WEBVTT - Why Manhattan DA's Race Is Not About Law & Order 0:00:03.160 --> 0:00:07.960 This is Bloomberg Law with June Brussel from Bloomberg Radio. 0:00:10.440 --> 0:00:13.160 The killing of George Floyd and the viral video of 0:00:13.200 --> 0:00:16.800 the police officer kneeling on the black man's neck sparked 0:00:16.800 --> 0:00:20.840 a movement for racial justice. This week, that former Minneapolis 0:00:20.840 --> 0:00:23.640 police officer goes on trial in a case that will 0:00:23.680 --> 0:00:27.080 combine elements of the trial of l A police officers 0:00:27.280 --> 0:00:30.520 in the beating of Rodney King and the media spectacle 0:00:30.560 --> 0:00:33.800 of the O. J. Simpson trial, all against a backdrop 0:00:33.880 --> 0:00:37.400 of the Black Lives Matter movement. The challenges in selecting 0:00:37.400 --> 0:00:40.839 a jury in such a well known case are illustrated 0:00:40.840 --> 0:00:44.760 by exchanges like this between potential jurors and the defense attorney, 0:00:44.880 --> 0:00:48.680 Eric Nelson. Do you attribute responsibility for that to my 0:00:48.800 --> 0:00:54.120 client sitting here today based on the media presentation, I 0:00:54.120 --> 0:00:56.920 don't think I can say one way or another. I mean, 0:00:56.960 --> 0:00:59.480 not here. You know, maybe at the time I have 0:00:59.600 --> 0:01:02.440 an opinion in but with some distance, I don't think 0:01:02.440 --> 0:01:06.000 I can say. Joining me as former federal prosecutor Robert Mints, 0:01:06.040 --> 0:01:10.560 a partner McCarter and English. There are protesters holding signs 0:01:10.600 --> 0:01:14.399 outside the courthouse, No justice, no Peace, speakers asking the 0:01:14.520 --> 0:01:16.920 jurors to do the right thing. How do you get 0:01:16.959 --> 0:01:20.800 a jury that is not influenced by that or has 0:01:20.840 --> 0:01:25.080 informed an opinion about the video of Chauvin kneeling on 0:01:25.160 --> 0:01:29.720 Floyd's neck. That's a great question because this trial is 0:01:29.760 --> 0:01:32.640 certainly shaping up to be one of the trials of 0:01:32.640 --> 0:01:35.480 the sanctuary. You know, we first had the Charles Lindbergh 0:01:35.520 --> 0:01:39.760 trial involving the kidnapping of the aviator's son in Hope Ow, 0:01:39.800 --> 0:01:42.520 New Jersey. Then we had the O. J. Simpson trial, 0:01:42.720 --> 0:01:46.199 and now we have the trial of former Minneapolis police 0:01:46.200 --> 0:01:49.880 officer Derek Schilvin, which could be the next big trial 0:01:49.920 --> 0:01:53.040 of the sanctuary. They're gonna be televisions in the courtroom, 0:01:53.080 --> 0:01:55.200 which is going to be a first for the state 0:01:55.240 --> 0:01:59.480 of Minnesota. And it's a case that is very difficult 0:01:59.520 --> 0:02:02.320 in terms of picking a jury because so many people 0:02:02.640 --> 0:02:06.320 have seen the video of the officer with his knee 0:02:06.520 --> 0:02:10.160 on the neck of Mr Floyd, and so many people 0:02:10.400 --> 0:02:13.120 have formed an opinion one way or the other about 0:02:13.120 --> 0:02:16.640 whether this police officers conduct led to the death of 0:02:16.680 --> 0:02:21.000 George Floyd. So what kinds of questions do the attorneys 0:02:21.080 --> 0:02:23.639 asked to try to get a juror who is going 0:02:23.680 --> 0:02:27.040 to be able to look at the evidence in the 0:02:27.080 --> 0:02:30.440 case and not what they know from media. In the 0:02:30.480 --> 0:02:33.040 minds of a lot of people, the selection of the 0:02:33.120 --> 0:02:35.760 jury for this trial may be the most difficult part 0:02:35.840 --> 0:02:39.120 of the case, both for the lawyers and for the judge. 0:02:39.440 --> 0:02:42.600 If you're on the defense side, you're gonna ask questions 0:02:42.639 --> 0:02:46.880 about whether jurors can focus solely on the information that 0:02:47.080 --> 0:02:49.800 is revealed in the corey in itself and not be 0:02:49.919 --> 0:02:54.399 influenced by outside influences like newspapers and television, or neighbors 0:02:54.440 --> 0:02:56.320 or other people who may be trying to give you 0:02:56.360 --> 0:02:59.760 information about what's going on outside of the courtroom. They're 0:02:59.800 --> 0:03:02.040 all sore gonna be asked about whether they've learned anything 0:03:02.040 --> 0:03:05.120 about this case through the media or whether they've absorbed 0:03:05.480 --> 0:03:09.760 information about the case through the culture after the long 0:03:09.800 --> 0:03:14.519 summer of racial justice demonstrations that were sparked by Floyd's death. 