1 00:00:03,160 --> 00:00:07,960 Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg Law with June Brusso from Bloomberg Radio. 2 00:00:10,080 --> 00:00:15,600 Speaker 2: This act of terrorism and the violence that stems from 3 00:00:15,640 --> 00:00:19,240 Speaker 2: it is something that would not be tolerated in the city. 4 00:00:19,840 --> 00:00:23,560 Speaker 2: We wanted to personally be here to show the symbolism 5 00:00:24,320 --> 00:00:26,079 Speaker 2: of leading from the front. 6 00:00:26,440 --> 00:00:29,880 Speaker 3: It's never happened before the Mayor of New York City 7 00:00:29,960 --> 00:00:33,800 Speaker 3: and the Police Commissioner meeting the aircraft carrying a murder 8 00:00:33,840 --> 00:00:37,320 Speaker 3: suspect being flown in from another state, And it was 9 00:00:37,400 --> 00:00:40,800 Speaker 3: quite a spectacle at a Lower Manhattan heliport this afternoon, 10 00:00:41,080 --> 00:00:44,920 Speaker 3: as Luigi Mangioni was escorted from a helicopter on the 11 00:00:44,960 --> 00:00:48,559 Speaker 3: Long Walk to a waiting van, surrounded by dozens of 12 00:00:48,600 --> 00:00:53,199 Speaker 3: heavily armed law enforcement officers in tactical gear, followed by 13 00:00:53,240 --> 00:00:56,760 Speaker 3: Mayor Eric Adams and the Police Commissioner. The so called 14 00:00:56,880 --> 00:01:00,480 Speaker 3: Purp Walk was a complete departure from how federal authorities 15 00:01:00,680 --> 00:01:04,520 Speaker 3: normally handled transfers of suspects, But the handling of the 16 00:01:04,560 --> 00:01:08,399 Speaker 3: Mangioni case by state and federal authorities seems to be 17 00:01:08,440 --> 00:01:11,880 Speaker 3: a departure from the usual in so many respects. The 18 00:01:12,000 --> 00:01:16,000 Speaker 3: latest the federal government has now charged Mangioni with murder 19 00:01:16,040 --> 00:01:19,640 Speaker 3: in the shooting death of United Healthcare CEO Brian Thompson. 20 00:01:20,080 --> 00:01:23,760 Speaker 3: Charges that carry a possible death sentence, a development that 21 00:01:23,840 --> 00:01:27,720 Speaker 3: Manhattan prosecutors didn't seem to have much notice of. Joining 22 00:01:27,760 --> 00:01:31,520 Speaker 3: me is Palm Beach County State Attorney Dave Ahrenberg. Dave, 23 00:01:31,560 --> 00:01:36,360 Speaker 3: the federal government doesn't usually do purp walks or photo ops. 24 00:01:36,800 --> 00:01:42,039 Speaker 1: Why here, Wow, you know, this is an internationally watch case, 25 00:01:42,240 --> 00:01:47,080 Speaker 1: and he's being treated differently. The reward money was larger 26 00:01:47,440 --> 00:01:52,240 Speaker 1: and faster in coming. The attention given to it is 27 00:01:52,360 --> 00:01:54,440 Speaker 1: much greater than any other case. He's a folk here 28 00:01:54,480 --> 00:01:57,600 Speaker 1: among some and I think this is a statement meant 29 00:01:57,600 --> 00:01:59,680 Speaker 1: that you're going to treat him like the criminal that 30 00:01:59,720 --> 00:02:02,560 Speaker 1: he is is, as opposed to a big time celebrity. 31 00:02:02,560 --> 00:02:05,120 Speaker 1: But in so doing, it looks like they're treating with 32 00:02:05,160 --> 00:02:07,880 Speaker 1: a celebrity because they normally do part walks, and so 33 00:02:08,600 --> 00:02:10,359 Speaker 1: nothing about this case seems to be normal. 34 00:02:10,680 --> 00:02:15,720 Speaker 3: So murder is generally not a federal charge. New York 35 00:02:15,760 --> 00:02:18,799 Speaker 3: City had three hundred and eighty six homicides last year, 36 00:02:18,840 --> 00:02:23,280 Speaker 3: the country as a whole almost eighteen thousand. This involves 37 00:02:23,320 --> 00:02:26,400 Speaker 3: the murder of one person that happened in New York city. 38 00:02:26,600 --> 00:02:29,639 Speaker 3: Why is the federal government filing charges as well? 39 00:02:29,760 --> 00:02:31,720 Speaker 1: Well? If this was the Trump administration, I'd say it's 40 00:02:31,720 --> 00:02:35,320 Speaker 1: because they don't trust the Manhattan DA, But this is 41 00:02:35,360 --> 00:02:39,720 Speaker 1: still the Biden administration, and I think just because of 42 00:02:39,760 --> 00:02:42,760 Speaker 1: the international interest in this case, that they're coming in 43 00:02:42,800 --> 00:02:45,480 Speaker 1: to make sure that nothing goes wrong. At the state level, 44 00:02:45,520 --> 00:02:48,959 Speaker 1: it's like a backup. But it is unusual because usually 45 00:02:49,000 --> 00:02:50,720 Speaker 1: it's one or the other, not both. 46 00:02:50,840 --> 00:02:55,399 Speaker 3: But in this case, federal prosecutors have filed murder, stalking, 47 00:02:55,600 --> 00:02:59,960 Speaker 3: and weapons charges against Mangioni, and the charge of murder 48 00:03:00,200 --> 00:03:05,040 Speaker 3: by firearm carries the possibility of the death penalty. Federal 49 00:03:05,040 --> 00:03:08,880 Speaker 3: prosecutors haven't said yet whether they'll seek the death penalty, 50 00:03:09,120 --> 00:03:12,480 Speaker 3: because that takes a process in the Justice Department. 51 00:03:13,040 --> 00:03:14,920 Speaker 4: Do you think they're likely to go that far? 52 00:03:15,919 --> 00:03:19,400 Speaker 1: I do think that, based on Donald Trump's statements about 53 00:03:19,400 --> 00:03:22,200 Speaker 1: this case, that in the next administration, they could seek 54 00:03:22,200 --> 00:03:24,680 Speaker 1: the death penalty, even if they don't seek initially, because 55 00:03:24,720 --> 00:03:27,079 Speaker 1: right now there's a more toorium on the death penalty 56 00:03:27,080 --> 00:03:29,240 Speaker 1: at the federal level, but that's going to change, and 57 00:03:29,280 --> 00:03:31,799 Speaker 1: so yes, I do think maybe that's one difference between 58 00:03:31,800 --> 00:03:34,000 Speaker 1: the state and the federal systems here is that the 59 00:03:34,040 --> 00:03:37,000 Speaker 1: death penalty is outlawed in New York, but a federal 60 00:03:37,040 --> 00:03:40,200 Speaker 1: case can impose a federal death penalty. I think there'll 61 00:03:40,240 --> 00:03:42,400 Speaker 1: be a lot of outcry, though, because this guy's got 62 00:03:42,640 --> 00:03:46,320 Speaker 1: a bunch of supporters, and I think that ultimately a 63 00:03:46,440 --> 00:03:49,640 Speaker 1: jury will not give him the death penalty in this case, 64 00:03:49,720 --> 00:03:51,320 Speaker 1: but the Fed may try. 65 00:03:52,160 --> 00:03:56,600 Speaker 3: His attorney, Karen Friedman Agnifilo, issued a statement quote, the 66 00:03:56,640 --> 00:03:59,880 Speaker 3: federal government's reported decision to pile on top of an 67 00:04:00,120 --> 00:04:03,880 Speaker 3: already overcharged first degree murder and state terror case is 68 00:04:03,960 --> 00:04:10,640 Speaker 3: highly unusual and raises serious constitutional and statutory double jeopardy concerns. 69 00:04:11,760 --> 00:04:13,520 Speaker 4: Is this double jeopardy. 70 00:04:13,840 --> 00:04:17,719 Speaker 1: Not really, because there's something called the separate sovereign doctrine. 71 00:04:17,839 --> 00:04:20,799 Speaker 1: These are two different sovereign state and federal They can 72 00:04:21,320 --> 00:04:24,800 Speaker 1: both file their own charges based on their own laws, 73 00:04:24,960 --> 00:04:27,000 Speaker 1: and so you could have that. Now in some states, 74 00:04:27,040 --> 00:04:30,840 Speaker 1: like New York, there are additional restrictions on states that 75 00:04:30,960 --> 00:04:34,080 Speaker 1: then pile on You saw that with Paul Manifort. In fact, 76 00:04:34,120 --> 00:04:36,719 Speaker 1: the Paul Manifort indictment that came at the state level 77 00:04:37,000 --> 00:04:41,760 Speaker 1: was thrown out by the courts because of double jeopardy concerns. 78 00:04:42,000 --> 00:04:45,520 Speaker 1: Now the SAIDs, though, don't have the same type of restrictions, 79 00:04:45,600 --> 00:04:50,520 Speaker 1: and federal law generally will permit a piggyback type of 80 00:04:50,560 --> 00:04:52,640 Speaker 1: case like this, as long as it's not the exact 81 00:04:52,640 --> 00:04:55,560 Speaker 1: same statute, which is not. These are two separate statutes 82 00:04:55,640 --> 00:04:58,679 Speaker 1: and two different types of penalties. In the federal system, 83 00:04:58,680 --> 00:05:01,239 Speaker 1: you can get the death penalty the state listen, you don't. 84 00:05:01,600 --> 00:05:03,800 Speaker 1: So I do think they'll move forward. And I do 85 00:05:03,920 --> 00:05:07,480 Speaker 1: respect Karen. She's a great lawyer, she's a friend of mine, 86 00:05:07,640 --> 00:05:10,719 Speaker 1: and I think she has an argument that the state 87 00:05:10,920 --> 00:05:13,800 Speaker 1: does seem to be overreaching here with the first re 88 00:05:14,000 --> 00:05:18,200 Speaker 1: murder charge. But I would disagree with her on her 89 00:05:18,400 --> 00:05:22,240 Speaker 1: statement that the Feds are engaging in double jeopardy in 90 00:05:22,480 --> 00:05:24,720 Speaker 1: adding their own charges. There's a lot of case all 91 00:05:24,760 --> 00:05:26,080 Speaker 1: that says they can do it. 92 00:05:27,000 --> 00:05:29,320 Speaker 3: I mean a lot of times you see a state 93 00:05:29,400 --> 00:05:33,400 Speaker 3: case fails or there are civil rights issues, and then 94 00:05:33,440 --> 00:05:36,360 Speaker 3: the federal government comes in and tries the case on 95 00:05:36,480 --> 00:05:40,560 Speaker 3: federal charges. But at this stage, before even his