WEBVTT - Subway Chokehold Trial & Courts Face Security Risks 0:00:03.200 --> 0:00:08.320 This is Bloomberg Law with June Brusso from Bloomberg Radio. 0:00:10.520 --> 0:00:12.360 I was scared for myself, but I looked around. I 0:00:12.360 --> 0:00:15.600 saw women and children. He was yelling in their faces, saying, 0:00:16.480 --> 0:00:18.759 saying these threats. I couldn't just sit still. 0:00:18.920 --> 0:00:23.080 Troll began this week for Daniel Penny, the Marine Corps 0:00:23.200 --> 0:00:27.040 veteran charged with recklessly causing the death of a homeless 0:00:27.080 --> 0:00:30.479 man by placing him in a deadly choke hold on 0:00:30.560 --> 0:00:33.880 a New York City subway train last year. The death 0:00:33.920 --> 0:00:38.440 of Jordan Neely ignited a firestorm of protests, debate, and 0:00:38.520 --> 0:00:42.680 division across the city and headlines across the country. Was 0:00:42.760 --> 0:00:46.879 Penny a good samaritan or a vigilante. Penny says he 0:00:47.000 --> 0:00:50.839 was trying to protect himself and the other passengers because 0:00:50.960 --> 0:00:52.800 Neely was threatening them. 0:00:53.120 --> 0:00:55.160 The three main threats that he repeated over and over 0:00:55.360 --> 0:00:58.000 was I'm going to kill you, I'm prepared to go 0:00:58.000 --> 0:01:00.160 to jail for life, and I'm willing to die. 0:01:00.440 --> 0:01:04.160 Jury selection in the case started on Monday. Joining me 0:01:04.240 --> 0:01:08.760 is criminal defense attorney Jeremy Salande, a former Manhattan prosecutor. 0:01:09.080 --> 0:01:13.479 How much of this debate about homelessness and mental illness 0:01:13.560 --> 0:01:16.200 and safety on the subway. How much will that bleed 0:01:16.240 --> 0:01:17.040 into the trial. 0:01:17.319 --> 0:01:19.640 These are issues that are biggest hit home for many 0:01:19.680 --> 0:01:22.399 New Yorkers. But what happens outside the courtroom should remain 0:01:22.440 --> 0:01:25.200 outside the court. What happens inside the courtroom should be 0:01:25.280 --> 0:01:27.880 regulated by the four corners of the law. I would 0:01:27.920 --> 0:01:31.360 not expect that any of it should come into the trial. 0:01:31.560 --> 0:01:34.559 The question is not what Jordan really did or didn't 0:01:34.640 --> 0:01:37.800 do Page weeks once and years before criminal record of 0:01:37.920 --> 0:01:40.920 the health builders being homeless in that moment, in that 0:01:40.920 --> 0:01:45.720 moment in time, was then Teddy justified and taking action 0:01:46.080 --> 0:01:49.480 to subdue Jordan Neili and then ultimately cause his death 0:01:49.480 --> 0:01:51.360 way recklessly and manage it me as the legs by 0:01:51.400 --> 0:01:52.760 the prosecutors. 0:01:52.600 --> 0:01:57.760 Nearly reportedly had mental health and drug addiction issues. You 0:01:57.800 --> 0:02:01.440 don't think that his psychiatric his history, and the fact 0:02:01.480 --> 0:02:06.200 that synthetic cannabinoids known as K two were found in 0:02:06.320 --> 0:02:09.200 his system, you don't think that that will come in. 0:02:09.760 --> 0:02:12.680 First of all, Max Wiley and Judge Wiley's has been 0:02:12.680 --> 0:02:15.120 around the block in terms of the criminal and criminal 0:02:15.240 --> 0:02:18.000 justice for years. He was actually my deputy chief when 0:02:18.000 --> 0:02:19.960 I was a prosecutor, and it's been on the bench 0:02:20.000 --> 0:02:22.320 a long time. I trust it he'll make the right call, 0:02:22.440 --> 0:02:24.560 and in this particular case, I think you have to 0:02:24.600 --> 0:02:29.040 setify the noise and again not looking at his criminal history, 0:02:29.040 --> 0:02:31.680 at his meaning Jordan Aally, not looking at his mental 0:02:31.720 --> 