --> 00:02:33,040
Speaker 1: minds of a lot of people, the selection of the

43
00:02:33,120 --> 00:02:35,760
Speaker 1: jury for this trial may be the most difficult part

44
00:02:35,840 --> 00:02:39,120
Speaker 1: of the case, both for the lawyers and for the judge.

45
00:02:39,440 --> 00:02:42,600
Speaker 1: If you're on the defense side, you're gonna ask questions

46
00:02:42,639 --> 00:02:46,880
Speaker 1: about whether jurors can focus solely on the information that

47
00:02:47,080 --> 00:02:49,800
Speaker 1: is revealed in the corey in itself and not be

48
00:02:49,919 --> 00:02:54,399
Speaker 1: influenced by outside influences like newspapers and television, or neighbors

49
00:02:54,440 --> 00:02:56,320
Speaker 1: or other people who may be trying to give you

50
00:02:56,360 --> 00:02:59,760
Speaker 1: information about what's going on outside of the courtroom. They're

51
00:02:59,800 --> 00:03:02,040
Speaker 1: all sore gonna be asked about whether they've learned anything

52
00:03:02,040 --> 00:03:05,120
Speaker 1: about this case through the media or whether they've absorbed

53
00:03:05,480 --> 00:03:09,760
Speaker 1: information about the case through the culture after the long

54
00:03:09,800 --> 00:03:14,519
Speaker 1: summer of racial justice demonstrations that were sparked by Floyd's death.

55
00:03:14,880 --> 00:03:17,799
Speaker 1: They'll also be asked about the Black Lives Matter movement,

56
00:03:17,800 --> 00:03:20,359
Speaker 1: how they feel about that, and how they feel about

57
00:03:20,360 --> 00:03:24,120
Speaker 1: the rise of the Blue Lives Matter movement. So there's

58
00:03:24,160 --> 00:03:27,000
Speaker 1: a lot of issues swirling around out there, and it's

59
00:03:27,040 --> 00:03:29,639
Speaker 1: going to be impossible to find a juror who doesn't

60
00:03:29,639 --> 00:03:32,800
Speaker 1: know anything about any of these issues. So ultimately comes

61
00:03:32,840 --> 00:03:35,560
Speaker 1: down to the question of whether or not they can

62
00:03:35,600 --> 00:03:38,480
Speaker 1: be fair and impartial, and whether they can make a

63
00:03:38,520 --> 00:03:41,240
Speaker 1: decision based solely on the evidence that's presented at the

64
00:03:41,280 --> 00:03:45,560
Speaker 1: trial and not be influenced by outside sources and not

65
00:03:45,720 --> 00:03:48,880
Speaker 1: bring preconceived notions into the jury room when they ultimately

66
00:03:48,920 --> 00:03:52,600
Speaker 1: make a decision about the guilt or innocence of former

67
00:03:52,720 --> 00:03:56,560
Speaker 1: officers Chauvin. On the first day of jury selection, three

68
00:03:56,640 --> 00:03:59,440
Speaker 1: jurors were picked. Does that indicate that it may not

69
00:03:59,480 --> 00:04:02,560
Speaker 1: be as hard to get a jury as many thought. Well,

70
00:04:02,560 --> 00:04:05,160
Speaker 1: the judge, i think, has said early on that he's

71
00:04:05,200 --> 00:04:08,560
Speaker 1: allowing three weeks for jury selection, but you never know

72
00:04:08,600 --> 00:04:11,760
Speaker 1: how long that's gonna last. It really depends on who

73
00:04:11,800 --> 00:04:14,160
Speaker 1: shows up in the jury pool. It depends on the

74
00:04:14,240 --> 00:04:17,920
Speaker 1: questions that are being asked by the prosecution and the defense.

75
00:04:18,240 --> 00:04:21,000
Speaker 1: So we may see a jury picked more quickly than

76
00:04:21,120 --> 00:04:25,000
Speaker 1: people anticipated. So two of the jurors who were selected

77
00:04:25,760 --> 00:04:28,800
Speaker 1: have seen the video. Can you look at that video

78
00:04:28,880 --> 00:04:32,440
Speaker 1: without forming an opinion? It's well, that's really the question.

79
00:04:32,480 --> 00:04:35,640
Speaker 1: So many people have seen that video, But ultimately it's

80
00:04:35,640 --> 00:04:38,080
Speaker 1: not whether you've seen the video or not seen the video.

81
00:04:38,160 --> 00:04:40,120
Speaker 1: It's whether or not you can keep an open mind

82
00:04:40,440 --> 00:04:43,200
Speaker 1: and consider only the evidence that's presented during the trial

83
00:04:43,240 --> 00:04:46,040
Speaker 1: in making your decisions. So if a juror can say,

84
00:04:46,120 --> 00:04:48,279
Speaker 1: I saw the video, but I can put that out

85
00:04:48,279 --> 00:04:50,760
Speaker 1: of my mind, not consider that an only focus on

86
00:04:50,800 --> 00:04:53,520
Speaker 1: the evidence that's presented a trial, and that I don't

87
00:04:53,560 --> 00:04:56,480
Speaker 1: come into the trial with any preconceived notion one way

88
00:04:56,560 --> 00:04:59,680
Speaker 1: or the other, then they are arguably available to sit

89
00:04:59,720 --> 00:05:02,520
Speaker 1: for this jury. Let's talk about the charges. First of all,

90
00:05:02,560 --> 00:05:06,080
Speaker 1: how unusual is it that they're selecting a jury but

91
00:05:06,200 --> 00:05:09,600
Speaker 1: the charges haven't been settled on yet. Yeah, that is

92
00:05:09,720 --> 00:05:12,600
Speaker 1: very unusual. And this is a case whereas you say,

93
00:05:12,680 --> 00:05:16,000
Speaker 1: the charges are still unsettled. Judge k Hill, who's the

94
00:05:16,040 --> 00:05:18,839
Speaker 1: trial judge you will be hearing this case, had previously

95
00:05:18,920 --> 00:05:22,960
Speaker 1: tossed out his third degree murder charge, leading prosecutors with

96
00:05:23,040 --> 00:05:27,160
Speaker 1: the second degree unintentional felony murder and second degree manslaughter,

97
00:05:27,440 --> 00:05:31,000
Speaker 1: but that decision was overturned by the Court of Appeals,

98
00:05:31,040 --> 00:05:35,039
Speaker 1: which decided that the judge had refused to reinstate the

99
00:05:35,040 --> 00:05:38,240
Speaker 1: third degree charge because the alleged deaths causing act was

100
00:05:38,279 --> 00:05:41,320
Speaker 1: not at a single person. The appeals court said that

101
00:05:41,440 --> 00:05:43,520
Speaker 1: was wrong and that the trial judge had failed to

102
00:05:43,640 --> 00:05:46,080
Speaker 1: follow precedent. But at the same time they send it

103
00:05:46,120 --> 00:05:49,359
Speaker 1: back to the trial judge to be reconsidered, and so

104
00:05:49,600 --> 00:05:52,200
Speaker 1: Chauvin and his counsel are still free to raise other

105
00:05:52,279 --> 00:05:55,839
Speaker 1: arguments against reinstating that third degree murder charge. So the

106
00:05:55,880 --> 00:06:00,600
Speaker 1: prosecutors have second degree unintentional felony murder and second degree manslaughter.