arraignment 96 00:05:41,279 --> 00:05:43,960 Speaker 3: on the New York charge, is this unusual for the 97 00:05:43,960 --> 00:05:44,760 Speaker 3: Feds to come in? 98 00:05:45,160 --> 00:05:48,160 Speaker 1: Oh? It is unusual, yes, But there's nothing usual about 99 00:05:48,200 --> 00:05:53,520 Speaker 1: this case. This case has attracted international interests. Everyone's still 100 00:05:53,520 --> 00:05:56,120 Speaker 1: talking about it. You have people dressing up as him 101 00:05:56,240 --> 00:05:59,080 Speaker 1: to praise him, to treat him like he's some sort 102 00:05:59,120 --> 00:06:01,479 Speaker 1: of hero when he is not. And I think that's 103 00:06:01,480 --> 00:06:03,960 Speaker 1: one of the reasons why the federal government is getting 104 00:06:04,000 --> 00:06:06,800 Speaker 1: involved here. It's important to them and to a lot 105 00:06:06,839 --> 00:06:10,480 Speaker 1: of people that there's not a precedent set that glorifies murder, 106 00:06:10,760 --> 00:06:13,479 Speaker 1: and right now we're seeing too many people glorify this 107 00:06:13,600 --> 00:06:17,559 Speaker 1: murder and treat him like a hero. When he killed 108 00:06:17,600 --> 00:06:20,320 Speaker 1: a father of two, and he did so by lying 109 00:06:20,360 --> 00:06:22,760 Speaker 1: in wait, wearing a mask, waiting for him to walk by, 110 00:06:22,880 --> 00:06:25,120 Speaker 1: and then shooting him in the back and then running away, 111 00:06:25,279 --> 00:06:27,080 Speaker 1: not quite an act of heroism. 112 00:06:27,640 --> 00:06:31,159 Speaker 3: I think the federal charges came as a surprise even 113 00:06:31,279 --> 00:06:36,279 Speaker 3: to the Manhattan District Attorney's office, because his attorney said 114 00:06:36,480 --> 00:06:39,960 Speaker 3: that she wanted to get some clarity on what was happening, 115 00:06:40,040 --> 00:06:44,080 Speaker 3: whether there were multiple investigations. Because she was told to 116 00:06:44,120 --> 00:06:47,000 Speaker 3: appear at two pm at state court and then she 117 00:06:47,160 --> 00:06:50,880 Speaker 3: ends up before a federal magistrate, it seems like fed's 118 00:06:50,920 --> 00:06:53,840 Speaker 3: in the state are not coordinating or talking at all. 119 00:06:54,560 --> 00:06:56,320 Speaker 1: Well, I wouldn't be the first time we saw this. 120 00:06:56,400 --> 00:07:00,800 Speaker 1: Most recently in the second assassination attempt is Donald Trump, 121 00:07:00,960 --> 00:07:05,360 Speaker 1: where you have the Feds seeking an indicting getting indictment 122 00:07:05,480 --> 00:07:10,440 Speaker 1: against the attempted assassinator, and then you have the State 123 00:07:10,480 --> 00:07:14,920 Speaker 1: of Florida doing a competing, conflicting investigation that has led 124 00:07:14,960 --> 00:07:18,080 Speaker 1: to state charges. So we're seeing these turb wars more 125 00:07:18,120 --> 00:07:21,120 Speaker 1: and more. I don't think that's a sign of progress. 126 00:07:21,200 --> 00:07:23,720 Speaker 1: I think that's a sign of the times, unfortunately. But 127 00:07:24,240 --> 00:07:27,240 Speaker 1: if you think it's bad, now, wait till you have 128 00:07:27,760 --> 00:07:30,800 Speaker 1: Trump in the White House and a democratic state of 129 00:07:30,800 --> 00:07:32,960 Speaker 1: New York. They'll really go at it. Right now, you 130 00:07:33,000 --> 00:07:37,239 Speaker 1: have Democrats running both agencies, but that only would lasts 131 00:07:37,560 --> 00:07:39,840 Speaker 1: for another few weeks. 132 00:07:39,640 --> 00:07:43,120 Speaker 3: And Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg said the New York 133 00:07:43,160 --> 00:07:47,440 Speaker 3: case will proceed in parallel with the federal case. What 134 00:07:47,520 --> 00:07:50,480 Speaker 3: do you think will happen here? Which case goes to 135 00:07:50,520 --> 00:07:53,400 Speaker 3: trial first? It seems like tough for the defense attorneys 136 00:07:53,400 --> 00:07:55,440 Speaker 3: to be defending against both at the same. 137 00:07:55,240 --> 00:07:59,480 Speaker 1: Time, right well, Luisi Mangioni's family can afford to hire 138 00:07:59,520 --> 00:08:02,520 Speaker 1: additional lawyers to ramp up their legal team to defend 139 00:08:02,560 --> 00:08:06,040 Speaker 1: against both. Generally, the Feds go first. Generally, the Feds 140 00:08:06,120 --> 00:08:09,160 Speaker 1: take precedents and the state will defer to them. The 141 00:08:09,200 --> 00:08:11,200 Speaker 1: state here is saying they're not backing down, they're going 142 00:08:11,240 --> 00:08:14,840 Speaker 1: to continue with their prosecution, and they filed first. So 143 00:08:14,920 --> 00:08:16,960 Speaker 1: it just depends on the scheduling of the court. Since 144 00:08:17,000 --> 00:08:18,880 Speaker 1: the state doesn't look like it's going to defer to 145 00:08:18,920 --> 00:08:21,160 Speaker 1: the Feds. I could see the state going first and 146 00:08:21,160 --> 00:08:24,680 Speaker 1: the Feds waiting for the state, or we'll see when 147 00:08:24,720 --> 00:08:30,000 Speaker 1: Trump takes over the government and his US attorney and 148 00:08:30,080 --> 00:08:33,120 Speaker 1: his DOJ is fully in place where they try to 149 00:08:33,120 --> 00:08:36,520 Speaker 1: expedite the federal case. So too early to say which 150 00:08:36,559 --> 00:08:39,080 Speaker 1: goes first. But as of right now, the state has 151 00:08:39,120 --> 00:08:42,320 Speaker 1: the lead because they got the first indictment. 152 00:08:42,559 --> 00:08:47,840 Speaker 3: The federal papers really went into detail, a timeline of 153 00:08:48,320 --> 00:08:52,160 Speaker 3: his plotting, and they had additional evidence. Do you think 154 00:08:52,200 --> 00:08:55,920 Speaker 3: that means that the Feds have more information than the 155 00:08:55,920 --> 00:08:58,880 Speaker 3: city or they just decided to lay it out in 156 00:08:58,920 --> 00:09:01,360 Speaker 3: a talking indictment whereas the city didn't. 157 00:09:01,920 --> 00:09:06,120 Speaker 1: Yeah, the Feds are used to issuing speaking indictments with 158 00:09:06,200 --> 00:09:09,040 Speaker 1: more detail than at the state level. In fact, you 159 00:09:09,120 --> 00:09:13,280 Speaker 1: saw when this Alvin Braggan dited Donald Trump, it didn't 160 00:09:13,320 --> 00:09:16,200 Speaker 1: provide a ton of details that the press and the 161 00:09:16,200 --> 00:09:19,559 Speaker 1: rest of us were looking for. The Feds will provide 162 00:09:19,559 --> 00:09:22,560 Speaker 1: more detail. They will provide more information, doesn't mean they 163 00:09:22,600 --> 00:09:25,199 Speaker 1: have more information. In fact, I think they're all playing 164 00:09:25,640 --> 00:09:29,960 Speaker 1: off the same info, the same investigation. But the Feds 165 00:09:30,080 --> 00:09:33,080 Speaker 1: will provide more information, which is ironic because generally the 166 00:09:33,080 --> 00:09:36,280 Speaker 1: FEDS are tight lipped. Generally there's lack of transparency at 167 00:09:36,280 --> 00:09:39,160 Speaker 1: the federal level. But here in New York, you know, 168 00:09:39,160 --> 00:09:40,719 Speaker 1: there are no cameras in the court room at the 169 00:09:40,760 --> 00:09:43,720 Speaker 1: state or the federal level. So I wish they would 170 00:09:43,760 --> 00:09:46,840 Speaker 1: both be a little more transparent. But that's where New 171 00:09:46,920 --> 00:09:48,480 Speaker 1: York is, and that's where the FEDS are when it 172 00:09:48,520 --> 00:09:49,960 Speaker 1: comes to the court room. 173 00:09:50,360 --> 00:09:52,800 Speaker 4: Yeah. Now let's go to the New York charges. 174 00:09:52,800 --> 00:09:56,520 Speaker 3: And you mentioned the top charge, first degree murder in 175 00:09:56,679 --> 00:10:00,720 Speaker 3: furtherance of terrorism, and Bragg said that Mangio he intended 176 00:10:00,760 --> 00:10:03,720 Speaker 3: to intimidate and evoke terror with the killing. 177 00:10:04,280 --> 00:10:07,000 Speaker 5: Is that an overcharge? Is he reaching there? 178 00:10:07,360 --> 00:10:10,400 Speaker 1: I respectfully do believe that they're reaching a bit. I 179 00:10:10,480 --> 00:10:13,160 Speaker 1: think it's an easier case to prove second agree murder, 180 00:10:13,280 --> 00:10:16,280 Speaker 1: and I realized that they include a second agree murder, 181 00:10:16,280 --> 00:10:20,120 Speaker 1: and they may want to push a compromised verdict, which 182 00:10:20,120 --> 00:10:22,840 Speaker 1: would be second agree murder, where he could face up 183 00:10:22,840 --> 00:10:25,000 Speaker 1: to life in prison. But I do think when you 184 00:10:25,080 --> 00:10:27,360 Speaker 1: add the first agree murder charge, it feels like an 185 00:10:27,400 --> 00:10:30,680 Speaker 1: overreach and that could cost you some credibility in the 186 00:10:30,679 --> 00:10:34,560 Speaker 1: eyes of jurors. You look at the prosecution of Daniel Penny, 187 00:10:34,920 --> 00:10:39,400 Speaker 1: that's the ex marine who killed mister Neelie on the subway. Well, 188 00:10:39,840 --> 00:10:41,840 Speaker 1: they charged him with manslaughter and a lot of us 189 00:10:41,840 --> 00:10:45,120 Speaker 1: thought that was an overcharge, and apparently it was because 190 00:10:45,200 --> 00:10:47,240 Speaker 1: the jury couldn't reach an agreement, and then finally the 191 00:10:47,320 --> 00:10:49,760 Speaker 1: judge threw it out, and then when it came down 192 00:10:49,800 --> 00:10:52,600 Speaker 1: to the lesser charge, the easier charge, the jurors had 193 00:10:52,720 --> 00:10:56,160 Speaker 1: enough and just said now acquittal. And that's the kind 194 00:10:56,160 --> 00:10:58,640 Speaker 1: of thing that you worry about when you overcharge, that 195 00:10:58,920 --> 00:11:02,559 Speaker 1: you have jurmy fatigue, have dur mistrusted prosecutors, so you 196 00:11:02,600 --> 00:11:05,080 Speaker 1: get me really careful here. And I just don't think 197 00:11:05,240 --> 00:11:07,720 Speaker 1: based on what we know now that you can confidently 198 00:11:07,720 --> 00:11:09,440 Speaker 1: say that this was an act of terrorism. But maybe 199 00:11:09,520 --> 00:11:11,800 Speaker 1: you know they have access information that the rest of 200 00:11:11,880 --> 00:11:14,439 Speaker 1: us do not have, So we'll see. But as of 201 00:11:14,520 --> 00:11:15,960 Speaker 1: right now, I do think it's a bit of a reach. 