0:03:14.880 --> 0:03:17.799 They'll also be asked about the Black Lives Matter movement, 0:03:17.800 --> 0:03:20.359 how they feel about that, and how they feel about 0:03:20.360 --> 0:03:24.120 the rise of the Blue Lives Matter movement. So there's 0:03:24.160 --> 0:03:27.000 a lot of issues swirling around out there, and it's 0:03:27.040 --> 0:03:29.639 going to be impossible to find a juror who doesn't 0:03:29.639 --> 0:03:32.800 know anything about any of these issues. So ultimately comes 0:03:32.840 --> 0:03:35.560 down to the question of whether or not they can 0:03:35.600 --> 0:03:38.480 be fair and impartial, and whether they can make a 0:03:38.520 --> 0:03:41.240 decision based solely on the evidence that's presented at the 0:03:41.280 --> 0:03:45.560 trial and not be influenced by outside sources and not 0:03:45.720 --> 0:03:48.880 bring preconceived notions into the jury room when they ultimately 0:03:48.920 --> 0:03:52.600 make a decision about the guilt or innocence of former 0:03:52.720 --> 0:03:56.560 officers Chauvin. On the first day of jury selection, three 0:03:56.640 --> 0:03:59.440 jurors were picked. Does that indicate that it may not 0:03:59.480 --> 0:04:02.560 be as hard to get a jury as many thought. Well, 0:04:02.560 --> 0:04:05.160 the judge, i think, has said early on that he's 0:04:05.200 --> 0:04:08.560 allowing three weeks for jury selection, but you never know 0:04:08.600 --> 0:04:11.760 how long that's gonna last. It really depends on who 0:04:11.800 --> 0:04:14.160 shows up in the jury pool. It depends on the 0:04:14.240 --> 0:04:17.920 questions that are being asked by the prosecution and the defense. 0:04:18.240 --> 0:04:21.000 So we may see a jury picked more quickly than 0:04:21.120 --> 0:04:25.000 people anticipated. So two of the jurors who were selected 0:04:25.760 --> 0:04:28.800 have seen the video. Can you look at that video 0:04:28.880 --> 0:04:32.440 without forming an opinion? It's well, that's really the question. 0:04:32.480 --> 0:04:35.640 So many people have seen that video, But ultimately it's 0:04:35.640 --> 0:04:38.080 not whether you've seen the video or not seen the video. 0:04:38.160 --> 0:04:40.120 It's whether or not you can keep an open mind 0:04:40.440 --> 0:04:43.200 and consider only the evidence that's presented during the trial 0:04:43.240 --> 0:04:46.040 in making your decisions. So if a juror can say, 0:04:46.120 --> 0:04:48.279 I saw the video, but I can put that out 0:04:48.279 --> 0:04:50.760 of my mind, not consider that an only focus on 0:04:50.800 --> 0:04:53.520 the evidence that's presented a trial, and that I don't 0:04:53.560 --> 0:04:56.480 come into the trial with any preconceived notion one way 0:04:56.560 --> 0:04:59.680 or the other, then they are arguably available to sit 0:04:59.720 --> 0:05:02.520 for this jury. Let's talk about the charges. First of all, 0:05:02.560 --> 0:05:06.080 how unusual is it that they're selecting a jury but 0:05:06.200 --> 0:05:09.600 the charges haven't been settled on yet. Yeah, that is 0:05:09.720 --> 0:05:12.600 very unusual. And this is a case whereas you say, 0:05:12.680 --> 0:05:16.000 the charges are still unsettled. Judge k Hill, who's the 0:05:16.040 --> 0:05:18.839 trial judge you will be hearing this case, had previously 0:05:18.920 --> 0:05:22.960 tossed out his third degree murder charge, leading prosecutors with 0:05:23.040 --> 0:05:27.160 the second degree unintentional felony murder and second degree manslaughter, 0:05:27.440 --> 0:05:31.000 but that decision was overturned by the Court of Appeals, 0:05:31.040 --> 0:05:35.039 which decided that the judge had refused to reinstate the 0:05:35.040 --> 0:05:38.240 third degree charge because the alleged deaths causing act was 0:05:38.279 --> 0:05:41.320 not at a single person. The appeals court said that 0:05:41.440 --> 0:05:43.520 was wrong and that the trial judge had failed to 0:05:43.640 --> 0:05:46.080 follow precedent. But at the same time they send it 0:05:46.120 --> 0:05:49.359 back to the trial judge to be reconsidered, and so 0:05:49.600 --> 0:05:52.200 Chauvin and his counsel are still free to raise other 0:05:52.279 --> 0:05:55.839 arguments against reinstating that third degree murder charge. So the 0:05:55.880 --> 0:06:00.600 prosecutors have second degree unintentional felony murder and second degree manslaughter. 