107
00:06:00,920 --> 00:06:04,400
Speaker 1: Why do they want a third degree murder charge? Well,

108
00:06:04,440 --> 00:06:06,599
Speaker 1: as prosecutors, you always want to be able to give

109
00:06:06,760 --> 00:06:10,039
Speaker 1: jurors a choice, and you'd rather have more than just

110
00:06:10,200 --> 00:06:13,599
Speaker 1: two choices. So inevitably there will be some people on

111
00:06:13,680 --> 00:06:17,040
Speaker 1: the jury who lean heavily towards conviction. There may be

112
00:06:17,160 --> 00:06:21,120
Speaker 1: others who lean either towards acquittal or at least are

113
00:06:21,240 --> 00:06:24,880
Speaker 1: less focused on the most serious charges. And ultimately what

114
00:06:24,920 --> 00:06:26,479
Speaker 1: they do is they go back in the jury room

115
00:06:26,800 --> 00:06:29,160
Speaker 1: and they spend hours and hours going over the evidence

116
00:06:29,440 --> 00:06:32,880
Speaker 1: and having discussions, and there is a consensus that is

117
00:06:32,920 --> 00:06:36,239
Speaker 1: developed because, as you know, jury in a criminal case

118
00:06:36,400 --> 00:06:39,200
Speaker 1: has to be a unanimous verdict. That means every single

119
00:06:39,279 --> 00:06:42,200
Speaker 1: juror who's sitting on jury has to agree as to

120
00:06:42,320 --> 00:06:45,480
Speaker 1: every account of conviction. In a criminal case, and so

121
00:06:45,600 --> 00:06:49,200
Speaker 1: it's a compromise by definition, and that's why prosecutors like

122
00:06:49,320 --> 00:06:52,280
Speaker 1: to give jurors a number of options so that if

123
00:06:52,320 --> 00:06:55,120
Speaker 1: they have to compromise, there's different ways that they can

124
00:06:55,160 --> 00:06:58,640
Speaker 1: do it without going all or nothing. Clearly, prosecutors in

125
00:06:58,680 --> 00:07:01,839
Speaker 1: this case are not looking for a second degree manslaughter,

126
00:07:02,080 --> 00:07:04,520
Speaker 1: looking for one of the more serious charges. By adding

127
00:07:04,600 --> 00:07:07,760
Speaker 1: third degree murder, it gives them something between the second

128
00:07:07,800 --> 00:07:10,800
Speaker 1: degree and the manslaughter charge to go after. In case,

129
00:07:10,880 --> 00:07:13,559
Speaker 1: jurors are of different minds on this and they're looking

130
00:07:13,560 --> 00:07:16,160
Speaker 1: for some way to come up with a compromise verdict.

131
00:07:16,480 --> 00:07:21,120
Speaker 1: Since police officers are authorized to use force, how does

132
00:07:21,160 --> 00:07:25,960
Speaker 1: that complicate the prosecutor's case, Well, it becomes a case

133
00:07:26,400 --> 00:07:30,520
Speaker 1: that focuses on causation. I think we're going to see

134
00:07:30,640 --> 00:07:35,360
Speaker 1: the defense raising the cause of death. Uh, They're going

135
00:07:35,400 --> 00:07:39,400
Speaker 1: to present medical experts, and the issue of causation is

136
00:07:39,400 --> 00:07:41,880
Speaker 1: going to be central to their case. In other words,

137
00:07:42,120 --> 00:07:44,880
Speaker 1: they are going to try to argue not only that

138
00:07:44,960 --> 00:07:49,000
Speaker 1: the officer's conduct was reasonable under the circumstances, but even

139
00:07:49,040 --> 00:07:51,920
Speaker 1: more importantly, from the defense standpoint, they're going to say

140
00:07:51,960 --> 00:07:55,800
Speaker 1: that whatever the police officer did, however, reasonable it was

141
00:07:56,320 --> 00:08:00,160
Speaker 1: that it did not ultimately cause George Floyd's death, And

142
00:08:00,200 --> 00:08:03,320
Speaker 1: they're going to point to factors that were highlighted in

143
00:08:03,360 --> 00:08:07,400
Speaker 1: the medical examiner's report that showed that Mr. Floyd had

144
00:08:07,440 --> 00:08:11,480
Speaker 1: certain health issues, that he had drugs in his system

145
00:08:11,520 --> 00:08:14,080
Speaker 1: at the time of his death. They may argue that

146
00:08:14,120 --> 00:08:17,840
Speaker 1: he was a likely resisting arrest, and ultimately this becomes

147
00:08:17,880 --> 00:08:20,400
Speaker 1: a battle of the experts as to whether or not

148
00:08:20,840 --> 00:08:25,200
Speaker 1: the defense can show that prosecutors are unable to draw

149
00:08:25,280 --> 00:08:29,120
Speaker 1: a direct line between the conduct of Officer Chauvin and

150
00:08:29,240 --> 00:08:33,000
Speaker 1: the death of George Floyd. So in the Ronnie King trial,

151
00:08:33,280 --> 00:08:35,679
Speaker 1: you know, the video was played over and over and

152
00:08:35,760 --> 00:08:39,280
Speaker 1: was stopped. Do you expect that this nine minute video

153
00:08:39,440 --> 00:08:43,560
Speaker 1: is going to be played and stopped at different points. Well,

154
00:08:43,600 --> 00:08:45,959
Speaker 1: I think if you're the prosecution, you're absolutely going to

155
00:08:46,040 --> 00:08:50,640
Speaker 1: play that video because it's it's riveting, it's very compelling evidence,

156
00:08:51,000 --> 00:08:53,400
Speaker 1: and I think it makes it difficult for the defense

157
00:08:53,720 --> 00:08:57,040
Speaker 1: to in any way argue that the restraint that was

158
00:08:57,160 --> 00:09:01,360
Speaker 1: used by Officer Chauvin was somehow reasonable under the circumstances.

159
00:09:01,400 --> 00:09:03,920
Speaker 1: That's why I expect a defense to focus more on

160
00:09:03,960 --> 00:09:07,080
Speaker 1: the issue of causation rather than that the force that

161
00:09:07,200 --> 00:09:10,400
Speaker 1: was used was was reasonable. Certainly that will be an issue.

162
00:09:10,679 --> 00:09:13,640
Speaker 1: Certainly they will try from the defense side to argue

163
00:09:13,920 --> 00:09:16,199
Speaker 1: that you have to look at all the facts and circumstances.