202 00:11:16,320 --> 00:11:19,320 Speaker 3: They could have been trying to push him into a 203 00:11:19,360 --> 00:11:24,359 Speaker 3: guilty plea, but now that seems complicated with the federal charges. 204 00:11:24,840 --> 00:11:26,880 Speaker 4: Would the defense only go forward with guilty? 205 00:11:26,920 --> 00:11:30,720 Speaker 3: Please if they could reach deals with both the Feds. 206 00:11:30,720 --> 00:11:31,360 Speaker 4: And the city. 207 00:11:31,880 --> 00:11:34,800 Speaker 1: No, it complicates things for the defense because you could 208 00:11:34,800 --> 00:11:38,040 Speaker 1: plead guilty the state charges and then still face federal charges. 209 00:11:38,400 --> 00:11:42,760 Speaker 1: So you want a deal that will cover everything. And 210 00:11:43,240 --> 00:11:45,280 Speaker 1: with the Feds and the states seemingly in conflict with 211 00:11:45,320 --> 00:11:47,800 Speaker 1: each other, that makes it harder for defense lawyers to say, 212 00:11:47,800 --> 00:11:49,640 Speaker 1: all right, everyone's all come to the table. Here's one 213 00:11:49,760 --> 00:11:53,720 Speaker 1: universal settlement. The Feds may seek the death penalty. The 214 00:11:53,920 --> 00:11:57,319 Speaker 1: state is looking for first or murder, but there is 215 00:11:57,320 --> 00:11:59,760 Speaker 1: no death penalty there. So there's a lot of moving 216 00:11:59,800 --> 00:12:02,760 Speaker 1: part here. And you're correct when you say that with 217 00:12:02,840 --> 00:12:04,800 Speaker 1: two different cases, maybe they want to ramp up with 218 00:12:04,880 --> 00:12:07,760 Speaker 1: more attorneys. They can afford it. The defense has lots 219 00:12:07,760 --> 00:12:10,559 Speaker 1: of money because this is getting a lot more complicated. 220 00:12:11,120 --> 00:12:16,040 Speaker 3: Before she was hired to represent Mangioni, his attorney Karen 221 00:12:16,080 --> 00:12:20,760 Speaker 3: Friedman Agnifilo suggested on CNN that there might be an 222 00:12:20,760 --> 00:12:24,680 Speaker 3: insanity defense here. By all accounts, the evidence against him 223 00:12:24,800 --> 00:12:29,680 Speaker 3: is overwhelming. Is not guilty by reason of insanity the 224 00:12:29,720 --> 00:12:30,600 Speaker 3: way to go here. 225 00:12:31,320 --> 00:12:33,680 Speaker 1: I don't think the insanity defense is a good defense here. 226 00:12:33,840 --> 00:12:36,440 Speaker 1: I don't think that will play. And the reason is 227 00:12:36,480 --> 00:12:38,440 Speaker 1: that to have an insanity defense, you have to have 228 00:12:38,480 --> 00:12:42,080 Speaker 1: an established medical condition and you cannot know the difference 229 00:12:42,080 --> 00:12:45,720 Speaker 1: between right and wrong. Well, when you wear a mask 230 00:12:45,760 --> 00:12:48,560 Speaker 1: and have fake IDs and meticulously plan for a murder, 231 00:12:49,440 --> 00:12:53,440 Speaker 1: you're definitely able to distinguish between right and wrong. You 232 00:12:53,480 --> 00:12:54,960 Speaker 1: know what you did was illegal. You know how, we 233 00:12:55,000 --> 00:12:57,440 Speaker 1: know because you planned for it to not be caught. 234 00:12:57,640 --> 00:13:01,160 Speaker 1: And then after you ran away and hid and tried 235 00:13:01,200 --> 00:13:03,760 Speaker 1: to conceal your identity. Well, that shows you knew the 236 00:13:03,800 --> 00:13:05,640 Speaker 1: difference between right and wrong. You knew what you did 237 00:13:05,760 --> 00:13:08,720 Speaker 1: was illegal, you knew the consequences of your actions. So 238 00:13:08,800 --> 00:13:10,560 Speaker 1: I don't think they have much of a chance at 239 00:13:10,600 --> 00:13:14,000 Speaker 1: an exandy defense. Now they could have a different defense 240 00:13:14,320 --> 00:13:18,040 Speaker 1: to claim that he was under extreme emotional disturbance, which 241 00:13:18,720 --> 00:13:21,120 Speaker 1: would make it more of a manslaughter case than a 242 00:13:21,200 --> 00:13:23,760 Speaker 1: murder case. That could get you between five and twenty 243 00:13:23,760 --> 00:13:26,600 Speaker 1: five years in prison as opposed to up to life 244 00:13:26,600 --> 00:13:29,120 Speaker 1: in prison for murder. That may be a better defense, 245 00:13:29,200 --> 00:13:32,960 Speaker 1: not a complete acquittal, but something less than murder. And 246 00:13:33,000 --> 00:13:36,880 Speaker 1: then there's always the specter of jury nullification. It's a 247 00:13:36,920 --> 00:13:40,760 Speaker 1: prosecutor's worst nightmare where the jury just feels sympathy for 248 00:13:40,840 --> 00:13:44,120 Speaker 1: the guy and ignores the evidence and ignores the law 249 00:13:44,640 --> 00:13:48,079 Speaker 1: and then just set them free. That's always a possibility 250 00:13:48,080 --> 00:13:50,800 Speaker 1: when you're dealing with this kind of unusual case of 251 00:13:50,840 --> 00:13:53,360 Speaker 1: a defendant who will probably take the stand and probably 252 00:13:53,360 --> 00:13:57,640 Speaker 1: gain some sympathy from the public, if not members of 253 00:13:57,640 --> 00:13:58,120 Speaker 1: the jury. 254 00:13:58,679 --> 00:14:02,240 Speaker 3: Jury selection is always important, but is it critical in 255 00:14:02,240 --> 00:14:02,760 Speaker 3: this case? 256 00:14:03,200 --> 00:14:06,320 Speaker 1: Yeah? Jury selection is always important. A lot of cases 257 00:14:06,360 --> 00:14:09,079 Speaker 1: of one and loss injury selection, and this one will 258 00:14:09,120 --> 00:14:13,120 Speaker 1: be crucially. You're dealing with a progressive area, relatively speaking, 259 00:14:13,160 --> 00:14:19,360 Speaker 1: in Manhattan, where people probably feel similarly to Luigi about 260 00:14:19,400 --> 00:14:23,080 Speaker 1: insurance companies. But you got I just say, this guy 261 00:14:23,120 --> 00:14:25,040 Speaker 1: went too far. I mean, you really have to put 262 00:14:25,040 --> 00:14:26,480 Speaker 1: your head in the stand and think we're just not 263 00:14:26,600 --> 00:14:30,600 Speaker 1: a country of laws if you are going to sanction murder. 264 00:14:30,840 --> 00:14:33,480 Speaker 1: So I do think that his defense that they had 265 00:14:33,520 --> 00:14:36,280 Speaker 1: a coming is a bridge too far. But you know, 266 00:14:36,320 --> 00:14:39,600 Speaker 1: he does have some some claims that could show that 267 00:14:39,640 --> 00:14:42,400 Speaker 1: he was under extreme emotional disturbance by saying that he 268 00:14:42,440 --> 00:14:45,400 Speaker 1: had back surgery. Maybe he was taking pain pills. His 269 00:14:45,400 --> 00:14:49,160 Speaker 1: family went through all this and he just acted irrationally. 270 00:14:49,680 --> 00:14:51,200 Speaker 1: And this is the type of think. It's more of 271 00:14:51,240 --> 00:14:53,560 Speaker 1: a man slaughter case than a murder case. We'll see. 272 00:14:53,560 --> 00:14:56,960 Speaker 1: But I don't think that Karen Friedman Magnifilo is out 273 00:14:56,960 --> 00:14:59,880 Speaker 1: of defenses. I think she has a real legitimate chance 274 00:15:00,040 --> 00:15:02,520 Speaker 1: to get him something less than life in prison. 275 00:15:02,880 --> 00:15:05,400 Speaker 3: Before I let you go, Dave, I want to get 276 00:15:05,440 --> 00:15:10,480 Speaker 3: your take on a Georgia appeals court disqualifying Fulton County 277 00:15:10,520 --> 00:15:14,520 Speaker 3: District Attorney Fawnie Willis and her office from handling the 278 00:15:14,640 --> 00:15:20,280 Speaker 3: twenty twenty election interference prosecution of President elect Donald Trump, 279 00:15:20,400 --> 00:15:25,040 Speaker 3: citing the appearance of impropriety stemming from her relationship with 280 00:15:25,120 --> 00:15:28,600 Speaker 3: a former member of the prosecution team. Although the appeals 281 00:15:28,640 --> 00:15:32,560 Speaker 3: court denied Trump's bid to have the indictment tossed out, 282 00:15:33,240 --> 00:15:35,600 Speaker 3: She's going to appeal. But do you think that case 283 00:15:35,720 --> 00:15:37,600 Speaker 3: is going to die? 284 00:15:37,680 --> 00:15:39,760 Speaker 1: If she's off the case, the case dies. I do 285 00:15:39,840 --> 00:15:42,120 Speaker 1: not believe another DA is going to want to step 286 00:15:42,120 --> 00:15:44,560 Speaker 1: into this case and pursue it with the zeal that 287 00:15:44,800 --> 00:15:47,440 Speaker 1: Fannie Wilson. I think that it will wither and die 288 00:15:47,480 --> 00:15:50,320 Speaker 1: on the vine. Now as far as will happens. She's 289 00:15:50,360 --> 00:15:51,920 Speaker 1: going to the Supreme Court