0:02:33.720 health issues. Was it relevant in that moment to the 0:02:33.800 --> 0:02:37.560 determination and the reasonable person analysis, if you will, of 0:02:38.080 --> 0:02:41.240 Daniel Penny when he observed this man throwing down his 0:02:41.360 --> 0:02:43.880 jacket saying something along the lines of I don't care 0:02:43.880 --> 0:02:45.840 if I go to jail or whatever he might have said, 0:02:46.160 --> 0:02:48.920 and the reaction of people. So you have to limit 0:02:48.960 --> 0:02:52.400 it because you can't twist the jury and provide evidence 0:02:52.400 --> 0:02:55.560 that is not relevant in to the determination and decision making. 0:02:55.800 --> 0:02:59.080 Daniel Penny didn't know about the prior history. Daniel Penny 0:02:59.080 --> 0:03:01.840 didn't know about the mental helmets, the K two cause 0:03:02.120 --> 0:03:04.320 and nearly they're acting a certain way. Maybe that could 0:03:04.320 --> 0:03:07.079 be relevant, But what did people see? What does the 0:03:07.160 --> 0:03:09.600 video show and demonstrate, and what happened in that moment 0:03:09.880 --> 0:03:12.880 is really important factor, not days, weeks and months before. 0:03:13.600 --> 0:03:17.600 There's a four minute video of Penny pinning nearly to 0:03:17.680 --> 0:03:21.440 the ground and placing him in a choke hold while 0:03:21.480 --> 0:03:25.800 two other passengers helped to restrain neely, and both sides 0:03:25.800 --> 0:03:27.720 say they're going to use that, how will they use 0:03:27.760 --> 0:03:28.399 it differently? 0:03:28.960 --> 0:03:31.400 Well, you know, I think that the defense's term to 0:03:31.440 --> 0:03:34.120 try to show that what Penny did was very reasonable 0:03:34.120 --> 0:03:36.960 in that moment and he's holding and pinning this individual 0:03:37.000 --> 0:03:39.520 to the ground, and you know there's other people who 0:03:39.520 --> 0:03:42.640 are helping him do something because they're equally concerned about 0:03:42.680 --> 0:03:45.960 the volatility of the immediate presence bones or that not 0:03:46.080 --> 0:03:49.200 threat on lives of people on the subway. Whereas the 0:03:49.280 --> 0:03:51.920 prosecution is going to show a guy who was subdued 0:03:52.280 --> 0:03:54.360 and there's a hold around the neck and the true 0:03:54.440 --> 0:03:58.080 hold and probably concentrate more on that, which, ultimately, if 0:03:58.080 --> 0:03:59.640 you believe in their theory, and they proved me on 0:03:59.720 --> 0:04:02.720 a reading him about paused him to lose consciousness and 0:04:02.800 --> 0:04:06.640 ultimately pass, setting aside whether or not law enforcement did 0:04:06.720 --> 0:04:10.360 CPR and should have done CPR. So it's the same video, obviously, 0:04:10.680 --> 0:04:12.480 But what is going to try to demonstrate it was 0:04:12.480 --> 0:04:14.160 reasonable in the moment. The other words, we're going to 0:04:14.160 --> 0:04:17.279 try to demonstrate it was naveraging, reckless, and beyond the panel, 0:04:17.279 --> 0:04:17.680 if you will. 0:04:18.320 --> 0:04:22.960 The Medical Examiner's Office found that he died from compression 0:04:23.000 --> 0:04:25.200 to his neck as a result of the choke hold, 0:04:25.720 --> 0:04:28.520 and the manner was homicide. The defense said it's going 0:04:28.600 --> 0:04:32.880 to attack the emmy's report and bring up potential other 0:04:33.000 --> 0:04:37.000 causes of Neelie's death, including high levels of that K 0:04:37.040 --> 0:04:40.320 two in his blood stream that usually works in movies. 0:04:40.320 --> 0:04:41.560 Does it work in the courtroom. 