0:06:00.920 --> 0:06:04.400 Why do they want a third degree murder charge? Well, 0:06:04.440 --> 0:06:06.599 as prosecutors, you always want to be able to give 0:06:06.760 --> 0:06:10.039 jurors a choice, and you'd rather have more than just 0:06:10.200 --> 0:06:13.599 two choices. So inevitably there will be some people on 0:06:13.680 --> 0:06:17.040 the jury who lean heavily towards conviction. There may be 0:06:17.160 --> 0:06:21.120 others who lean either towards acquittal or at least are 0:06:21.240 --> 0:06:24.880 less focused on the most serious charges. And ultimately what 0:06:24.920 --> 0:06:26.479 they do is they go back in the jury room 0:06:26.800 --> 0:06:29.160 and they spend hours and hours going over the evidence 0:06:29.440 --> 0:06:32.880 and having discussions, and there is a consensus that is 0:06:32.920 --> 0:06:36.239 developed because, as you know, jury in a criminal case 0:06:36.400 --> 0:06:39.200 has to be a unanimous verdict. That means every single 0:06:39.279 --> 0:06:42.200 juror who's sitting on jury has to agree as to 0:06:42.320 --> 0:06:45.480 every account of conviction. In a criminal case, and so 0:06:45.600 --> 0:06:49.200 it's a compromise by definition, and that's why prosecutors like 0:06:49.320 --> 0:06:52.280 to give jurors a number of options so that if 0:06:52.320 --> 0:06:55.120 they have to compromise, there's different ways that they can 0:06:55.160 --> 0:06:58.640 do it without going all or nothing. Clearly, prosecutors in 0:06:58.680 --> 0:07:01.839 this case are not looking for a second degree manslaughter, 0:07:02.080 --> 0:07:04.520 looking for one of the more serious charges. By adding 0:07:04.600 --> 0:07:07.760 third degree murder, it gives them something between the second 0:07:07.800 --> 0:07:10.800 degree and the manslaughter charge to go after. In case, 0:07:10.880 --> 0:07:13.559 jurors are of different minds on this and they're looking 0:07:13.560 --> 0:07:16.160 for some way to come up with a compromise verdict. 0:07:16.480 --> 0:07:21.120 Since police officers are authorized to use force, how does 0:07:21.160 --> 0:07:25.960 that complicate the prosecutor's case, Well, it becomes a case 0:07:26.400 --> 0:07:30.520 that focuses on causation. I think we're going to see 0:07:30.640 --> 0:07:35.360 the defense raising the cause of death. Uh, They're going 0:07:35.400 --> 0:07:39.400 to present medical experts, and the issue of causation is 0:07:39.400 --> 0:07:41.880 going to be central to their case. In other words, 0:07:42.120 --> 0:07:44.880 they are going to try to argue not only that 0:07:44.960 --> 0:07:49.000 the officer's conduct was reasonable under the circumstances, but even 0:07:49.040 --> 0:07:51.920 more importantly, from the defense standpoint, they're going to say 0:07:51.960 --> 0:07:55.800 that whatever the police officer did, however, reasonable it was 0:07:56.320 --> 0:08:00.160 that it did not ultimately cause George Floyd's death, And 0:08:00.200 --> 0:08:03.320 they're going to point to factors that were highlighted in 0:08:03.360 --> 0:08:07.400 the medical examiner's report that showed that Mr. Floyd had 0:08:07.440 --> 0:08:11.480 certain health issues, that he had drugs in his system 0:08:11.520 --> 0:08:14.080 at the time of his death. They may argue that 0:08:14.120 --> 0:08:17.840 he was a likely resisting arrest, and ultimately this becomes 0:08:17.880 --> 0:08:20.400 a battle of the experts as to whether or not 0:08:20.840 --> 0:08:25.200 the defense can show that prosecutors are unable to draw 0:08:25.280 --> 0:08:29.120 a direct line between the conduct of Officer Chauvin and 0:08:29.240 --> 0:08:33.000 the death of George Floyd. So in the Ronnie King trial, 0:08:33.280 --> 0:08:35.679 you know, the