of Georgia. I don't know 290 00:15:51,920 --> 00:15:53,720 Speaker 1: which way we'll go. I did not think the appellate 291 00:15:53,760 --> 00:15:59,680 Speaker 1: Court was going to overrule Judge McAfee and disqualify her. So, boy, 292 00:16:00,160 --> 00:16:02,520 Speaker 1: that surprised me, And so would it surprise me if 293 00:16:02,520 --> 00:16:06,320 Speaker 1: the State Supreme Court overruled the appellate court. Perhaps. I 294 00:16:06,320 --> 00:16:08,000 Speaker 1: don't know what's going to happen next. But this thing 295 00:16:08,120 --> 00:16:11,000 Speaker 1: was a self inflicted wound. This was a solid case 296 00:16:11,040 --> 00:16:15,360 Speaker 1: against Trump and his cohorts. But because the DA hired 297 00:16:15,360 --> 00:16:18,400 Speaker 1: a special prosecutor who she had a romantic relationship with, 298 00:16:19,120 --> 00:16:22,080 Speaker 1: it muddled everything up and now were left with this. 299 00:16:22,480 --> 00:16:25,120 Speaker 3: Oh he's a pleasure, Dave, thanks so much. That's Palm 300 00:16:25,120 --> 00:16:29,040 Speaker 3: Beach County State Attorney Dave Ahrenberg turning out his Supreme 301 00:16:29,120 --> 00:16:33,960 Speaker 3: Court news. The justices are fast tracking TikTok's challenge to 302 00:16:34,040 --> 00:16:37,160 Speaker 3: a law that would ban the popular social media platform 303 00:16:37,560 --> 00:16:41,000 Speaker 3: on January nineteenth if it isn't sold by its Chinese 304 00:16:41,080 --> 00:16:45,440 Speaker 3: parent company. The court has scheduled a special argument session 305 00:16:45,520 --> 00:16:49,160 Speaker 3: on January tenth to consider the law before it takes 306 00:16:49,160 --> 00:16:53,360 Speaker 3: effect on January nineteenth. TikTok and its parent company say 307 00:16:53,360 --> 00:16:57,560 Speaker 3: the law violates the Constitution's free speech protections, but the 308 00:16:57,640 --> 00:17:01,080 Speaker 3: DC Appellate Court unanimously up hell of the law earlier 309 00:17:01,160 --> 00:17:05,040 Speaker 3: this month as a legitimate means of protecting national security 310 00:17:05,080 --> 00:17:08,320 Speaker 3: and user privacy. Joining me is Professor Eric Goleman of 311 00:17:08,320 --> 00:17:11,639 Speaker 3: the Santa Clara University Law School. He's co director of 312 00:17:11,680 --> 00:17:13,240 Speaker 3: the High Tech Law Institute. 313 00:17:13,280 --> 00:17:14,080 Speaker 4: The Court has. 314 00:17:13,960 --> 00:17:18,360 Speaker 3: Scheduled arguments for January tenth, with a special argument day, 315 00:17:18,520 --> 00:17:21,679 Speaker 3: two hours of argument, double the usual time. 316 00:17:22,040 --> 00:17:25,080 Speaker 4: How unusual is it and what does it signify? If anything? 317 00:17:25,440 --> 00:17:27,919 Speaker 6: Every Supreme Court case is unusual. It's one of the 318 00:17:28,040 --> 00:17:32,280 Speaker 6: rarest events in litigation. But this case is unusual for 319 00:17:32,400 --> 00:17:36,720 Speaker 6: the Supreme Court procedure. They've set up an expedited process 320 00:17:36,760 --> 00:17:39,160 Speaker 6: that they don't normally follow, and it means that they're 321 00:17:39,160 --> 00:17:41,560 Speaker 6: going to be moving fast. But they're probably also not 322 00:17:41,600 --> 00:17:45,000 Speaker 6: going to be able to issue this kind of quality 323 00:17:45,000 --> 00:17:47,399 Speaker 6: of opinions that we're used to, so they're probably going 324 00:17:47,440 --> 00:17:49,520 Speaker 6: to have to cut some corners along the way as well. 325 00:17:49,760 --> 00:17:51,560 Speaker 6: So this is an unusual case for them. 326 00:17:52,160 --> 00:17:55,280 Speaker 3: In the Bushfee Gore case, they ruled the day after 327 00:17:55,359 --> 00:17:59,240 Speaker 3: they heard oral arguments, and just three days after they 328 00:17:59,359 --> 00:18:01,600 Speaker 3: agreed to take the case. Do you think with this 329 00:18:01,760 --> 00:18:06,359 Speaker 3: expedited schedule they're looking to do something before January nineteenth. 330 00:18:06,960 --> 00:18:08,639 Speaker 6: I don't think they would have built to schedule like 331 00:18:08,720 --> 00:18:12,840 Speaker 6: this unless they plan to give some ruling before January nineteenth. 332 00:18:13,080 --> 00:18:15,880 Speaker 6: But you mentioned bushby Gore, and that's actually a good 333 00:18:15,880 --> 00:18:18,919 Speaker 6: example of the problems that are awaiting the Supreme Court. 334 00:18:19,400 --> 00:18:22,600 Speaker 6: Not only was that opinion fragmented in the sense that 335 00:18:22,800 --> 00:18:26,280 Speaker 6: every judge wrote for themselves, but also that opinion has 336 00:18:26,280 --> 00:18:30,080 Speaker 6: been roundly criticized as being not the same kind of 337 00:18:30,400 --> 00:18:34,320 Speaker 6: standard quality of judging that we expect from the Supreme Court. 338 00:18:34,840 --> 00:18:38,560 Speaker 6: So the Bush versus Gore example is actually a cautionary 339 00:18:38,600 --> 00:18:41,000 Speaker 6: tale for the Supreme Court. Odds are that they're going 340 00:18:41,040 --> 00:18:44,480 Speaker 6: to issue multiple opinions and that it might not be 341 00:18:44,600 --> 00:18:46,240 Speaker 6: to the level of quality that we want. 342 00:18:46,640 --> 00:18:50,800 Speaker 5: The Justices could have acted on the emergency request by 343 00:18:51,040 --> 00:18:54,520 Speaker 5: TikTok and blocked the law while the case moves forward. 344 00:18:54,680 --> 00:18:56,760 Speaker 4: Wouldn't that have been an easier way to handle this? 345 00:18:57,240 --> 00:18:59,960 Speaker 6: As an outsider, it looks like what the Supreme Court 346 00:19:00,080 --> 00:19:03,000 Speaker 6: should have done was put the law on hold until 347 00:19:03,000 --> 00:19:07,359 Speaker 6: the Supreme Court could do a standard process for its review. 348 00:19:07,560 --> 00:19:11,920 Speaker 6: Not do this expedited corner cutting approach. And I don't 349 00:19:11,960 --> 00:19:14,480 Speaker 6: know why they didn't do that, but that's the choice 350 00:19:14,480 --> 00:19:17,719 Speaker 6: they made, and so they've clearly decided that they're going 351 00:19:17,800 --> 00:19:19,040 Speaker 6: to have to move faster. 352 00:19:19,600 --> 00:19:25,080 Speaker 3: Are they balancing the First Amendment against national security concerns 353 00:19:25,119 --> 00:19:29,240 Speaker 3: and the court's deference to Congress and the Executive branch 354 00:19:29,400 --> 00:19:31,920 Speaker 3: in making national security decisions. 355 00:19:32,359 --> 00:19:33,760 Speaker 6: That's a good summary, but if you in mind, I'm 356 00:19:33,760 --> 00:19:37,160 Speaker 6: going to restated a little bit. Absolutely, the EC Circuit, 357 00:19:37,320 --> 00:19:41,080 Speaker 6: which hurt the TikTok case and had sent the case 358 00:19:41,160 --> 00:19:44,680 Speaker 6: up to the Supreme Court, said that the law was censorship, 359 00:19:44,920 --> 00:19:49,280 Speaker 6: that the laws censored TikTok and its users, but nevertheless 360 00:19:49,280 --> 00:19:53,800 Speaker 6: that censorship was justified on national security concerns. That creates 361 00:19:53,920 --> 00:19:56,720 Speaker 6: really two tracks for the Supreme Court to pursue. One 362 00:19:56,800 --> 00:20:00,639 Speaker 6: track they could pursue is to say the laws censorship, 363 00:20:01,119 --> 00:20:05,200 Speaker 6: and yet it survives, like the DC Circuit said, because 364 00:20:05,240 --> 00:20:09,600 Speaker 6: the nationalist security concerns overweigh the laws of free speech. 365 00:20:09,920 --> 00:20:12,840 Speaker 6: Another attract is that they could say, we agree that 366 00:20:13,200 --> 00:20:16,000 Speaker 6: the law is censorship and that's the reason why it 367 00:20:16,000 --> 00:20:19,240 Speaker 6: should be struck down. And so the DC Circuits opinion 368 00:20:19,359 --> 00:20:23,159 Speaker 6: that prestages. The Supreme Court's review really set up the 369 00:20:23,160 --> 00:20:27,040 Speaker 6: Supreme Court to answer that fundamental question, under what circumstances 370 00:20:27,359 --> 00:20:31,960 Speaker 6: does national security override what is on its space? And 371 00:20:32,000 --> 00:20:34,320 Speaker 6: everyone seems to agree it's just censorship. 372 00:20:35,440 --> 00:20:40,240 Speaker 3: And I mean, do you have based on their past opinions, 373 00:20:40,600 --> 00:20:42,719 Speaker 3: do you have any feel for how this. I mean, 374 00:20:42,720 --> 00:20:48,720 Speaker 3: they're usually it seems like they are. They usually deferred 375 00:20:48,800 --> 00:20:52,480 Speaker 3: on national security and they're also big on First Amendment. 