0:04:41.880 --> 0:04:44.160 It can work in the courtroom. And this is sort 0:04:44.200 --> 0:04:46.800 of a response to what we asked me earlier. I 0:04:46.839 --> 0:04:49.600 don't necessarily believe the cakes was relevant to the reaction 0:04:50.040 --> 0:04:53.680 and behavior of a penny, but it can absolutely be relevant. 0:04:54.240 --> 0:04:56.479 And I assume we'll have a forensic and expert for 0:04:56.560 --> 0:04:59.120 lack of better term, to try to establish this that 0:04:59.160 --> 0:05:02.440 the K two may have been that proximate natural cause 0:05:02.520 --> 0:05:05.520 or death to join a kneeling. So I think that's 0:05:05.560 --> 0:05:07.080 going to be something that they're going to argue, and 0:05:07.160 --> 0:05:09.320 it should be something it sounds like it is. Does 0:05:09.360 --> 0:05:11.880 it work in real life as opposed to movies. Every 0:05:11.880 --> 0:05:14.640 case is unique, and every case is different. I believe 0:05:14.680 --> 0:05:17.440 that big concern here is you have to make sure 0:05:17.480 --> 0:05:21.280 that you separate those jurors the preconceived notion, whether it's race, 0:05:21.320 --> 0:05:24.080 whether it's politics, whether it's some way safety take them 0:05:24.080 --> 0:05:28.360 out of the equation so that that jury objectively analyzes 0:05:28.400 --> 0:05:31.840 the evidence that's presented in that courtroom. So it does work, 0:05:31.880 --> 0:05:34.680 It absolutely can work. It's not an easy task or 0:05:34.680 --> 0:05:37.480 an easy lift, especially with such a charged case. From 0:05:37.520 --> 0:05:39.080 the emotional perspective. 0:05:39.440 --> 0:05:42.200 Both sides are going to call witnesses who are on 0:05:42.240 --> 0:05:46.080 the train, and it appears that their level of concern 0:05:46.200 --> 0:05:51.279 about Neely's behavior varied. Some said they were afraid, others 0:05:51.360 --> 0:05:54.160 said no, they see this all the time on the subway. 0:05:54.640 --> 0:05:56.880 Will their accounts sort of cancel each other out? 0:05:57.600 --> 0:05:59.920 The testimony and the witnesses are not going to cancel 0:06:00.040 --> 0:06:02.760 shovel out to lack of a better way to describe it, 0:06:02.920 --> 0:06:04.799 The words that they use are going to be critically 0:06:04.800 --> 0:06:07.720 important because that video owning shows section in time and 0:06:07.800 --> 0:06:11.720 doesn't show that imminent threat because remembered by law, there 0:06:11.760 --> 0:06:14.000 needs to be that imminent threat of that serious physical 0:06:14.000 --> 0:06:17.680 injury or death even to allow for the justification defense 0:06:17.760 --> 0:06:20.760 or self defense if you will yourself or other people. 0:06:20.880 --> 0:06:24.719 So beyond that video, how do these people perceive those moments? 0:06:24.800 --> 0:06:27.880 How do they react? And I'd be very concerned, as 0:06:28.000 --> 0:06:31.600 Daniel Penny's counsel and Daniel penny personally, if witnesses are 0:06:31.600 --> 0:06:33.719 going to call up and say, you know what, you 0:06:33.760 --> 0:06:35.320 see this all the time, you put your head down. 0:06:35.360 --> 0:06:37.120 I'm a New Yorker, I've been around the block, I'm 0:06:37.200 --> 0:06:39.800 ridden these subways. Later at night, you just ignore that 0:06:39.839 --> 0:06:43.440 moment and the threat if he will goes away, because remember, too, 0:06:43.480 --> 0:06:46.240 it's not about just being scared or nervous or anxious. 0:06:46.360 --> 0:06:49.120 It's not a candae or textansponder of riding the New 0:06:49.200 --> 0:06:53.000 York subway. It's photography or a realual New York standard 0:06:53.080 --> 0:06:55.560 or just a reasonable standard versus standard, and what was 0:06:55.600 --> 0:06:58.640 deserved in the moment. So you have to be careful. 