video was played over and over and 0:08:35.760 --> 0:08:39.280 was stopped. Do you expect that this nine minute video 0:08:39.440 --> 0:08:43.560 is going to be played and stopped at different points. Well, 0:08:43.600 --> 0:08:45.959 I think if you're the prosecution, you're absolutely going to 0:08:46.040 --> 0:08:50.640 play that video because it's it's riveting, it's very compelling evidence, 0:08:51.000 --> 0:08:53.400 and I think it makes it difficult for the defense 0:08:53.720 --> 0:08:57.040 to in any way argue that the restraint that was 0:08:57.160 --> 0:09:01.360 used by Officer Chauvin was somehow reasonable under the circumstances. 0:09:01.400 --> 0:09:03.920 That's why I expect a defense to focus more on 0:09:03.960 --> 0:09:07.080 the issue of causation rather than that the force that 0:09:07.200 --> 0:09:10.400 was used was was reasonable. Certainly that will be an issue. 0:09:10.679 --> 0:09:13.640 Certainly they will try from the defense side to argue 0:09:13.920 --> 0:09:16.199 that you have to look at all the facts and circumstances. 0:09:16.200 --> 0:09:18.760 You look at the size of Mr. Floyd, you look 0:09:18.800 --> 0:09:20.440 at the fact that they're going to argue that he 0:09:20.480 --> 0:09:22.680 appeared to be under the influence of some kind of 0:09:22.760 --> 0:09:26.520 drugs and the officers were taking steps to reasonably subdue him. 0:09:26.679 --> 0:09:28.760 That's going to be the defense argument. Of course, the 0:09:28.800 --> 0:09:31.920 prostitution is going to argue that the force was clearly excessive, 0:09:32.200 --> 0:09:35.800 that even bystanders who were simply walking by were so 0:09:36.000 --> 0:09:38.320 alarmed that they spoke to the police officers to try 0:09:38.320 --> 0:09:41.120 to get them to remove some of their restraints, to 0:09:41.120 --> 0:09:43.400 try to get officers Chouven to remove his knee from 0:09:43.440 --> 0:09:45.600 the neck of George Floyd. They're going to argue that 0:09:45.640 --> 0:09:49.280 it was so clearly excessive that there's no question that 0:09:49.400 --> 0:09:51.720 the force was not appropriate in light of the risk 0:09:51.960 --> 0:09:56.079 that George Floyd posed to the police officers. Many people 0:09:56.080 --> 0:09:59.839 who saw the video will say, there's no way the 0:10:00.040 --> 0:10:05.320 at this police officer won't be convicted of something. But 0:10:05.440 --> 0:10:09.480 have we learned from past trials of police officers that 0:10:09.480 --> 0:10:13.920 that's not necessarily the case. Yeah, their history of convicting 0:10:14.040 --> 0:10:18.640 police officers for using excessive force is certainly a checkered 0:10:18.679 --> 0:10:21.400 one in this country. There's no question that there have 0:10:21.480 --> 0:10:23.760 been other cases. We looked at the Rodney King case, 0:10:23.800 --> 0:10:27.760 for example, where there was a state prosecution and ultimately 0:10:28.240 --> 0:10:31.040 ended in an acquittal. We saw the federal government then 0:10:31.080 --> 0:10:33.600 come in and retry the case on federal civil rights 0:10:33.679 --> 0:10:36.560 charges and gain a conviction. By the way, that could 0:10:36.600 --> 0:10:39.400 happen here as well. Even though these state charges are 0:10:39.400 --> 0:10:42.640 going to be tried first. This doesn't deprive the federal 0:10:42.679 --> 0:10:45.880 government of prosecuting this case all over again on civil 0:10:45.960 --> 0:10:48.640 rights charges if they don't like the outcome here. No 0:10:48.760 --> 0:10:52.080 double jeopardy attaches because the charges are different and the 0:10:52.120 --> 0:10:54.760 sovereign's difference one is the state one of the federal government. 0:10:54.880 --> 0:10:57.840 So we could see that here. But prosecuting police officers 0:10:57.880 --> 0:11:02.320 has historically been difficult. People view police officers mostly in 0:11:02.360 --> 0:11:05.840 a favorable light in this country, and the question is 0:11:05.840 --> 0:11:08.480 whether the officers were acting reasonably in light of all 0:11:08.480 --> 0:11:12.200 the facts and circumstances. Were they fearful for their own safety, 0:11:12.800 --> 0:11:16.160 was the restraint being used reasonable in light of what 0:11:16.280 --> 0:11:19.280 they knew at the time. The defense will sairly argue 0:11:19.480 --> 0:11:23.720 that hindsight is easy to apply to this circumstance, but 0:11:23.800 --> 0:11:27.040 the police officers have to make these decisions in real time, 0:11:27.480 --> 0:11:30.440 been a split second type of setting, and that one 0:11:30.520 --> 0:11:32.920 wrong move can lead to the death of a police officers. 