376 00:20:53,359 --> 00:20:54,560 Speaker 4: I mean, do you have any feel. 377 00:20:56,000 --> 00:20:57,880 Speaker 6: It's hard to predict what the Supreme Court is going 378 00:20:57,920 --> 00:21:01,159 Speaker 6: to do because there really are two different dynamics pushing 379 00:21:01,200 --> 00:21:04,960 Speaker 6: them in opposite directions. Back in July, the Supreme Court 380 00:21:05,000 --> 00:21:09,200 Speaker 6: issued a very strong endorsement of the First Amendment protections 381 00:21:09,240 --> 00:21:11,399 Speaker 6: for social media. And so if we look at what 382 00:21:11,440 --> 00:21:14,280 Speaker 6: the Supreme Court has said just a few months ago, 383 00:21:14,280 --> 00:21:17,359 Speaker 6: they said, if it's censoring social media, that sounds like 384 00:21:17,400 --> 00:21:20,200 Speaker 6: a First Amendment problem. On the other hand, you had 385 00:21:20,200 --> 00:21:24,040 Speaker 6: this DC Circuit opinion that was a unanimous opinion from 386 00:21:24,160 --> 00:21:27,960 Speaker 6: the lower court saying that the national security concerns here 387 00:21:28,000 --> 00:21:32,480 Speaker 6: overrode free speech concerns. And the Supreme Court listens carefully 388 00:21:32,520 --> 00:21:35,360 Speaker 6: to the DC Circuit, It's a well respected court. They 389 00:21:35,400 --> 00:21:38,159 Speaker 6: put together an opinion that was designed to be persuasive 390 00:21:38,200 --> 00:21:40,960 Speaker 6: for the Supreme Court. So if we look at what 391 00:21:41,000 --> 00:21:43,240 Speaker 6: the Supreme Court then in July, it looks like the 392 00:21:43,280 --> 00:21:45,679 Speaker 6: TikTok band should not succeed. If we look at what 393 00:21:45,760 --> 00:21:48,600 Speaker 6: the DC Circuit advised the Supreme Court, it looks like 394 00:21:48,880 --> 00:21:51,639 Speaker 6: the band should be upheld. And so I don't know 395 00:21:51,680 --> 00:21:53,760 Speaker 6: which strand is going to override the other. 396 00:21:54,320 --> 00:21:56,840 Speaker 3: The public still hasn't seen evidence from the government that 397 00:21:57,000 --> 00:22:01,080 Speaker 3: China use the app to influence US citizens or to 398 00:22:01,160 --> 00:22:04,880 Speaker 3: steal data, like a Supreme court be looking for some. 399 00:22:04,880 --> 00:22:05,600 Speaker 4: Of that evidence. 400 00:22:06,119 --> 00:22:09,000 Speaker 6: So there have been many closed door discussions about the 401 00:22:09,040 --> 00:22:13,240 Speaker 6: alleged national security concerns raised by TikTok, evidence that has 402 00:22:13,280 --> 00:22:15,760 Speaker 6: not seen the light of day for the public. The 403 00:22:15,880 --> 00:22:18,399 Speaker 6: DC Circuit's opinion made it clear that it would not 404 00:22:18,480 --> 00:22:21,600 Speaker 6: relying on any of that hidden evidence, that they were 405 00:22:21,600 --> 00:22:24,639 Speaker 6: relying only on the evidence that's been introduced into the 406 00:22:24,680 --> 00:22:29,679 Speaker 6: public sphere. That then creates a dilemma because some people 407 00:22:29,720 --> 00:22:32,640 Speaker 6: might find that evident's not credible, that it's a lot 408 00:22:32,640 --> 00:22:36,560 Speaker 6: of smoking mirrors, it's a lot of implications and inferences, 409 00:22:36,680 --> 00:22:40,520 Speaker 6: but it's not exactly the kind of smoking gun conclusion 410 00:22:41,080 --> 00:22:44,440 Speaker 6: that would dictate the potential loss of a major free 411 00:22:44,440 --> 00:22:47,760 Speaker 6: speech right. So part of the challenge for the Supreme 412 00:22:47,800 --> 00:22:51,120 Speaker 6: Court will be to decide what exactly is a threat 413 00:22:51,119 --> 00:22:54,280 Speaker 6: to national security? How seriously can we take the evidence 414 00:22:54,320 --> 00:22:57,960 Speaker 6: that's been presented in the public light and will we 415 00:22:58,080 --> 00:23:01,879 Speaker 6: agree with the DC circuits concern because not everyone does. 416 00:23:02,400 --> 00:23:05,280 Speaker 3: Some TikTok users seem to be waking up to the 417 00:23:05,359 --> 00:23:10,560 Speaker 3: fact that it may be gone on January nineteenth. Do 418 00:23:10,600 --> 00:23:13,240 Speaker 3: you think the Court will address the concerns of the 419 00:23:13,520 --> 00:23:16,320 Speaker 3: one hundred and seventy million US users. 420 00:23:16,800 --> 00:23:20,120 Speaker 6: I'm hoping that the Court will be sensitive to the 421 00:23:20,119 --> 00:23:23,480 Speaker 6: fact that not only does TikTok have free speech trades, 422 00:23:23,520 --> 00:23:26,440 Speaker 6: but so do all the millions of users, millions of 423 00:23:26,480 --> 00:23:30,040 Speaker 6: Americans who are talking to each other on TikTok. And 424 00:23:30,359 --> 00:23:34,359 Speaker 6: even if we disregard TikTok's interests, we still ought to 425 00:23:34,440 --> 00:23:37,480 Speaker 6: care about the conversations that are taking place by and 426 00:23:37,600 --> 00:23:41,040 Speaker 6: among Americans on TikTok that are all in jeopardy due 427 00:23:41,080 --> 00:23:44,520 Speaker 6: to this ban. The TC Circuit really didn't care about 428 00:23:44,520 --> 00:23:47,480 Speaker 6: that issue. They just lumped it together under the broad 429 00:23:47,520 --> 00:23:51,040 Speaker 6: heading of TikTok's concerns. They didn't otherwise pay attention to 430 00:23:51,119 --> 00:23:55,080 Speaker 6: TikTok's user's interests. I'm hopeful the Supreme Court will be 431 00:23:55,119 --> 00:23:59,000 Speaker 6: more sensitive to that, but we'll have to see Jump. 432 00:23:58,760 --> 00:24:03,480 Speaker 3: Takes office after the TikTok ban goes into effect if 433 00:24:03,480 --> 00:24:06,040 Speaker 3: the Supreme Court doesn't do anything about that, He's been 434 00:24:06,080 --> 00:24:06,600 Speaker 3: all over. 435 00:24:06,480 --> 00:24:08,480 Speaker 4: The map about TikTok. 436 00:24:08,760 --> 00:24:14,520 Speaker 3: He met with executives of TikTok at marl Lago this week. 437 00:24:14,920 --> 00:24:17,280 Speaker 3: He said recently he has a warm spot in his 438 00:24:17,359 --> 00:24:20,080 Speaker 3: heart for TikTok. Let's say he does want to do 439 00:24:20,160 --> 00:24:21,160 Speaker 3: something about. 440 00:24:20,840 --> 00:24:22,080 Speaker 4: It, what could he do. 441 00:24:22,520 --> 00:24:25,920 Speaker 6: By the time Trump takes office, either the TikTok ban 442 00:24:26,080 --> 00:24:30,399 Speaker 6: will be enjoyed permanently or temporarily, or it will be 443 00:24:30,440 --> 00:24:33,400 Speaker 6: an effect So the law has a mechanism that gives 444 00:24:33,400 --> 00:24:36,120 Speaker 6: the president some discretion with respect to TikTok, but only 445 00:24:36,160 --> 00:24:39,080 Speaker 6: Biden will be able to exercise that. So we'll know 446 00:24:39,200 --> 00:24:41,720 Speaker 6: what Biden does before these office. But by the time 447 00:24:41,720 --> 00:24:45,359 Speaker 6: Trump gets there, that particular option in the statue to 448 00:24:45,400 --> 00:24:48,120 Speaker 6: delay the effectiveness of law won't be available to him. 449 00:24:48,280 --> 00:24:50,800 Speaker 6: So at that point, Trump really has two choices. If 450 00:24:50,800 --> 00:24:53,440 Speaker 6: you really want to protect TikTok first, as he could 451 00:24:53,480 --> 00:24:56,920 Speaker 6: go back to Congress and ask Congress to rethink its banned. 452 00:24:57,320 --> 00:25:00,000 Speaker 6: I don't think that's going to go anywhere. Even trump 453 00:25:00,320 --> 00:25:04,439 Speaker 6: most loyal fans have been very solidly against anything that 454 00:25:04,560 --> 00:25:06,960 Speaker 6: looks like it would benefit China, and so I just 455 00:25:07,000 --> 00:25:09,119 Speaker 6: don't think that even if Trump asks, he's going to 456 00:25:09,200 --> 00:25:11,840 Speaker 6: get a majority of Congress to change their minds. The 457 00:25:11,880 --> 00:25:14,040 Speaker 6: other thing that Trump can do is that he could 458 00:25:14,160 --> 00:25:17,399 Speaker 6: ask the Department of Justice not to enforce the laws, 459 00:25:17,400 --> 00:25:20,560 Speaker 6: that the Department Justice could take a voluntary stance that 460 00:25:20,560 --> 00:25:23,000 Speaker 6: those laws in effect, they're not going to devote any 461 00:25:23,000 --> 00:25:26,399 Speaker 6: prosecutorial resources to it. Trump doesn't have the power to 462 00:25:26,440 --> 00:25:28,800 Speaker 6: tell the DOJ what to do. He hass to ask. 463 00:25:29,440 --> 00:25:32,159 Speaker 6: In practice, if he asked the DOJ to do something 464 00:25:32,280 --> 00:25:36,320 Speaker 6: or not, they would likely do it. However, that only 465 00:25:36,400 --> 00:25:40,280 Speaker 6: works if everyone around the Department Justice believes that the 466 00:25:40,280 --> 00:25:44,320 Speaker 6: Department Justice won't actually change its mind, and that depends 467 00:25:44,400 --> 00:25:47,400 Speaker 6: on believing that Trump won't change his mind. And given 468 00:25:47,440 --> 00:25:50,879 Speaker 6: how mear curial Trump is, how often he has changed 469 00:25:50,880 --> 00:25:53,919 Speaker 6: his tune, I don't think anyone would believe the Department 470 00:25:53,960 --> 00:25:55,840 Speaker 6: of Justice if it said that it wasn't going to 471 00:25:55,920 --> 00:25:58,840 Speaker 6: enforce the law that. I just think that everyone would 472 00:25:58,960 --> 00:26:03,120 Speaker 6: view that as a short term statement, subject to change, 473 00:26:03,400 --> 00:26:06,840 Speaker 6: and not make any decisions and reliance on it. So 474 00:26:07,000 --> 00:26:10,480 Speaker 6: I really don't think Trump has any valid options to 475 00:26:10,720 --> 00:26:13,080 Speaker 6: walk back the ban. You do, they have to go 476 00:26:13,119 --> 00:26:15,280 Speaker 6: to Congress, or you have to ask to GEO dude 477 00:26:15,320 --> 00:26:18,120 Speaker 6: do something, which I don't think would really make a difference. 478 00:26:18,480 --> 00:26:22,080 Speaker 6: So this ban is real, and it's unfortunate that so 479 00:26:22,160 --> 00:26:25,080 Speaker 6: many Americans don't realize that this band is coming for them. 480 00:26:25,640 --> 00:26:27,920 Speaker 3: So people say, well, I have TikTok on my phone, 481 00:26:28,040 --> 00:26:31,040 Speaker 3: I'm still going to use it. Explain what happens if 482 00:26:31,160 --> 00:26:32,960 Speaker 3: this ban goes into effect. 