164
00:09:16,200 --> 00:09:18,760
Speaker 1: You look at the size of Mr. Floyd, you look

165
00:09:18,800 --> 00:09:20,440
Speaker 1: at the fact that they're going to argue that he

166
00:09:20,480 --> 00:09:22,680
Speaker 1: appeared to be under the influence of some kind of

167
00:09:22,760 --> 00:09:26,520
Speaker 1: drugs and the officers were taking steps to reasonably subdue him.

168
00:09:26,679 --> 00:09:28,760
Speaker 1: That's going to be the defense argument. Of course, the

169
00:09:28,800 --> 00:09:31,920
Speaker 1: prostitution is going to argue that the force was clearly excessive,

170
00:09:32,200 --> 00:09:35,800
Speaker 1: that even bystanders who were simply walking by were so

171
00:09:36,000 --> 00:09:38,320
Speaker 1: alarmed that they spoke to the police officers to try

172
00:09:38,320 --> 00:09:41,120
Speaker 1: to get them to remove some of their restraints, to

173
00:09:41,120 --> 00:09:43,400
Speaker 1: try to get officers Chouven to remove his knee from

174
00:09:43,440 --> 00:09:45,600
Speaker 1: the neck of George Floyd. They're going to argue that

175
00:09:45,640 --> 00:09:49,280
Speaker 1: it was so clearly excessive that there's no question that

176
00:09:49,400 --> 00:09:51,720
Speaker 1: the force was not appropriate in light of the risk

177
00:09:51,960 --> 00:09:56,079
Speaker 1: that George Floyd posed to the police officers. Many people

178
00:09:56,080 --> 00:09:59,839
Speaker 1: who saw the video will say, there's no way the

179
00:10:00,040 --> 00:10:05,320
Speaker 1: at this police officer won't be convicted of something. But

180
00:10:05,440 --> 00:10:09,480
Speaker 1: have we learned from past trials of police officers that

181
00:10:09,480 --> 00:10:13,920
Speaker 1: that's not necessarily the case. Yeah, their history of convicting

182
00:10:14,040 --> 00:10:18,640
Speaker 1: police officers for using excessive force is certainly a checkered

183
00:10:18,679 --> 00:10:21,400
Speaker 1: one in this country. There's no question that there have

184
00:10:21,480 --> 00:10:23,760
Speaker 1: been other cases. We looked at the Rodney King case,

185
00:10:23,800 --> 00:10:27,760
Speaker 1: for example, where there was a state prosecution and ultimately

186
00:10:28,240 --> 00:10:31,040
Speaker 1: ended in an acquittal. We saw the federal government then

187
00:10:31,080 --> 00:10:33,600
Speaker 1: come in and retry the case on federal civil rights

188
00:10:33,679 --> 00:10:36,560
Speaker 1: charges and gain a conviction. By the way, that could

189
00:10:36,600 --> 00:10:39,400
Speaker 1: happen here as well. Even though these state charges are

190
00:10:39,400 --> 00:10:42,640
Speaker 1: going to be tried first. This doesn't deprive the federal

191
00:10:42,679 --> 00:10:45,880
Speaker 1: government of prosecuting this case all over again on civil

192
00:10:45,960 --> 00:10:48,640
Speaker 1: rights charges if they don't like the outcome here. No

193
00:10:48,760 --> 00:10:52,080
Speaker 1: double jeopardy attaches because the charges are different and the

194
00:10:52,120 --> 00:10:54,760
Speaker 1: sovereign's difference one is the state one of the federal government.

195
00:10:54,880 --> 00:10:57,840
Speaker 1: So we could see that here. But prosecuting police officers

196
00:10:57,880 --> 00:11:02,320
Speaker 1: has historically been difficult. People view police officers mostly in

197
00:11:02,360 --> 00:11:05,840
Speaker 1: a favorable light in this country, and the question is

198
00:11:05,840 --> 00:11:08,480
Speaker 1: whether the officers were acting reasonably in light of all

199
00:11:08,480 --> 00:11:12,200
Speaker 1: the facts and circumstances. Were they fearful for their own safety,

200
00:11:12,800 --> 00:11:16,160
Speaker 1: was the restraint being used reasonable in light of what

201
00:11:16,280 --> 00:11:19,280
Speaker 1: they knew at the time. The defense will sairly argue

202
00:11:19,480 --> 00:11:23,720
Speaker 1: that hindsight is easy to apply to this circumstance, but

203
00:11:23,800 --> 00:11:27,040
Speaker 1: the police officers have to make these decisions in real time,

204
00:11:27,480 --> 00:11:30,440
Speaker 1: been a split second type of setting, and that one

205
00:11:30,520 --> 00:11:32,920
Speaker 1: wrong move can lead to the death of a police officers.

206
00:11:32,960 --> 00:11:35,520
Speaker 1: So they'll argue that this force was all reasonable and

207
00:11:35,559 --> 00:11:38,040
Speaker 1: there's nothing excessive about this at all, But the video

208
00:11:38,160 --> 00:11:40,160
Speaker 1: is gonna be very difficult for them to overcome in

209
00:11:40,200 --> 00:11:43,079
Speaker 1: that regard. What do you think the chances are that

210
00:11:43,160 --> 00:11:48,679
Speaker 1: the defendant takes the stand. Certainly the moment of highest

211
00:11:48,760 --> 00:11:52,600
Speaker 1: anticipation in this trial will be whether or not the

212
00:11:52,679 --> 00:11:55,920
Speaker 1: former police officer Derek Scholvin will take a stand in

213
00:11:55,920 --> 00:12:01,240
Speaker 1: his own defense. Historically, that's something that we're likely to see.

214
00:12:01,400 --> 00:12:04,520
Speaker 1: The defense doesn't really have a lot to gain by

215
00:12:04,559 --> 00:12:06,679
Speaker 1: putting him on the stand, and what it does is

216
00:12:06,720 --> 00:12:10,400
Speaker 1: it gives prosecutors the chance to essentially retry their case.