0:11:32.960 --> 0:11:35.520 So they'll argue that this force was all reasonable and 0:11:35.559 --> 0:11:38.040 there's nothing excessive about this at all, But the video 0:11:38.160 --> 0:11:40.160 is gonna be very difficult for them to overcome in 0:11:40.200 --> 0:11:43.079 that regard. What do you think the chances are that 0:11:43.160 --> 0:11:48.679 the defendant takes the stand. Certainly the moment of highest 0:11:48.760 --> 0:11:52.600 anticipation in this trial will be whether or not the 0:11:52.679 --> 0:11:55.920 former police officer Derek Scholvin will take a stand in 0:11:55.920 --> 0:12:01.240 his own defense. Historically, that's something that we're likely to see. 0:12:01.400 --> 0:12:04.520 The defense doesn't really have a lot to gain by 0:12:04.559 --> 0:12:06.679 putting him on the stand, and what it does is 0:12:06.720 --> 0:12:10.400 it gives prosecutors the chance to essentially retry their case. 0:12:10.720 --> 0:12:14.079 So all the evidence that they presented in their case 0:12:14.320 --> 0:12:16.840 when they turn over to the defense, if the defendant 0:12:16.840 --> 0:12:19.679 takes the stand, they can cross examine the defendant with 0:12:19.760 --> 0:12:22.280 all the evidence all over again. They can take him 0:12:22.280 --> 0:12:26.200 through that videotape, minute by minute and across examined on 0:12:26.280 --> 0:12:28.640 what was going through his mind, why he felt that 0:12:28.640 --> 0:12:32.600 that type overstraint was reasonable, why he allegedly felt that 0:12:32.720 --> 0:12:35.080 he was in fear for his safety and had to 0:12:35.240 --> 0:12:37.840 put the knee on the neck of George Floyd for 0:12:37.880 --> 0:12:40.480 eleven minutes. So I don't think we're going to see 0:12:40.720 --> 0:12:43.400 the defendant in this case take the stand, And when 0:12:43.400 --> 0:12:45.640 defendants do take the stand in their own defense, it 0:12:45.760 --> 0:12:49.040 usually does not work out to their benefit. The judge 0:12:49.080 --> 0:12:53.120 has separated Chauvin's case from that of the three other 0:12:53.520 --> 0:12:57.760 former police officers charged in Floyd's death. Does that give 0:12:57.800 --> 0:13:02.079 the advantage to the defense or to the prosecution? Prosecutors 0:13:02.240 --> 0:13:05.520 typically want to try all the defendants together at the 0:13:05.559 --> 0:13:08.640 same time for number of reasons. First of all, they 0:13:08.679 --> 0:13:12.760 have witnesses who are going to testify about difficult circumstances, 0:13:12.800 --> 0:13:15.240 about difficult facts. And what they don't want to have 0:13:15.559 --> 0:13:18.640 is witnesses who have to testify over and over and 0:13:18.720 --> 0:13:22.319 over again about the same circumstances. Because human nature being 0:13:22.360 --> 0:13:25.719 what it is, every time somebody remembers something and recalls 0:13:26.040 --> 0:13:29.240 what they saw, they're going to recall it slightly differently, 0:13:29.240 --> 0:13:32.400 and that gives defense lawyers fodder for cross examination and 0:13:32.520 --> 0:13:35.920 to try to pick apart the witnesses testimony. So prosecugers 0:13:35.960 --> 0:13:39.240 will routinely try to keep all those cases together and 0:13:39.360 --> 0:13:42.960 not let the defendants be tried separately. The procedugers also 0:13:43.000 --> 0:13:45.600 don't want a situation which defendants can point the stinger 0:13:45.760 --> 0:13:48.520 and an empty chair, in other words, where they will 0:13:48.640 --> 0:13:51.280 argue that one of the other defendants was really at 0:13:51.280 --> 0:13:53.960 fault and there's nobody there for jurors to listen to. 0:13:54.240 --> 0:13:57.400 There's nobody there who jurors can weigh the evidence against 0:13:57.440 --> 0:14:00.600 and determine whether one defendant is more culpable than the other. 