483 00:26:33,600 --> 00:26:36,479 Speaker 6: I'm still a little unclear about exactly what would happen 484 00:26:36,760 --> 00:26:41,320 Speaker 6: post ban. We know that new downloads will become extremely difficult, 485 00:26:41,359 --> 00:26:45,080 Speaker 6: if not impossible, So the ban affects the app stores. 486 00:26:45,119 --> 00:26:47,119 Speaker 6: The app stores are going to do whatever the government 487 00:26:47,160 --> 00:26:49,840 Speaker 6: tells them to do, and so the government tells them 488 00:26:49,920 --> 00:26:51,720 Speaker 6: to take the apps out of their app stores, they'll 489 00:26:51,720 --> 00:26:51,960 Speaker 6: do it. 490 00:26:52,240 --> 00:26:52,400 Speaker 4: So. 491 00:26:52,840 --> 00:26:56,960 Speaker 6: In addition, other service providers in the US are supposed 492 00:26:57,040 --> 00:27:00,640 Speaker 6: to not provide support to TikTok, and I don't exactly 493 00:27:00,640 --> 00:27:03,480 Speaker 6: know what implications that would have for the experience of 494 00:27:03,480 --> 00:27:06,720 Speaker 6: the users who already have installed the app. I think 495 00:27:06,760 --> 00:27:09,439 Speaker 6: what's likely to happen is that the app is going 496 00:27:09,520 --> 00:27:12,480 Speaker 6: to start a death spiral. It won't happen in overnight, 497 00:27:12,840 --> 00:27:16,200 Speaker 6: but over time, people will invest less of their time, 498 00:27:16,640 --> 00:27:20,560 Speaker 6: or content producers will invest less in producing TikTok content, 499 00:27:21,040 --> 00:27:23,639 Speaker 6: and so over time it becomes a ghost town. That 500 00:27:23,760 --> 00:27:27,160 Speaker 6: might take months or years. But by stopping the inflow 501 00:27:27,200 --> 00:27:30,960 Speaker 6: of new users and by making it harder for existing 502 00:27:31,040 --> 00:27:33,480 Speaker 6: users to take advantage of it, I just think people 503 00:27:33,520 --> 00:27:34,920 Speaker 6: will start to migrate elsewhere. 504 00:27:35,200 --> 00:27:38,720 Speaker 3: Yeah, and it's papers TikTok said that being shuttered for 505 00:27:38,760 --> 00:27:41,000 Speaker 3: even one month would cause it to lose about a 506 00:27:41,040 --> 00:27:44,880 Speaker 3: third of its US users, So we see what would 507 00:27:44,880 --> 00:27:46,560 Speaker 3: happen losing. 508 00:27:46,240 --> 00:27:49,439 Speaker 6: The users outright. It's also that users are just going 509 00:27:49,480 --> 00:27:51,920 Speaker 6: to invest less of their time, or content producers will 510 00:27:51,960 --> 00:27:54,919 Speaker 6: invest less in producing good content. People are just going 511 00:27:55,000 --> 00:27:57,600 Speaker 6: to take their marbles and play it in some other playgrounds. 512 00:27:57,640 --> 00:28:00,760 Speaker 6: But the problem with the TikTok ban, and why that's 513 00:28:00,800 --> 00:28:05,600 Speaker 6: so legally significant, is that some conversations won't migrate anywhere else, 514 00:28:05,640 --> 00:28:09,240 Speaker 6: They'll simply be lost. That there's certain ways that TikTok 515 00:28:09,240 --> 00:28:12,080 Speaker 6: conversations work that don't work on other environments, and there's 516 00:28:12,080 --> 00:28:15,840 Speaker 6: certain communities that develops on TikTok that won't replicate elsewhere. 517 00:28:16,160 --> 00:28:19,040 Speaker 6: So though TikTok will become a ghost town and some 518 00:28:19,080 --> 00:28:22,000 Speaker 6: people will migrate to other services, there's going to be 519 00:28:22,000 --> 00:28:24,280 Speaker 6: some conversations to get lost in the equation. And that's 520 00:28:24,320 --> 00:28:25,600 Speaker 6: the real speech charm. 521 00:28:25,800 --> 00:28:29,000 Speaker 3: Have you heard anything new about a possible sale because 522 00:28:29,000 --> 00:28:31,680 Speaker 3: of the ban, Although a lot of people say it's 523 00:28:31,720 --> 00:28:34,240 Speaker 3: not a ban because it can be sold, so it's 524 00:28:34,280 --> 00:28:36,439 Speaker 3: not a ban. I mean there seems to be nobody 525 00:28:36,440 --> 00:28:37,959 Speaker 3: who's stepping up to buy it. 526 00:28:38,680 --> 00:28:41,240 Speaker 6: Yeah, we don't know what's going on in backroom negotiations. 527 00:28:41,480 --> 00:28:43,640 Speaker 6: We don't know to what it's done, they're not able 528 00:28:43,680 --> 00:28:46,240 Speaker 6: to work on a price, or that the Chinese government 529 00:28:46,280 --> 00:28:49,600 Speaker 6: is blocking the sale behind the scenes, or that there 530 00:28:49,680 --> 00:28:52,080 Speaker 6: just has any interest in taking it over. It's really 531 00:28:52,640 --> 00:28:56,800 Speaker 6: hard to reverse engineer why a sale isn't happening. But 532 00:28:57,240 --> 00:28:59,240 Speaker 6: TikTok has been clear all along that that was not 533 00:28:59,480 --> 00:29:01,440 Speaker 6: it's game place and that it was going to accept 534 00:29:01,440 --> 00:29:04,720 Speaker 6: the ban over a sale. And from my perspective, the 535 00:29:04,800 --> 00:29:08,520 Speaker 6: idea of sell or ban is really a ban, and 536 00:29:08,760 --> 00:29:11,880 Speaker 6: yet the DC Circuit was open idea. All TikTok had 537 00:29:11,880 --> 00:29:14,400 Speaker 6: to do was just sell, And from my perspective, I 538 00:29:14,680 --> 00:29:16,640 Speaker 6: felt offended by that. I felt like that was really 539 00:29:16,720 --> 00:29:17,160 Speaker 6: toned up. 540 00:29:17,360 --> 00:29:22,840 Speaker 3: Bloomberg Intelligence litigation analyst Matthew Shettenhelm is giving TikTok a 541 00:29:22,920 --> 00:29:26,960 Speaker 3: thirty percent chance of success at the Supreme Court. So 542 00:29:27,120 --> 00:29:30,320 Speaker 3: do you think it's an uphill battle for TikTok at 543 00:29:30,320 --> 00:29:31,480 Speaker 3: the Supreme Court. 544 00:29:31,600 --> 00:29:33,640 Speaker 6: I wouldn't put money on either side of the equation 545 00:29:33,920 --> 00:29:36,760 Speaker 6: TikTok winning or losing the Supreme Court. I just view 546 00:29:36,840 --> 00:29:39,920 Speaker 6: the risks as being too hazy to really make an 547 00:29:40,080 --> 00:29:43,160 Speaker 6: educated gamble. Having said that, for those who think that 548 00:29:43,240 --> 00:29:46,040 Speaker 6: TikTok has an uphill battle, they have good evidence to 549 00:29:46,080 --> 00:29:49,840 Speaker 6: support that. The DC Circus opinion was a unanimous opinion 550 00:29:50,200 --> 00:29:53,000 Speaker 6: and the Supreme Court will absolutely pay attention to it. 551 00:29:53,240 --> 00:29:56,800 Speaker 6: So the most recent statement in this cases TikTok loses, 552 00:29:56,880 --> 00:29:59,360 Speaker 6: the band succeeds, And so anyone who puts the money 553 00:29:59,400 --> 00:30:02,480 Speaker 6: on that I understand. But I also think that the 554 00:30:02,520 --> 00:30:07,080 Speaker 6: Supreme Court is open to an alternative outcome given what 555 00:30:07,160 --> 00:30:09,960 Speaker 6: they said in July. So if they are the people 556 00:30:09,960 --> 00:30:12,040 Speaker 6: put money on TikTok. I could see that as well. 557 00:30:12,840 --> 00:30:17,160 Speaker 3: So what are the other outcomes besides an outright win 558 00:30:17,520 --> 00:30:18,280 Speaker 3: or loss. 559 00:30:18,800 --> 00:30:21,600 Speaker 6: One possibility is that the Supreme Court says that it 560 00:30:21,680 --> 00:30:25,000 Speaker 6: can't reach a final decision and that additional work needs 561 00:30:25,040 --> 00:30:27,520 Speaker 6: to be done by lower courts, so we get a 562 00:30:27,760 --> 00:30:31,360 Speaker 6: non answer for the Supreme Court. Another possible outcomes of 563 00:30:31,480 --> 00:30:35,120 Speaker 6: the Supreme Court upholds parts of the ban and strikes 564 00:30:35,160 --> 00:30:38,080 Speaker 6: down other parts. I don't really know what that looks like. 565 00:30:38,120 --> 00:30:40,600 Speaker 6: We'd have to see, but the point is that it's 566 00:30:40,600 --> 00:30:42,520 Speaker 6: not as easy as just does the Supreme Court uphold 567 00:30:42,520 --> 00:30:45,480 Speaker 6: the ban outright or not, because there's a whole bunch 568 00:30:45,520 --> 00:30:47,520 Speaker 6: of other tools in the Supreme Court's toolkits. 569 00:30:48,000 --> 00:30:48,640 Speaker 4: So we'll talk. 570 00:30:48,520 --> 00:30:51,960 Speaker 3: Again on January tenth. Thanks so much, Eric. That's Professor 571 00:30:52,040 --> 00:30:55,959 Speaker 3: Eric Goleman of the Santa Clara University Law School, turning 572 00:30:56,000 --> 00:30:59,760 Speaker 3: now to a murder conviction. Earlier this week, an acquaintance 573 00:30:59,800 --> 00:31:02,800 Speaker 3: of cash app founder Bob Lee was found guilty of 574 00:31:02,920 --> 00:31:06,760 Speaker 3: murdering him on a downtown San Francisco street in April 575 00:31:06,760 --> 00:31:10,160 Speaker 3: of twenty twenty three, and faces the possibility of life 576 00:31:10,240 --> 00:31:14,040 Speaker 3: in prison. A jury rejected Nima Mamoni's claim that he'd 577 00:31:14,080 --> 00:31:18,400 Speaker 3: stabbed Lee in self defense after Lee, high on drugs 578 00:31:18,400 --> 00:31:21,360 Speaker 3: and sleep deprived, try to attack him with a knife. 