217
00:12:10,720 --> 00:12:14,079
Speaker 1: So all the evidence that they presented in their case

218
00:12:14,320 --> 00:12:16,840
Speaker 1: when they turn over to the defense, if the defendant

219
00:12:16,840 --> 00:12:19,679
Speaker 1: takes the stand, they can cross examine the defendant with

220
00:12:19,760 --> 00:12:22,280
Speaker 1: all the evidence all over again. They can take him

221
00:12:22,280 --> 00:12:26,200
Speaker 1: through that videotape, minute by minute and across examined on

222
00:12:26,280 --> 00:12:28,640
Speaker 1: what was going through his mind, why he felt that

223
00:12:28,640 --> 00:12:32,600
Speaker 1: that type overstraint was reasonable, why he allegedly felt that

224
00:12:32,720 --> 00:12:35,080
Speaker 1: he was in fear for his safety and had to

225
00:12:35,240 --> 00:12:37,840
Speaker 1: put the knee on the neck of George Floyd for

226
00:12:37,880 --> 00:12:40,480
Speaker 1: eleven minutes. So I don't think we're going to see

227
00:12:40,720 --> 00:12:43,400
Speaker 1: the defendant in this case take the stand, And when

228
00:12:43,400 --> 00:12:45,640
Speaker 1: defendants do take the stand in their own defense, it

229
00:12:45,760 --> 00:12:49,040
Speaker 1: usually does not work out to their benefit. The judge

230
00:12:49,080 --> 00:12:53,120
Speaker 1: has separated Chauvin's case from that of the three other

231
00:12:53,520 --> 00:12:57,760
Speaker 1: former police officers charged in Floyd's death. Does that give

232
00:12:57,800 --> 00:13:02,079
Speaker 1: the advantage to the defense or to the prosecution? Prosecutors

233
00:13:02,240 --> 00:13:05,520
Speaker 1: typically want to try all the defendants together at the

234
00:13:05,559 --> 00:13:08,640
Speaker 1: same time for number of reasons. First of all, they

235
00:13:08,679 --> 00:13:12,760
Speaker 1: have witnesses who are going to testify about difficult circumstances,

236
00:13:12,800 --> 00:13:15,240
Speaker 1: about difficult facts. And what they don't want to have

237
00:13:15,559 --> 00:13:18,640
Speaker 1: is witnesses who have to testify over and over and

238
00:13:18,720 --> 00:13:22,319
Speaker 1: over again about the same circumstances. Because human nature being

239
00:13:22,360 --> 00:13:25,719
Speaker 1: what it is, every time somebody remembers something and recalls

240
00:13:26,040 --> 00:13:29,240
Speaker 1: what they saw, they're going to recall it slightly differently,

241
00:13:29,240 --> 00:13:32,400
Speaker 1: and that gives defense lawyers fodder for cross examination and

242
00:13:32,520 --> 00:13:35,920
Speaker 1: to try to pick apart the witnesses testimony. So prosecugers

243
00:13:35,960 --> 00:13:39,240
Speaker 1: will routinely try to keep all those cases together and

244
00:13:39,360 --> 00:13:42,960
Speaker 1: not let the defendants be tried separately. The procedugers also

245
00:13:43,000 --> 00:13:45,600
Speaker 1: don't want a situation which defendants can point the stinger

246
00:13:45,760 --> 00:13:48,520
Speaker 1: and an empty chair, in other words, where they will

247
00:13:48,640 --> 00:13:51,280
Speaker 1: argue that one of the other defendants was really at

248
00:13:51,280 --> 00:13:53,960
Speaker 1: fault and there's nobody there for jurors to listen to.

249
00:13:54,240 --> 00:13:57,400
Speaker 1: There's nobody there who jurors can weigh the evidence against

250
00:13:57,440 --> 00:14:00,600
Speaker 1: and determine whether one defendant is more culpable than the other.

251
00:14:00,800 --> 00:14:04,000
Speaker 1: The prosecuters like to try these cases together. In this case,

252
00:14:04,040 --> 00:14:07,080
Speaker 1: I'm sure they wanted all the defendants to be tried together.

253
00:14:07,400 --> 00:14:11,320
Speaker 1: This ultimately will not help the prosecution, although it does

254
00:14:11,400 --> 00:14:14,719
Speaker 1: give prosecuters the opportunity to focus in case entirely on

255
00:14:14,800 --> 00:14:17,600
Speaker 1: Auster Shauman and not all the other defendants at the

256
00:14:17,600 --> 00:14:34,160
Speaker 1: same time. That's Robert Manson, McCarter and English. The prosecutors

257
00:14:34,160 --> 00:14:37,000
Speaker 1: in the long running TV legal drama Law and Order

258
00:14:37,320 --> 00:14:40,600
Speaker 1: are from the Manhattan District Attorney's Office. The most high

259
00:14:40,600 --> 00:14:44,360
Speaker 1: profile d a's office in the country with a storied history,

260
00:14:44,680 --> 00:14:48,040
Speaker 1: but now despite a recent rising crime many of the

261
00:14:48,120 --> 00:14:51,080
Speaker 1: candidates for d A are not talking about law and order.

262
00:14:51,440 --> 00:14:55,400
Speaker 1: They're talking about which crimes they won't prosecute and defunding

263
00:14:55,480 --> 00:14:58,520
Speaker 1: the office and the police. Joining me is Bloomberg Legal

264
00:14:58,560 --> 00:15:01,840
Speaker 1: reporter Patricia Hurd Todd. So, pat tell us about the

265
00:15:01,840 --> 00:15:05,720
Speaker 1: candidates running for Manhattan d A. It's an open field

266
00:15:05,760 --> 00:15:08,280
Speaker 1: and it's what some people are calling it historic rate

267
00:15:08,440 --> 00:15:11,840
Speaker 1: because eight people are find to be the Manhattan d A.

268
00:15:12,520 --> 00:15:16,360
Speaker 1: It's historic, and that there are six women and two men,

269
00:15:17,040 --> 00:15:19,320
Speaker 1: and one of the men is a black man who

270
00:15:19,400 --> 00:15:22,160
Speaker 1: used to be an assistant U S Attorney in Manhattan

271
00:15:22,320 --> 00:15:25,840
Speaker 1: and former chief of Deputy Attorney General for the state

272
00:15:25,880 --> 00:15:29,440
Speaker 1: of New York. So the very next d A may

273
00:15:29,440 --> 00:15:33,360
Speaker 1: be either a black man or a woman. The candidates

274
00:15:33,440 --> 00:15:37,160
Speaker 1: have a variety of opinions, many of them being very

275
00:15:37,240 --> 00:15:41,160
Speaker 1: progressive for what we've normally seen. But this is part

276
00:15:41,200 --> 00:15:45,560
Speaker 1: of a growing trend for progressives to basically take hold

277
00:15:45,560 --> 00:15:52,200
Speaker 1: of the conversation in certain campaigns to promote more progressive agenda.