0:14:00.800 --> 0:14:04.000 The prosecuters like to try these cases together. In this case, 0:14:04.040 --> 0:14:07.080 I'm sure they wanted all the defendants to be tried together. 0:14:07.400 --> 0:14:11.320 This ultimately will not help the prosecution, although it does 0:14:11.400 --> 0:14:14.719 give prosecuters the opportunity to focus in case entirely on 0:14:14.800 --> 0:14:17.600 Auster Shauman and not all the other defendants at the 0:14:17.600 --> 0:14:34.160 same time. That's Robert Manson, McCarter and English. The prosecutors 0:14:34.160 --> 0:14:37.000 in the long running TV legal drama Law and Order 0:14:37.320 --> 0:14:40.600 are from the Manhattan District Attorney's Office. The most high 0:14:40.600 --> 0:14:44.360 profile d a's office in the country with a storied history, 0:14:44.680 --> 0:14:48.040 but now despite a recent rising crime many of the 0:14:48.120 --> 0:14:51.080 candidates for d A are not talking about law and order. 0:14:51.440 --> 0:14:55.400 They're talking about which crimes they won't prosecute and defunding 0:14:55.480 --> 0:14:58.520 the office and the police. Joining me is Bloomberg Legal 0:14:58.560 --> 0:15:01.840 reporter Patricia Hurd Todd. So, pat tell us about the 0:15:01.840 --> 0:15:05.720 candidates running for Manhattan d A. It's an open field 0:15:05.760 --> 0:15:08.280 and it's what some people are calling it historic rate 0:15:08.440 --> 0:15:11.840 because eight people are find to be the Manhattan d A. 0:15:12.520 --> 0:15:16.360 It's historic, and that there are six women and two men, 0:15:17.040 --> 0:15:19.320 and one of the men is a black man who 0:15:19.400 --> 0:15:22.160 used to be an assistant U S Attorney in Manhattan 0:15:22.320 --> 0:15:25.840 and former chief of Deputy Attorney General for the state 0:15:25.880 --> 0:15:29.440 of New York. So the very next d A may 0:15:29.440 --> 0:15:33.360 be either a black man or a woman. The candidates 0:15:33.440 --> 0:15:37.160 have a variety of opinions, many of them being very 0:15:37.240 --> 0:15:41.160 progressive for what we've normally seen. But this is part 0:15:41.200 --> 0:15:45.560 of a growing trend for progressives to basically take hold 0:15:45.560 --> 0:15:52.200 of the conversation in certain campaigns to promote more progressive agenda. 0:15:52.240 --> 0:15:54.920 Is so tell us a little bit about the office 0:15:55.080 --> 0:15:58.800 and its history. The Manhattan d A. It's always been 0:15:58.840 --> 0:16:01.480 a high profile because Asian. You know, this goes back 0:16:01.520 --> 0:16:04.880 to Tom Dewey was the d A before he became 0:16:05.120 --> 0:16:08.800 governor of the State of New York, and under Bob Morgantow, 0:16:09.400 --> 0:16:14.440 the legendary Manhattan d A. He basically remade the office 0:16:14.480 --> 0:16:17.600 into a very progressive, interesting place. I mean like he 0:16:17.680 --> 0:16:21.960 created a sex crime unit that investigated sex crimes. So 0:16:22.040 --> 0:16:26.280 that's why the creators of Law and Order used Mr 0:16:26.360 --> 0:16:30.720 Morgantow as the prototype for their character of the legendary 0:16:30.800 --> 0:16:33.840 d A that is running the office. And a lot 0:16:33.880 --> 0:16:37.200 of his cases were very creative. I mean he brought 0:16:37.240 --> 0:16:40.920 this Bank of Credit and Commerce case, an international financial 0:16:40.960 --> 0:16:46.600 fraud case. He's broad cases against Tycho and Dennis Kazlasky 0:16:46.800 --> 0:16:49.960 for tax evasion and all kinds of excesses of the 0:16:50.040 --> 0:16:54.720 late nineties. The cases include famous murder cases like the 0:16:54.760 --> 0:16:57.360 Preppy murder case, or with Jennifer Levin was killed in 0:16:57.400 --> 0:17:01.560 Central Park by allegedly her boy friend, the Central Park 0:17:01.880 --> 0:17:05.800 Jagger case. So you know, a crime happens in New York, 0:17:05.880 --> 0:17:07.800 he gets a lot of the media attention and the 0:17:07.880 --> 0:17:12.879 manhattand A's office will bring some very high profile prosecution. 