579 00:31:21,680 --> 00:31:25,240 Speaker 3: Tuesday's verdict followed about a week of jury deliberations in 580 00:31:25,280 --> 00:31:28,080 Speaker 3: a high profile trial that featured more than a month 581 00:31:28,120 --> 00:31:32,320 Speaker 3: of witness testimony. Joining me is Bloomberg Legal reporter Mathi Nayak, 582 00:31:32,360 --> 00:31:34,960 Speaker 3: who covered the trial. Marthy start by telling us a 583 00:31:35,000 --> 00:31:39,280 Speaker 3: little about Bob Lee and the reaction in San Francisco 584 00:31:39,480 --> 00:31:40,280 Speaker 3: to the shooting. 585 00:31:40,960 --> 00:31:45,240 Speaker 7: So, Bob Lee is a celebrated executive in the technology 586 00:31:45,280 --> 00:31:49,880 Speaker 7: world in San Francisco. He's known as a coder, a 587 00:31:49,960 --> 00:31:55,440 Speaker 7: supercoder in fact, who helped Google develop Android and also 588 00:31:55,480 --> 00:31:59,280 Speaker 7: squares Cash app, which he was an executive app and 589 00:31:59,320 --> 00:32:01,840 Speaker 7: he was a founder off. So when he died, there 590 00:32:01,880 --> 00:32:05,960 Speaker 7: was definitely a lot of reactions, especially you know, at 591 00:32:06,000 --> 00:32:09,360 Speaker 7: first people thought it was possible that someone was just 592 00:32:09,440 --> 00:32:12,040 Speaker 7: killed on the streets of San Francisco. And at the time, 593 00:32:12,040 --> 00:32:14,840 Speaker 7: there was all this news about how San Francisco had 594 00:32:14,880 --> 00:32:18,000 Speaker 7: sort of really spiraled into a state of lawlessness and 595 00:32:18,120 --> 00:32:20,840 Speaker 7: that people could get shot, and that there was drugs 596 00:32:20,880 --> 00:32:23,960 Speaker 7: on the streets, and you know, drug dealers and all 597 00:32:24,000 --> 00:32:26,440 Speaker 7: these bad guys roaming around on the streets. So there 598 00:32:26,480 --> 00:32:29,000 Speaker 7: was definitely a very strong reaction. People were sort of 599 00:32:29,080 --> 00:32:31,920 Speaker 7: surprised that this had happened, and it was only later 600 00:32:31,960 --> 00:32:34,120 Speaker 7: that we learned a little bit more about the facts 601 00:32:34,120 --> 00:32:37,640 Speaker 7: and some brainy videos that then you know, the police shared, 602 00:32:38,040 --> 00:32:40,920 Speaker 7: and then it appeared that he was actually seen, you know, 603 00:32:41,000 --> 00:32:44,760 Speaker 7: not far from the iconic day Bridge tackling this other 604 00:32:44,880 --> 00:32:47,840 Speaker 7: man and they had some sort of an encounter and 605 00:32:47,920 --> 00:32:50,240 Speaker 7: he was stabbed, and then there's also a video of 606 00:32:50,320 --> 00:32:54,760 Speaker 7: him sort of walking away from this encounter. It seems 607 00:32:54,760 --> 00:32:57,440 Speaker 7: like he then called nine one one was leading. So yeah, 608 00:32:57,440 --> 00:33:00,280 Speaker 7: it was definitely a strong reaction given that we don't 609 00:33:00,280 --> 00:33:03,480 Speaker 7: hear a lot of you know, such violent crime. Mondisquez 610 00:33:03,520 --> 00:33:04,200 Speaker 7: of San Francisco. 611 00:33:04,560 --> 00:33:08,320 Speaker 3: So what was the prosecutor's theory of the case. Why 612 00:33:08,360 --> 00:33:10,960 Speaker 3: did they say the defendant did this? 613 00:33:11,760 --> 00:33:15,640 Speaker 7: So it's this very sort of interesting sort of tale 614 00:33:15,680 --> 00:33:20,000 Speaker 7: about Nima Mumeni and his sister Cazar, and Casar was 615 00:33:20,040 --> 00:33:23,640 Speaker 7: friends with Bob Lee, and it turned out that, you know, 616 00:33:24,240 --> 00:33:27,320 Speaker 7: during the trial, there was all this sort of information 617 00:33:27,600 --> 00:33:30,880 Speaker 7: and sort of testimony that came out about the drugs 618 00:33:30,920 --> 00:33:33,280 Speaker 7: that you know, they were doing, and it turns out 619 00:33:33,320 --> 00:33:36,320 Speaker 7: that one night, bob Ly introduced her to a friend 620 00:33:36,360 --> 00:33:38,440 Speaker 7: who was like a party host to a drug dealer, 621 00:33:38,840 --> 00:33:41,800 Speaker 7: and they did some drugs together. There was some sort 622 00:33:41,840 --> 00:33:45,560 Speaker 7: of like sexual assault that Cauzer said she faced from 623 00:33:45,680 --> 00:33:49,800 Speaker 7: this friend of Bob Lee, and she was upset about that. 624 00:33:50,120 --> 00:33:53,560 Speaker 7: And then that night bob Ly and Nima many ended 625 00:33:53,600 --> 00:33:56,960 Speaker 7: up at the Millennium Tower, which is this building in 626 00:33:57,400 --> 00:34:00,960 Speaker 7: San Francisco, luxury high rise apartment and they ended up 627 00:34:01,000 --> 00:34:03,520 Speaker 7: at Kazar's house late at night, and I think Kasar 628 00:34:03,600 --> 00:34:06,360 Speaker 7: had complained to her brother about what had happened and 629 00:34:06,800 --> 00:34:09,120 Speaker 7: he was upset with bob Lee. But the thing is 630 00:34:09,400 --> 00:34:13,400 Speaker 7: that it wasn't Bob Lee who allegedly assaulted the sister, 631 00:34:14,000 --> 00:34:17,240 Speaker 7: but Bobly was the one who sort of introduced Casar 632 00:34:17,440 --> 00:34:22,120 Speaker 7: Nima to the party host who supposedly misbehaved with Kazar. 633 00:34:22,480 --> 00:34:24,680 Speaker 7: So they had some sort of like a tiff over 634 00:34:24,760 --> 00:34:28,120 Speaker 7: this situation. And you know, there's a video of Bob 635 00:34:28,200 --> 00:34:32,800 Speaker 7: Lee and Nima driving away in a car from Millennium Tower, 636 00:34:33,120 --> 00:34:35,279 Speaker 7: and then they got out and they started sort of 637 00:34:35,320 --> 00:34:37,560 Speaker 7: fighting on the streets. And there was also like a 638 00:34:37,600 --> 00:34:42,400 Speaker 7: paring knife that was used in this murder and supposedly 639 00:34:42,640 --> 00:34:46,000 Speaker 7: it was from the same brand of knives and silverware 640 00:34:46,080 --> 00:34:50,759 Speaker 7: that Mima Momeni's sister had in her kitten. So the 641 00:34:50,800 --> 00:34:53,480 Speaker 7: prosecutors said that, you know, they had some sort of 642 00:34:53,520 --> 00:34:57,120 Speaker 7: TIFFs and Lima Mumeni was really angry and like a 643 00:34:57,160 --> 00:35:00,040 Speaker 7: fit of rage, he took that knife and planned to 644 00:35:00,120 --> 00:35:03,319 Speaker 7: drive out and kill bobly in the middle of the night. 645 00:35:03,680 --> 00:35:07,320 Speaker 7: But the defense attorneys it was kind of interesting. Towards 646 00:35:07,400 --> 00:35:09,760 Speaker 7: the end, on the very last day, they showed another 647 00:35:09,840 --> 00:35:12,719 Speaker 7: video which hadn't come up, you know, during the evidence 648 00:35:12,800 --> 00:35:15,080 Speaker 7: that was presented to the jury. But at the very 649 00:35:15,160 --> 00:35:18,239 Speaker 7: last minute, they showed another video of Bob Lee that 650 00:35:18,400 --> 00:35:22,360 Speaker 7: same night standing outside this very exclusive club called the 651 00:35:22,400 --> 00:35:26,480 Speaker 7: Battery for technology executives and other tech industry folks who 652 00:35:26,520 --> 00:35:30,440 Speaker 7: are members there. So he was standing outside doing drugs. 653 00:35:31,239 --> 00:35:33,400 Speaker 7: It looked like he was snotting coke. And the issue 654 00:35:33,440 --> 00:35:35,439 Speaker 7: with all these videos is they're so greatly it's really 655 00:35:35,440 --> 00:35:36,960 Speaker 7: hard to know what's going on, and I'm sure the 656 00:35:37,040 --> 00:35:39,720 Speaker 7: jurists must have struggled with that too. But he's standing 657 00:35:39,719 --> 00:35:43,200 Speaker 7: there and he's holding a knife that looks very similar 658 00:35:43,239 --> 00:35:46,360 Speaker 7: to the knights that was used in the murder. So 659 00:35:46,719 --> 00:35:50,280 Speaker 7: you know, at the last minute, the defense attorneys presented 660 00:35:50,280 --> 00:35:52,920 Speaker 7: this video and said, you know, during closing arguments that 661 00:35:53,040 --> 00:35:55,520 Speaker 7: actually it was Bob Lee's nice and you know, he'd 662 00:35:55,560 --> 00:35:58,719 Speaker 7: used it to snot coke earlier that night, and that 663 00:35:58,880 --> 00:36:02,000 Speaker 7: potentially it was just an act of self defense on 664 00:36:02,200 --> 00:36:04,880 Speaker 7: Nima Momeni's part in terms of he was attacked first 665 00:36:04,920 --> 00:36:07,160 Speaker 7: and he just kind of you know, fought back in 666 00:36:07,239 --> 00:36:10,160 Speaker 7: self defense. And they said that it wasn't like first 667 00:36:10,200 --> 00:36:15,000 Speaker 7: degree murder, wasn't premeditated or wilful, and eventually, you know, 668 00:36:15,040 --> 00:36:17,560 Speaker 7: the jurors found that it was a lesser charge. It 669 00:36:17,680 --> 00:36:20,680 Speaker 7: was second degree murder, so it wasn't premeditated, but they 670 00:36:20,680 --> 00:36:23,439 Speaker 7: did think that Nima Momeni was the one who took 671 00:36:23,560 --> 00:36:25,480 Speaker 7: the knife and stabbed Bobby. 672 00:36:25,760 --> 00:36:29,840 Speaker 3: So the prosecutors were saying that this was a premeditated murder. 673 00:36:30,280 --> 00:36:33,120 Speaker 3: What did they offer to prove premeditation here? 674 00:36:33,560 --> 00:36:35,959 Speaker 7: So I think, you know, there was some phone call 675 00:36:36,120 --> 00:36:39,720 Speaker 7: that Nima Momeni and Bobby had had where they were arguing, 676 00:36:39,800 --> 00:36:42,879 Speaker 7: and they were also having his altercation at Ksar's home 677 00:36:43,000 --> 00:36:46,200 Speaker 7: before they left Millennium Tower that night, so they thought 678 00:36:46,200 --> 00:36:49,360 Speaker 7: that you know, Nima Momeni was engraged and really angry 679 00:36:49,400 --> 00:36:53,239 Speaker 7: at what had happened to his sister and reacted and 680 00:36:53,280 --> 00:36:56,000 Speaker 7: in a fit of rage, was the one who stabbed Bobby. 