278
00:15:52,240 --> 00:15:54,920
Speaker 1: Is so tell us a little bit about the office

279
00:15:55,080 --> 00:15:58,800
Speaker 1: and its history. The Manhattan d A. It's always been

280
00:15:58,840 --> 00:16:01,480
Speaker 1: a high profile because Asian. You know, this goes back

281
00:16:01,520 --> 00:16:04,880
Speaker 1: to Tom Dewey was the d A before he became

282
00:16:05,120 --> 00:16:08,800
Speaker 1: governor of the State of New York, and under Bob Morgantow,

283
00:16:09,400 --> 00:16:14,440
Speaker 1: the legendary Manhattan d A. He basically remade the office

284
00:16:14,480 --> 00:16:17,600
Speaker 1: into a very progressive, interesting place. I mean like he

285
00:16:17,680 --> 00:16:21,960
Speaker 1: created a sex crime unit that investigated sex crimes. So

286
00:16:22,040 --> 00:16:26,280
Speaker 1: that's why the creators of Law and Order used Mr

287
00:16:26,360 --> 00:16:30,720
Speaker 1: Morgantow as the prototype for their character of the legendary

288
00:16:30,800 --> 00:16:33,840
Speaker 1: d A that is running the office. And a lot

289
00:16:33,880 --> 00:16:37,200
Speaker 1: of his cases were very creative. I mean he brought

290
00:16:37,240 --> 00:16:40,920
Speaker 1: this Bank of Credit and Commerce case, an international financial

291
00:16:40,960 --> 00:16:46,600
Speaker 1: fraud case. He's broad cases against Tycho and Dennis Kazlasky

292
00:16:46,800 --> 00:16:49,960
Speaker 1: for tax evasion and all kinds of excesses of the

293
00:16:50,040 --> 00:16:54,720
Speaker 1: late nineties. The cases include famous murder cases like the

294
00:16:54,760 --> 00:16:57,360
Speaker 1: Preppy murder case, or with Jennifer Levin was killed in

295
00:16:57,400 --> 00:17:01,560
Speaker 1: Central Park by allegedly her boy friend, the Central Park

296
00:17:01,880 --> 00:17:05,800
Speaker 1: Jagger case. So you know, a crime happens in New York,

297
00:17:05,880 --> 00:17:07,800
Speaker 1: he gets a lot of the media attention and the

298
00:17:07,880 --> 00:17:12,879
Speaker 1: manhattand A's office will bring some very high profile prosecution.

299
00:17:13,240 --> 00:17:16,880
Speaker 1: And Morgan thou especially was the guy that took on

300
00:17:17,080 --> 00:17:20,080
Speaker 1: the mob. Elliott Spister was an a d A and

301
00:17:20,160 --> 00:17:23,560
Speaker 1: Assistant District attorney. And they brought a case against the

302
00:17:23,640 --> 00:17:27,920
Speaker 1: mafia for carting in Manhattan and they have you know, influence,

303
00:17:28,040 --> 00:17:30,960
Speaker 1: and they would call the mob tax. So Morgan though,

304
00:17:31,040 --> 00:17:33,240
Speaker 1: and they brought this case to clean up like this

305
00:17:33,440 --> 00:17:38,399
Speaker 1: unofficial tax that the mafia was charging to cartway garbage

306
00:17:38,600 --> 00:17:43,199
Speaker 1: from restaurants and businesses in Manhattan. So do we know

307
00:17:43,800 --> 00:17:49,160
Speaker 1: for certain that Sivance is not seeking reelection? He has

308
00:17:49,240 --> 00:17:54,680
Speaker 1: not officially said. We don't know. Officially. He is barely

309
00:17:54,800 --> 00:17:58,399
Speaker 1: raised any money whatsoever compared to some of the candidates

310
00:17:58,400 --> 00:18:02,600
Speaker 1: have raised like upwards of three million dollars. And he

311
00:18:02,640 --> 00:18:05,480
Speaker 1: hasn't said officially. But some people have said to me

312
00:18:05,640 --> 00:18:09,160
Speaker 1: that if I wanted to run again, based on this

313
00:18:09,240 --> 00:18:13,920
Speaker 1: high profile investigation that he has of Trump, Donald Trump

314
00:18:13,960 --> 00:18:17,120
Speaker 1: and his in the Trump organization, that many Manhattan I's

315
00:18:17,200 --> 00:18:19,680
Speaker 1: might re elect him. But it remains to be seen.

316
00:18:19,760 --> 00:18:23,320
Speaker 1: He hasn't said officially one way or another. As you mentioned,

317
00:18:23,840 --> 00:18:27,120
Speaker 1: the biggest prosecution and why the Manhattan d as keeps

318
00:18:27,119 --> 00:18:30,040
Speaker 1: getting mentioned over and over again, in national news is

319
00:18:30,080 --> 00:18:35,680
Speaker 1: because of this investigation into Trump and what maybe criminal charges.

320
00:18:36,280 --> 00:18:40,480
Speaker 1: Have the candidates talked about that? Well, originally they were

321
00:18:40,520 --> 00:18:44,320
Speaker 1: not speaking about it, and I think as time is progressed,

322
00:18:44,640 --> 00:18:49,040
Speaker 1: they decided, especially in light of after what the Supreme

323
00:18:49,119 --> 00:18:53,199
Speaker 1: Court's ruling came out last month granting the d A

324
00:18:53,400 --> 00:18:55,760
Speaker 1: the right to have access to whatever eight years of

325
00:18:55,840 --> 00:19:01,040
Speaker 1: tax records from Trump. Um, they are now saying things

326
00:19:01,080 --> 00:19:04,760
Speaker 1: like I could take on Trump, you know, and there's

327
00:19:04,880 --> 00:19:08,560
Speaker 1: they're not talking about the investigation per se, because of course,

328
00:19:08,640 --> 00:19:11,560
Speaker 1: no one knows what this investigation is except for the

329
00:19:11,600 --> 00:19:14,399
Speaker 1: people who are actually doing it, and so to comment

330
00:19:14,480 --> 00:19:16,639
Speaker 1: on it would be they don't know the evidence. So

331
00:19:16,800 --> 00:19:19,120
Speaker 1: it's not really like you can make an informed comments

332
00:19:19,440 --> 00:19:23,199
Speaker 1: handicapping what the investigation is. It's all grand jury and

333
00:19:23,240 --> 00:19:26,520
Speaker 1: its secret um. But some of them have have tried

334
00:19:26,560 --> 00:19:29,480
Speaker 1: to put like, you know, their their street creds out there,

335
00:19:29,680 --> 00:19:34,840
Speaker 1: for I could take on Trump because I sued him civilly.

336
00:19:34,880 --> 00:19:37,280
Speaker 1: That's the kind of thing they've been saying now recently.

337
00:19:37,840 --> 00:19:39,960
Speaker 1: It's the climb rate or the murder rate that's up

338
00:19:40,000 --> 00:19:43,399
Speaker 1: in New York. Violent crime is up in New York

339
00:19:43,760 --> 00:19:48,800
Speaker 1: all throughout the city, and especially there's been shootings. UH.