0:17:13.240 --> 0:17:16.880 And Morgan thou especially was the guy that took on 0:17:17.080 --> 0:17:20.080 the mob. Elliott Spister was an a d A and 0:17:20.160 --> 0:17:23.560 Assistant District attorney. And they brought a case against the 0:17:23.640 --> 0:17:27.920 mafia for carting in Manhattan and they have you know, influence, 0:17:28.040 --> 0:17:30.960 and they would call the mob tax. So Morgan though, 0:17:31.040 --> 0:17:33.240 and they brought this case to clean up like this 0:17:33.440 --> 0:17:38.399 unofficial tax that the mafia was charging to cartway garbage 0:17:38.600 --> 0:17:43.199 from restaurants and businesses in Manhattan. So do we know 0:17:43.800 --> 0:17:49.160 for certain that Sivance is not seeking reelection? He has 0:17:49.240 --> 0:17:54.680 not officially said. We don't know. Officially. He is barely 0:17:54.800 --> 0:17:58.399 raised any money whatsoever compared to some of the candidates 0:17:58.400 --> 0:18:02.600 have raised like upwards of three million dollars. And he 0:18:02.640 --> 0:18:05.480 hasn't said officially. But some people have said to me 0:18:05.640 --> 0:18:09.160 that if I wanted to run again, based on this 0:18:09.240 --> 0:18:13.920 high profile investigation that he has of Trump, Donald Trump 0:18:13.960 --> 0:18:17.120 and his in the Trump organization, that many Manhattan I's 0:18:17.200 --> 0:18:19.680 might re elect him. But it remains to be seen. 0:18:19.760 --> 0:18:23.320 He hasn't said officially one way or another. As you mentioned, 0:18:23.840 --> 0:18:27.120 the biggest prosecution and why the Manhattan d as keeps 0:18:27.119 --> 0:18:30.040 getting mentioned over and over again, in national news is 0:18:30.080 --> 0:18:35.680 because of this investigation into Trump and what maybe criminal charges. 0:18:36.280 --> 0:18:40.480 Have the candidates talked about that? Well, originally they were 0:18:40.520 --> 0:18:44.320 not speaking about it, and I think as time is progressed, 0:18:44.640 --> 0:18:49.040 they decided, especially in light of after what the Supreme 0:18:49.119 --> 0:18:53.199 Court's ruling came out last month granting the d A 0:18:53.400 --> 0:18:55.760 the right to have access to whatever eight years of 0:18:55.840 --> 0:19:01.040 tax records from Trump. Um, they are now saying things 0:19:01.080 --> 0:19:04.760 like I could take on Trump, you know, and there's 0:19:04.880 --> 0:19:08.560 they're not talking about the investigation per se, because of course, 0:19:08.640 --> 0:19:11.560 no one knows what this investigation is except for the 0:19:11.600 --> 0:19:14.399 people who are actually doing it, and so to comment 0:19:14.480 --> 0:19:16.639 on it would be they don't know the evidence. So 0:19:16.800 --> 0:19:19.120 it's not really like you can make an informed comments 0:19:19.440 --> 0:19:23.199 handicapping what the investigation is. It's all grand jury and 0:19:23.240 --> 0:19:26.520 its secret um. But some of them have have tried 0:19:26.560 --> 0:19:29.480 to put like, you know, their their street creds out there, 0:19:29.680 --> 0:19:34.840 for I could take on Trump because I sued him civilly. 0:19:34.880 --> 0:19:37.280 That's the kind of thing they've been saying now recently. 0:19:37.840 --> 0:19:39.960 It's the climb rate or the murder rate that's up 0:19:40.000 --> 0:19:43.399 in New York. Violent crime is up in New York 0:19:43.760 --> 0:19:48.800 all throughout the city, and especially there's been shootings. UH. 0:19:49.000 --> 0:19:52.920 Gun related violence is up and murders are up. So 0:19:53.480 --> 0:19:55.959 not in the last two months, but in the end 0:19:56.000 --> 0:20:00.520 of the last three months of there was a and 0:20:00.640 --> 0:20:04.080 so most of violent crimes remain on. So we were 0:20:04.119 --> 0:20:08.080 talking about this spike in crime. Are the candidates discussing 0:20:08.119 --> 0:20:10.879 that and what they're going to do about it? Actually, no, 0:20:12.520 --> 0:20:15.960 there has been. There is one candidate, Liz Krate. She 0:20:16.200 --> 0:20:20.400 is a former assistant district attorney and she went into 0:20:20.440 --> 0:20:23.159 private practice and she's a criminal defense lawyer, so she 0:20:23.240 --> 0:20:26.879 cut practices in the courthouse and she has been saying 0:20:27.000 --> 0:20:30.280 she would be for law and order, and you know, 0:20:30.600 --> 0:20:33.560 