681 00:36:56,320 --> 00:36:57,880 Speaker 4: The defendant took the stand. 682 00:36:58,120 --> 00:37:00,960 Speaker 7: He did take the stand, and he he talked about 683 00:37:01,000 --> 00:37:06,240 Speaker 7: how there was this altercation and that he, in fact, 684 00:37:06,480 --> 00:37:08,960 Speaker 7: while they were driving off, like it just happened to 685 00:37:09,000 --> 00:37:12,279 Speaker 7: make some sort of bad joke about Bob Lee, like 686 00:37:12,360 --> 00:37:15,120 Speaker 7: potentially going to a strip club that night and not 687 00:37:15,280 --> 00:37:18,920 Speaker 7: going to see his family. That enraged Bob Lee, and 688 00:37:19,080 --> 00:37:22,280 Speaker 7: supposedly they had some sort of altercation in the car 689 00:37:22,520 --> 00:37:24,719 Speaker 7: and they stepped out to talk it out, and then 690 00:37:24,719 --> 00:37:27,680 Speaker 7: it kind of led to this encounter with this knife 691 00:37:27,760 --> 00:37:29,799 Speaker 7: coming out, and according to him, it was just an 692 00:37:29,840 --> 00:37:33,320 Speaker 7: act of self defense. So yeah, he did talk understand 693 00:37:33,320 --> 00:37:36,279 Speaker 7: about this discussion that he had in the car and 694 00:37:36,320 --> 00:37:38,319 Speaker 7: how it got heated and how he made a bad 695 00:37:38,400 --> 00:37:42,040 Speaker 7: joke and how that led things to sort of inspire 696 00:37:42,080 --> 00:37:42,880 Speaker 7: a lot of control. 697 00:37:43,840 --> 00:37:44,359 Speaker 4: They did have. 698 00:37:44,440 --> 00:37:46,280 Speaker 5: Video, Why wasn't it more helpful? 699 00:37:47,080 --> 00:37:49,840 Speaker 7: It was sort of difficult because you know, the videos 700 00:37:49,880 --> 00:37:52,200 Speaker 7: are so brainy, it's hard to see what was going on. 701 00:37:52,320 --> 00:37:54,640 Speaker 7: You can't see, you know, who was the first one 702 00:37:54,719 --> 00:37:57,799 Speaker 7: to stab or get the knife out. We don't know 703 00:37:57,880 --> 00:38:00,319 Speaker 7: whose knife it was, if it was Bob Lee's or not, 704 00:38:00,520 --> 00:38:03,319 Speaker 7: but yeah, there were definitely a lot of gaps. So yeah, 705 00:38:03,360 --> 00:38:06,359 Speaker 7: it was definitely not an easy decision and they took 706 00:38:06,360 --> 00:38:09,879 Speaker 7: about a week or so to decide, but eventually they 707 00:38:09,880 --> 00:38:12,439 Speaker 7: did find that it was the lesser charge of second 708 00:38:12,480 --> 00:38:16,640 Speaker 7: digree murder and that it wasn't feelful and premeditated, but 709 00:38:16,719 --> 00:38:20,320 Speaker 7: that Mima Mumeni did murder Bobby. 710 00:38:20,960 --> 00:38:23,040 Speaker 5: So how much time does he face? 711 00:38:23,880 --> 00:38:27,960 Speaker 7: So he faces sixteen years to life in prison and 712 00:38:28,280 --> 00:38:31,080 Speaker 7: his sentencing date hasn't been set yet but it could 713 00:38:31,160 --> 00:38:33,960 Speaker 7: be a couple of months out, according to District Attorney 714 00:38:34,000 --> 00:38:35,840 Speaker 7: of San Francisco, Brooke Jenkins. 715 00:38:36,200 --> 00:38:39,680 Speaker 4: And was the courtroom packed for the verdict. 716 00:38:39,200 --> 00:38:42,319 Speaker 7: Yes, it was. It was definitely back. There were, you know, 717 00:38:42,360 --> 00:38:45,880 Speaker 7: a lot of members from both sides in terms of 718 00:38:45,920 --> 00:38:51,480 Speaker 7: the families of Bobbly, his ex wife, Crystal Lee and 719 00:38:51,600 --> 00:38:56,439 Speaker 7: his daughter was there as well as on Nima Momeni's side. 720 00:38:57,080 --> 00:39:02,000 Speaker 7: Momeni's mom who had attended a trial and was frequently 721 00:39:02,040 --> 00:39:04,440 Speaker 7: seen in court, And it was kind of interesting she 722 00:39:04,640 --> 00:39:07,719 Speaker 7: was wearing black clothes like initially and then towards the 723 00:39:07,880 --> 00:39:10,440 Speaker 7: end in the last days of the trial and during 724 00:39:10,880 --> 00:39:14,080 Speaker 7: a verdict watch, she was wearing all white. You know, 725 00:39:14,120 --> 00:39:16,880 Speaker 7: she sat there, you know, stoically as the verdict was 726 00:39:16,920 --> 00:39:18,600 Speaker 7: read out, and then you know, later on, as a 727 00:39:18,640 --> 00:39:21,359 Speaker 7: defense attorneys were addressing the media, you could see her, 728 00:39:21,520 --> 00:39:24,680 Speaker 7: you know, upset and sort of wiping away tears. She 729 00:39:24,800 --> 00:39:28,120 Speaker 7: said that she still believes her son is a kind 730 00:39:28,840 --> 00:39:33,440 Speaker 7: and respectful individual, and she was upset by the jury's verdict. 731 00:39:33,680 --> 00:39:36,000 Speaker 5: Did he have any reaction when the verdict was read? 732 00:39:36,520 --> 00:39:39,040 Speaker 7: It was hard to see him because you know, he 733 00:39:39,160 --> 00:39:42,479 Speaker 7: was actually sitting facing towards the judge and we could 734 00:39:42,480 --> 00:39:45,200 Speaker 7: just see the back of his head. But one interesting 735 00:39:45,239 --> 00:39:47,360 Speaker 7: thing to note was when everyone stood up at the 736 00:39:47,520 --> 00:39:51,439 Speaker 7: end when the jurors were leaving, he continued to sit down. 737 00:39:51,520 --> 00:39:54,520 Speaker 7: He just probably was just so upset that he didn't 738 00:39:54,520 --> 00:39:57,160 Speaker 7: stand up when everyone else stood up as a jurors 739 00:39:57,200 --> 00:39:57,960 Speaker 7: left the coast room. 740 00:39:58,280 --> 00:40:00,440 Speaker 3: The defense is they're going to appeal. Do you have 741 00:40:00,480 --> 00:40:02,520 Speaker 3: any idea what they'd appeal on. 742 00:40:03,120 --> 00:40:06,600 Speaker 7: I think they said that certain evidence perhaps was not 743 00:40:06,960 --> 00:40:11,600 Speaker 7: like weighed accurately by jurors, and they feel like even 744 00:40:11,680 --> 00:40:14,560 Speaker 7: though it was the lesser charge of second degree murder, 745 00:40:14,600 --> 00:40:18,600 Speaker 7: not first degree murder that the jurors did make a mistake. 746 00:40:18,680 --> 00:40:21,279 Speaker 7: So yeah, they do plan to appeal and they're sort 747 00:40:21,320 --> 00:40:24,600 Speaker 7: of weighing their options at the moment. Even District Attorney 748 00:40:24,600 --> 00:40:28,120 Speaker 7: Brouke Jenkins said that she was expecting an appeal and 749 00:40:28,160 --> 00:40:30,200 Speaker 7: they're going to continue fighting on. 750 00:40:30,640 --> 00:40:33,560 Speaker 3: Did it come as a surprise in San Francisco, you know, 751 00:40:33,960 --> 00:40:38,560 Speaker 3: the revelation of all this drug use by this respected 752 00:40:39,000 --> 00:40:39,480 Speaker 3: tech guy. 753 00:40:39,920 --> 00:40:43,480 Speaker 7: So you know, it's sort of interesting because it's not surprising, 754 00:40:43,800 --> 00:40:46,279 Speaker 7: you know, I would think that in the world is 755 00:40:46,440 --> 00:40:49,160 Speaker 7: sort of the rich, there is easy access to all 756 00:40:49,200 --> 00:40:51,520 Speaker 7: of this stuff. But just taking it all in during 757 00:40:51,560 --> 00:40:53,960 Speaker 7: the trial, it just struck me that all of this 758 00:40:54,040 --> 00:40:56,080 Speaker 7: is actually going on, and it sort of gave us 759 00:40:56,080 --> 00:40:59,000 Speaker 7: a glimpse into the life of some of these technology 760 00:40:59,200 --> 00:41:03,160 Speaker 7: industry executive and how they need party and you know, 761 00:41:03,200 --> 00:41:05,480 Speaker 7: go to festivals like Birding Man. We know all of 762 00:41:05,520 --> 00:41:08,080 Speaker 7: that stuff, but we don't know what happens on the inside. 763 00:41:08,160 --> 00:41:10,520 Speaker 7: And you know, Bobble's or top Seeded show that he 764 00:41:10,600 --> 00:41:14,279 Speaker 7: had chetanine and cocaine in his body, you know, at 765 00:41:14,320 --> 00:41:16,680 Speaker 7: the time of his death. And then when Casar and 766 00:41:17,080 --> 00:41:20,880 Speaker 7: Mima Momeni's sister took the stend. She talked about how 767 00:41:21,280 --> 00:41:23,920 Speaker 7: the prosecutors had shared some of her text messages and 768 00:41:24,000 --> 00:41:26,719 Speaker 7: she had used a lot of foul language, and she 769 00:41:26,840 --> 00:41:29,960 Speaker 7: said that because she was taking drugs so much that 770 00:41:30,120 --> 00:41:34,520 Speaker 7: sometimes like her messages were really sort of aggressive or 771 00:41:34,600 --> 00:41:37,720 Speaker 7: had bad language because she was doing all these drugs. 772 00:41:37,719 --> 00:41:40,359 Speaker 3: You got to look into another world there, Mauthi, thanks 773 00:41:40,440 --> 00:41:44,600 Speaker 3: so much. That's Bloomberg Legal reporter Malthy Nayak. And that's 774 00:41:44,600 --> 00:41:47,600 Speaker 3: it for this edition of the Bloomberg Law Podcast. Remember 775 00:41:47,600 --> 00:41:49,400 Speaker 3: you've can always get the latest legal and it was 776 00:41:49,440 --> 00:41:52,799 Speaker 3: by subscribing and listening to the show on Apple Podcasts, 777 00:41:52,840 --> 00:41:57,080 Speaker 3: Spotify and at Bloomberg dot com, slash podcast, slash Law. 778 00:41:57,400 --> 00:42:00,080 Speaker 4: I'm June Grosso and this is Bloomberg a