340
00:19:49,000 --> 00:19:52,920
Speaker 1: Gun related violence is up and murders are up. So

341
00:19:53,480 --> 00:19:55,959
Speaker 1: not in the last two months, but in the end

342
00:19:56,000 --> 00:20:00,520
Speaker 1: of the last three months of there was a and

343
00:20:00,640 --> 00:20:04,080
Speaker 1: so most of violent crimes remain on. So we were

344
00:20:04,119 --> 00:20:08,080
Speaker 1: talking about this spike in crime. Are the candidates discussing

345
00:20:08,119 --> 00:20:10,879
Speaker 1: that and what they're going to do about it? Actually, no,

346
00:20:12,520 --> 00:20:15,960
Speaker 1: there has been. There is one candidate, Liz Krate. She

347
00:20:16,200 --> 00:20:20,400
Speaker 1: is a former assistant district attorney and she went into

348
00:20:20,440 --> 00:20:23,159
Speaker 1: private practice and she's a criminal defense lawyer, so she

349
00:20:23,240 --> 00:20:26,879
Speaker 1: cut practices in the courthouse and she has been saying

350
00:20:27,000 --> 00:20:30,280
Speaker 1: she would be for law and order, and you know,

351
00:20:30,600 --> 00:20:33,560
Speaker 1: she's kind of like the lone voice. And many of

352
00:20:33,600 --> 00:20:38,040
Speaker 1: these other UH candidates have spent the majority of their

353
00:20:38,080 --> 00:20:43,080
Speaker 1: time during these discussions talking about more progressive reforms, the

354
00:20:43,160 --> 00:20:47,680
Speaker 1: kinds of crimes, low level crimes they wouldn't prosecute. Most

355
00:20:47,720 --> 00:20:50,159
Speaker 1: of them are talking about, you know, fair beating or

356
00:20:50,280 --> 00:20:54,639
Speaker 1: turnstyle jumping for example, or low level marijuana possession that

357
00:20:54,680 --> 00:20:58,479
Speaker 1: they wouldn't prosecute. Some of the candidates are saying they

358
00:20:58,480 --> 00:21:04,399
Speaker 1: would never bring cases of gang cases against involving juveniles,

359
00:21:04,400 --> 00:21:09,040
Speaker 1: but underside vance having prosecutions for certain minor crimes like

360
00:21:09,200 --> 00:21:13,760
Speaker 1: fair jumping, etcetera also fallen. Yes, and and and some

361
00:21:13,800 --> 00:21:16,560
Speaker 1: people have pointed out to me when Vance took office,

362
00:21:16,640 --> 00:21:20,280
Speaker 1: he was considered a progressive that wanted to cut the offices,

363
00:21:20,880 --> 00:21:23,800
Speaker 1: you know, cut back on the kinds of cases they're brought.

364
00:21:23,840 --> 00:21:26,879
Speaker 1: Some people say, of course, as you're very progressive, you

365
00:21:27,000 --> 00:21:29,119
Speaker 1: have you know he's not. He never did enough. He

366
00:21:29,160 --> 00:21:32,040
Speaker 1: should never have prosecuted any cases. But if people need

367
00:21:32,080 --> 00:21:36,879
Speaker 1: to remember that, you know, he's basically reigned in prosecutions

368
00:21:36,880 --> 00:21:41,480
Speaker 1: of low level crime. UM. There was one instance, UH

369
00:21:41,640 --> 00:21:46,040
Speaker 1: of the forum I covered recently that was UM sponsored

370
00:21:46,080 --> 00:21:50,280
Speaker 1: by former veterans of the Manhattan DA's office, where they

371
00:21:50,320 --> 00:21:54,199
Speaker 1: wanted to hear closely questioned some of the candidates and

372
00:21:54,240 --> 00:21:57,840
Speaker 1: where do you stand on on these topics and UM.

373
00:21:57,920 --> 00:22:01,280
Speaker 1: One of the candidates was Karate. When I was mentioning before,

374
00:22:01,680 --> 00:22:03,879
Speaker 1: she said, what are you guys talking about? How can

375
00:22:03,920 --> 00:22:06,520
Speaker 1: you decline to bring these cases? They're on the books,

376
00:22:06,640 --> 00:22:09,200
Speaker 1: they're you know, they're part of the law. You can,

377
00:22:09,280 --> 00:22:12,640
Speaker 1: as a d A abdicate the responsibility to prosecute crimes.

378
00:22:12,640 --> 00:22:14,200
Speaker 1: She said, She's going to do it on a case

379
00:22:14,240 --> 00:22:16,920
Speaker 1: by case basis, but some of the candidates had said

380
00:22:16,920 --> 00:22:19,920
Speaker 1: they will never have vowed, never ever ever to bring

381
00:22:20,119 --> 00:22:24,920
Speaker 1: low level crimes. Two of the candidates, lawyer named Hanni

382
00:22:24,960 --> 00:22:28,920
Speaker 1: Abushi who is a civil rights lawyer, and another lawyer

383
00:22:29,680 --> 00:22:31,720
Speaker 1: has said that they would cut the footprint of the

384
00:22:31,840 --> 00:22:35,159
Speaker 1: office in half and then they would give the money

385
00:22:35,200 --> 00:22:39,600
Speaker 1: instead of hiring prosecutors, They get rid of the prosecutors

386
00:22:39,640 --> 00:22:44,600
Speaker 1: and hired defense lawyers or public defenders and replace them.

387
00:22:45,160 --> 00:22:47,840
Speaker 1: So instead of prosecuting people, they look at ways not

388
00:22:47,960 --> 00:22:51,200
Speaker 1: to prosecute them, and then they spread that money around

389
00:22:51,600 --> 00:22:55,520
Speaker 1: to community groups instead of using it for prosecution. So

390
00:22:56,320 --> 00:23:00,920
Speaker 1: they want to defund their own office. Yes, yes, and

391
00:23:01,320 --> 00:23:03,919
Speaker 1: five of them have said they're in favor of defunding

392
00:23:03,960 --> 00:23:06,960
Speaker 1: the police. And it remains to be seen. I asked

393
00:23:06,960 --> 00:23:09,480
Speaker 1: a couple of people, you know, it's Manhattan, this progressive,

394
00:23:09,560 --> 00:23:12,919
Speaker 1: that there are they willing to go this far? And

395
00:23:12,960 --> 00:23:17,360
Speaker 1: there have been other cities like l A County elected

396
00:23:17,720 --> 00:23:22,280
Speaker 1: uh this guy, George Gascon on a progressive agenda, and

397
00:23:22,320 --> 00:23:26,600
Speaker 1: now his own the Union of Prosecutors, the Assistant District

398
00:23:26,600 --> 00:23:30,919
Speaker 1: Attorney's union that works for him have sued him to

399
00:23:31,000 --> 00:23:33,800
Speaker 1: get him to stop in acting some of these what

400
00:23:33,880 --> 00:23:37,119
Speaker 1: the pieces are reformed, but they say are too progressive,

401
00:23:37,359 --> 00:23:41,600
Speaker 1: you know, measures that are not enforcing the law. So

402
00:23:41,760 --> 00:23:44,640
Speaker 1: it becomes like quite a struggle. The l A. D

403
00:23:44,680 --> 00:23:48,119
Speaker 1: A's office, the San Francisco Day's office is seeing that

404
00:23:48,200 --> 00:23:53,200
Speaker 1: same kind of push and pull of tension. Basically, then

405
00:23:53,280 --> 00:23:57,400
Speaker 1: you would be going into office and firing a lot

406
00:23:57,440 --> 00:24:02,360
Speaker 1: of your staff. Yeah, and one of the candidates has vowed.