she's kind of like the lone voice. And many of 0:20:33.600 --> 0:20:38.040 these other UH candidates have spent the majority of their 0:20:38.080 --> 0:20:43.080 time during these discussions talking about more progressive reforms, the 0:20:43.160 --> 0:20:47.680 kinds of crimes, low level crimes they wouldn't prosecute. Most 0:20:47.720 --> 0:20:50.159 of them are talking about, you know, fair beating or 0:20:50.280 --> 0:20:54.639 turnstyle jumping for example, or low level marijuana possession that 0:20:54.680 --> 0:20:58.479 they wouldn't prosecute. Some of the candidates are saying they 0:20:58.480 --> 0:21:04.399 would never bring cases of gang cases against involving juveniles, 0:21:04.400 --> 0:21:09.040 but underside vance having prosecutions for certain minor crimes like 0:21:09.200 --> 0:21:13.760 fair jumping, etcetera also fallen. Yes, and and and some 0:21:13.800 --> 0:21:16.560 people have pointed out to me when Vance took office, 0:21:16.640 --> 0:21:20.280 he was considered a progressive that wanted to cut the offices, 0:21:20.880 --> 0:21:23.800 you know, cut back on the kinds of cases they're brought. 0:21:23.840 --> 0:21:26.879 Some people say, of course, as you're very progressive, you 0:21:27.000 --> 0:21:29.119 have you know he's not. He never did enough. He 0:21:29.160 --> 0:21:32.040 should never have prosecuted any cases. But if people need 0:21:32.080 --> 0:21:36.879 to remember that, you know, he's basically reigned in prosecutions 0:21:36.880 --> 0:21:41.480 of low level crime. UM. There was one instance, UH 0:21:41.640 --> 0:21:46.040 of the forum I covered recently that was UM sponsored 0:21:46.080 --> 0:21:50.280 by former veterans of the Manhattan DA's office, where they 0:21:50.320 --> 0:21:54.199 wanted to hear closely questioned some of the candidates and 0:21:54.240 --> 0:21:57.840 where do you stand on on these topics and UM. 0:21:57.920 --> 0:22:01.280 One of the candidates was Karate. When I was mentioning before, 0:22:01.680 --> 0:22:03.879 she said, what are you guys talking about? How can 0:22:03.920 --> 0:22:06.520 you decline to bring these cases? They're on the books, 0:22:06.640 --> 0:22:09.200 they're you know, they're part of the law. You can, 0:22:09.280 --> 0:22:12.640 as a d A abdicate the responsibility to prosecute crimes. 0:22:12.640 --> 0:22:14.200 She said, She's going to do it on a case 0:22:14.240 --> 0:22:16.920 by case basis, but some of the candidates had said 0:22:16.920 --> 0:22:19.920 they will never have vowed, never ever ever to bring 0:22:20.119 --> 0:22:24.920 low level crimes. Two of the candidates, lawyer named Hanni 0:22:24.960 --> 0:22:28.920 Abushi who is a civil rights lawyer, and another lawyer 0:22:29.680 --> 0:22:31.720 has said that they would cut the footprint of the 0:22:31.840 --> 0:22:35.159 office in half and then they would give the money 0:22:35.200 --> 0:22:39.600 instead of hiring prosecutors, They get rid of the prosecutors 0:22:39.640 --> 0:22:44.600 and hired defense lawyers or public defenders and replace them. 0:22:45.160 --> 0:22:47.840 So instead of prosecuting people, they look at ways not 0:22:47.960 --> 0:22:51.200 to prosecute them, and then they spread that money around 0:22:51.600 --> 0:22:55.520 to community groups instead of using it for prosecution. So 0:22:56.320 --> 0:23:00.920 they want to defund their own office. Yes, yes, and 0:23:01.320 --> 0:23:03.919 five of them have said they're in favor of defunding 0:23:03.960 --> 0:23:06.960 the police. And it remains to be seen. I asked 0:23:06.960 --> 0:23:09.480 a couple of people, you know, it's Manhattan, this progressive, 0:23:09.560 --> 0:23:12.919 that there are they willing to go this far? And 0:23:12.960 --> 0:23:17.360 there have been other cities like l A County elected 0:23:17.720 --> 0:23:22.280 uh this guy, George Gascon on a progressive agenda, and 0:23:22.320 --> 0:23:26.600 now his own the Union of Prosecutors, the Assistant District 0:23:26.600 --> 0:23:30.919 Attorney's union that works for him have sued him to 0:23:31.000 --> 0:23:33.800 get him to stop in acting some of these what 0:23:33.880 --> 0:23:37.119 the pieces are reformed, but they say are too progressive, 0:23:37.359 --> 0:23:41.600