407
00:24:02,440 --> 00:24:07,280
Speaker 1: Alvin Bragg, the candidate that's the former Deputy Attorney General

408
00:24:07,520 --> 00:24:09,720
Speaker 1: of the State of New York and a former assistant

409
00:24:09,800 --> 00:24:13,560
Speaker 1: U S Attorney in Manhattan, he said that he would

410
00:24:13,640 --> 00:24:16,840
Speaker 1: like to review the cases done by Linda Fairstein. Now

411
00:24:16,880 --> 00:24:20,120
Speaker 1: she was in office for decades and Linda Fairstein came

412
00:24:20,200 --> 00:24:23,680
Speaker 1: under fire for being the supervisor in the Central Park case.

413
00:24:24,040 --> 00:24:28,880
Speaker 1: Morgan Thau exonerated them after years after a review of information.

414
00:24:29,600 --> 00:24:33,560
Speaker 1: So I mean that might mean hundreds and hundreds of

415
00:24:33,640 --> 00:24:37,520
Speaker 1: cases that not only did Fairsteeing maybe prosecute, but then

416
00:24:37,560 --> 00:24:40,080
Speaker 1: as a supervisor, how far back to you go if

417
00:24:40,119 --> 00:24:43,040
Speaker 1: she was just the boss? But you know ten steps

418
00:24:43,280 --> 00:24:45,639
Speaker 1: below was a prosecution of the case. How do you

419
00:24:45,680 --> 00:24:48,280
Speaker 1: do a review of that? You know, some of these

420
00:24:48,320 --> 00:24:52,080
Speaker 1: things people have pointed out would be very difficult to

421
00:24:52,119 --> 00:24:56,520
Speaker 1: do and also exhaustive. And what happens when crime is spiking?

422
00:24:56,640 --> 00:24:59,760
Speaker 1: Do you deal with the old crimes and review everything

423
00:25:00,080 --> 00:25:02,879
Speaker 1: the finance US comb or do you or with a

424
00:25:02,960 --> 00:25:07,080
Speaker 1: microscope or how far back do you go? And then

425
00:25:07,119 --> 00:25:11,000
Speaker 1: you're dealing with this ongoing problem of if crime is rising,

426
00:25:11,119 --> 00:25:13,960
Speaker 1: do you not prosecute those cases? And how what happens

427
00:25:14,400 --> 00:25:18,280
Speaker 1: with deterrence because some people argue, you know, part of

428
00:25:18,280 --> 00:25:22,800
Speaker 1: the deterrence is prosecuting people so they understand the ramifications

429
00:25:22,920 --> 00:25:27,880
Speaker 1: of committing a crime. Once you start investigating and opening

430
00:25:27,920 --> 00:25:30,600
Speaker 1: cases up, then defense lorries are going to come and

431
00:25:30,640 --> 00:25:34,160
Speaker 1: start attacking other cases. It's it seems like it's would

432
00:25:34,160 --> 00:25:38,920
Speaker 1: open up a huge cycle and a huge problem. Yeah,

433
00:25:39,200 --> 00:25:41,600
Speaker 1: I mean there's that too. I mean some of these

434
00:25:41,640 --> 00:25:45,399
Speaker 1: measures are progressive and they're good, but you know, Farmer

435
00:25:45,440 --> 00:25:48,720
Speaker 1: prosecutors pointed out to me that, you know, last year

436
00:25:49,000 --> 00:25:52,520
Speaker 1: there were hundreds of people arrested during the Black Lives

437
00:25:52,600 --> 00:25:56,520
Speaker 1: Matter protests in Manhattan, and aside from the ones that

438
00:25:56,640 --> 00:26:00,520
Speaker 1: actually broke into like a SOHO Channel store or and

439
00:26:00,640 --> 00:26:04,560
Speaker 1: looted the place, they were caught for burglary there in

440
00:26:04,640 --> 00:26:07,760
Speaker 1: the store, and they're caught on video tape or something,

441
00:26:07,880 --> 00:26:11,200
Speaker 1: or surveillance tape. Those people got prosecuted, but the vast

442
00:26:11,240 --> 00:26:15,719
Speaker 1: majority Dance dismissed the cases against them, and the judges

443
00:26:15,760 --> 00:26:17,719
Speaker 1: didn't go along with that, and one of the judges

444
00:26:17,800 --> 00:26:20,119
Speaker 1: ordered everybody to be helped, but the d A dropped

445
00:26:20,160 --> 00:26:22,119
Speaker 1: his cases and and then Dance got a lot of

446
00:26:22,160 --> 00:26:24,879
Speaker 1: criticism for that. Oh, you're too soft on crime, and

447
00:26:24,920 --> 00:26:29,520
Speaker 1: these demonstrators should be prosecuted. So Manhattan Nights have a

448
00:26:29,600 --> 00:26:32,919
Speaker 1: real decision to make of who they want. You know,

449
00:26:33,000 --> 00:26:37,760
Speaker 1: do they want a progressive or super progressive, a moderate progressive,

450
00:26:37,960 --> 00:26:42,359
Speaker 1: or do they want someone that is vowing to follow

451
00:26:42,400 --> 00:26:45,200
Speaker 1: the law and prosecute people. There are a couple of candidates,

452
00:26:45,280 --> 00:26:48,960
Speaker 1: like Diana Florence is the former assistant District Attorney in

453
00:26:49,040 --> 00:26:52,240
Speaker 1: the office, and she has twenty five years of experience,

454
00:26:52,680 --> 00:26:55,359
Speaker 1: and she says she wants to proceute crimes of power,

455
00:26:56,040 --> 00:26:58,680
Speaker 1: like I said. Liz Crawdy has said that she would

456
00:26:58,840 --> 00:27:01,359
Speaker 1: uh the white collar and neats to be a priority

457
00:27:01,480 --> 00:27:06,000
Speaker 1: back to the heyday of Mr Morgan now because the

458
00:27:06,080 --> 00:27:09,679
Speaker 1: office shouldn't just be focusing on the poor you know

459
00:27:09,720 --> 00:27:13,560
Speaker 1: as crimes of poverty and crimes people commit because they

460
00:27:13,560 --> 00:27:16,560
Speaker 1: don't have money, but they should possibly go after what's

461
00:27:16,560 --> 00:27:19,440
Speaker 1: going on in the corporate srates. So she's promised to

462
00:27:19,520 --> 00:27:24,159
Speaker 1: return to more traditional UH and and bigger cases. Lucy

463
00:27:24,280 --> 00:27:27,359
Speaker 1: Lang is a former prosecutor in the office as well,

464
00:27:27,920 --> 00:27:31,520
Speaker 1: and she's part of a program of what was director

465
00:27:31,600 --> 00:27:34,719
Speaker 1: of a program that was doing like a lot of

466
00:27:34,720 --> 00:27:39,360
Speaker 1: innovative work at Quney John Jay's UH School of Criminal Justice.

467
00:27:39,800 --> 00:27:42,879
Speaker 1: They were trying to design non jail alternatives and different,

468
00:27:43,000 --> 00:27:47,160
Speaker 1: you know, alternatives to prosecution for those kinds of crimes.

469
00:27:47,240 --> 00:27:49,840
Speaker 1: Let's say a juvenile and it was an initial offender

470
00:27:50,280 --> 00:27:53,119
Speaker 1: and rather than get prosecuted, there could be some alternative

471
00:27:53,200 --> 00:27:56,159
Speaker 1: to justice program. So some of them are thinking or

472
00:27:56,240 --> 00:28:00,639
Speaker 1: offering very unique, unusual programs that I be seen as

473
00:28:00,680 --> 00:28:04,200
Speaker 1: progressive in another realm. But now you know, there are

474
00:28:04,359 --> 00:28:08,439
Speaker 1: very uber, uber progressives that are saying the fund the

475
00:28:08,440 --> 00:28:13,040
Speaker 1: police never arrest anybody, No, I will never prosecute mistermeor crime.

476
00:28:13,359 --> 00:28:15,840
Speaker 1: Some of them have made that claim. What I found

477
00:28:15,880 --> 00:28:19,960
Speaker 1: really surprising is that you don't need that many votes.

478
00:28:20,560 --> 00:28:23,960
Speaker 1: Out of the eight hundred sixty thousand registered Democrats in

479
00:28:24,080 --> 00:28:26,840
Speaker 1: and you don't need that many votes to win, and

480
00:28:27,000 --> 00:28:32,000
Speaker 1: you don't because look they're all Democratic candidates and uh

481
00:28:32,359 --> 00:28:36,479
Speaker 1: Vance when he was running against two opponents, he needed

482
00:28:36,680 --> 00:28:41,000
Speaker 1: less than like fifty votes to win because of the

483
00:28:41,040 --> 00:28:45,360
Speaker 1: fact that not that many people actually go vote. So

484
00:28:45,520 --> 00:28:50,240
Speaker 1: if a voter turnout is poor, a person could possibly

485
00:28:50,440 --> 00:28:54,400
Speaker 1: win this race because there's eight candidates and of course

486
00:28:54,440 --> 00:28:58,000
Speaker 1: their votes would get deluded, so you could win with

487
00:28:58,120 --> 00:29:02,040
Speaker 1: fewer than thirty thousand votes. So does that mean that

488
00:29:02,080 --> 00:29:05,200
Speaker 1: the people who are getting the more campaign contributions have

489
00:29:05,280 --> 00:29:07,680
Speaker 1: an edge or you have two of them who have

490
00:29:07,840 --> 00:29:11,000
Speaker 1: raised over a million dollars. The thing about it is

491
00:29:11,040 --> 00:29:15,400
Speaker 1: that pandemic is making it difficult for doing polling. So

492
00:29:15,720 --> 00:29:17,840
Speaker 1: some people have said, you know, this is basically a

493
00:29:17,920 --> 00:29:20,959
Speaker 1: guest amount of who is who's leading in the polls

494
00:29:21,000 --> 00:29:25,000
Speaker 1: and they haven't done that much advertising. But somebody who

495
00:29:25,120 --> 00:29:29,400
Speaker 1: like Telly Farhati and Weinstein who's the wife of the

496
00:29:29,520 --> 00:29:33,320
Speaker 1: fund manager Boas Weinstein, she's raised two point three million,

497
00:29:33,840 --> 00:29:37,200
Speaker 1: and Alvin Bragg he's raised like one point three million.

498
00:29:37,760 --> 00:29:41,760
Speaker 1: One of the candidates, Eliza Orleans, is a public defender

499
00:29:41,800 --> 00:29:44,600
Speaker 1: and she's one of the people that's very vociferously saying

500
00:29:44,800 --> 00:29:47,200
Speaker 1: she would be cutting back the power of the office

501
00:29:47,400 --> 00:29:50,360
Speaker 1: and putting progressive reforms in. She's the one that wants

502
00:29:50,360 --> 00:29:53,920
Speaker 1: to replace prosecutors with defense lawyers. She's got a lot

503
00:29:54,400 --> 00:29:59,000
Speaker 1: high media presence because she's a former Survivor, TV show

504
00:29:59,680 --> 00:30:04,160
Speaker 1: star are uh and the Great Race star, so she's uh,

505
00:30:04,280 --> 00:30:08,120
Speaker 1: she's raised money and she's got But somebody was pointing

506
00:30:08,120 --> 00:30:11,959
Speaker 1: out just because you're popular in a place like, you know,

507
00:30:12,840 --> 00:30:15,920
Speaker 1: a different state like Wyoming, doesn't mean that person can

508
00:30:16,000 --> 00:30:20,040
Speaker 1: vote in Manhattan. So they could possibly we could start

509
00:30:20,120 --> 00:30:24,480
Speaker 1: seeing ads being purchased by this with this money. Is

510
00:30:24,520 --> 00:30:27,680
Speaker 1: there going to be a debate? Well, there have been

511
00:30:27,760 --> 00:30:33,160
Speaker 1: these forms, which you can imagine with eight candidates. I mean,

512
00:30:33,560 --> 00:30:36,840
Speaker 1: in my years I've usually covered a d a race

513
00:30:37,080 --> 00:30:41,160
Speaker 1: where it's two people running to having several debates. We're

514
00:30:41,160 --> 00:30:43,400
Speaker 1: in the middle of a pandemic where people can't go

515
00:30:43,440 --> 00:30:46,160
Speaker 1: to the ninety Street why and sit in the audience

516
00:30:46,160 --> 00:30:49,520
Speaker 1: and then go up to the mic and ask their questions.

517
00:30:49,560 --> 00:30:52,400
Speaker 1: So these have been more static where you have eight

518
00:30:52,480 --> 00:30:57,240
Speaker 1: people each giving their spin and a moderator asking the questions.

519
00:30:57,680 --> 00:31:01,480
Speaker 1: But they're not necessarily the same kind of follow up

520
00:31:01,560 --> 00:31:04,400
Speaker 1: that would we would. We're more used to scene and

521
00:31:04,440 --> 00:31:08,680
Speaker 1: it's in a real debate, so it's a little bit artificial,

522
00:31:09,440 --> 00:31:13,080
Speaker 1: and it's a little bit like people can say what

523
00:31:13,120 --> 00:31:16,200
Speaker 1: they want to say and maybe not necessarily answer the

524
00:31:16,280 --> 00:31:19,479
Speaker 1: question that was actually posed to them. Thanks Pat. That's

525
00:31:19,520 --> 00:31:23,320
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Legal reporter Patricia Hurtado. I'm June Grosse and you're

526
00:31:23,400 --> 00:31:24,440
Speaker 1: listening to Bloomberg