0:06:58.680 --> 0:07:00.839 I don't think they're going to negate each other the 0:07:00.920 --> 0:07:04.160 words and the specificity why and how they believe that 0:07:04.200 --> 0:07:08.360 they were physical or serious physical danger in a death. 0:07:08.720 --> 0:07:11.880 That's so important, so important, not just that I'm scared. 0:07:12.200 --> 0:07:14.840 What about the fact that he was a trained marine? 0:07:15.400 --> 0:07:17.160 Does that come in very well? 0:07:17.240 --> 0:07:20.520 Can come in if there is evidence that he knew 0:07:20.520 --> 0:07:23.440 and was aware of this type of choke hold and 0:07:23.520 --> 0:07:26.760 how to apply it and use it, and the potential 0:07:27.160 --> 0:07:30.720 consequences of it. Because because remember, you know, it's not 0:07:30.960 --> 0:07:34.120 an intentional client but did he know of these risks 0:07:34.280 --> 0:07:37.720 from Jordan Eely? And then he just really ignored those risks. 0:07:37.880 --> 0:07:40.840 Was there a substantial likelihood or risk that his actions 0:07:40.840 --> 0:07:43.000 were going to cause another person's death and he ignored it. 0:07:43.320 --> 0:07:47.080 It really just disregarded this person's well being in Jordan Eely. 0:07:47.560 --> 0:07:49.720 And if Danny Penny was aware and knew and had 0:07:49.720 --> 0:07:51.760 that skill set, I believe that it should come in. 0:07:51.800 --> 0:07:55.080 It should revel go over what does a prosecution need 0:07:55.120 --> 0:07:57.200 to prove to get a manslaughter conviction? 0:07:57.760 --> 0:08:01.360 So man'slaughter is a little bit different and criminally negligent 0:08:01.440 --> 0:08:03.880 on side, just think it's different from an intentional crime 0:08:04.360 --> 0:08:07.280 when you're trying advanced daughter the second degree, when the 0:08:07.320 --> 0:08:10.720 prosecution has to imagines that you recklessly cause the death 0:08:10.800 --> 0:08:15.280 to another person. Reckless is that standard, whereas criminally negligent, 0:08:15.480 --> 0:08:18.000 which is different, and that's the lower felony, that's the 0:08:18.080 --> 0:08:22.320 class ethelony that when you do so you commit these acts, 0:08:22.600 --> 0:08:25.200 you failed to sort of perceive that there was this 0:08:25.560 --> 0:08:29.320 real substantial risk that your actions would tell us out 0:08:29.320 --> 0:08:32.679 of the person's death. So the recklessness is different and 0:08:32.720 --> 0:08:35.920 it's more severe than the lesser, if you will, of 0:08:35.960 --> 0:08:36.880 criminal negligence. 0:08:37.360 --> 0:08:41.839 So The question looming over the trial, like every trial basically, 0:08:42.200 --> 0:08:45.880 is whether he's going to testify himself, And one of 0:08:45.960 --> 0:08:49.120 his lawyers said he'd be a great witness. We anticipate 0:08:49.160 --> 0:08:51.600 that he will, but that will depend on how the 0:08:51.640 --> 0:08:55.480 trial goes. Do you think he almost needs to testify 0:08:56.240 --> 0:08:58.480 to show his state of mind at the time. 0:08:59.120 --> 0:09:02.000 Defense attorney such as myself, we don't always show our 0:09:02.040 --> 0:09:04.439 cards like the prosecution does at this point in the 0:09:04.480 --> 0:09:09.280 trial process. A lot of this hinges on that witness testimony. Yes, 0:09:09.360 --> 0:09:11.360 that video was important, but I think that video can 0:09:11.400 --> 0:09:14.720 work against Daniel Penny too, because you know, if someone 0:09:14.800 --> 0:09:17.560 is quote unquote squirming, as was used in the terminology 0:09:17.600 --> 0:09:20.480 by Daniel Penny, and that's not a favorable term, and 0:09:20.520 --> 0:09:23.160 for all those minutes to hold that person there, what 0:09:23.240 --> 0:09:25.480 are these witnesses going to say? Are they going to 0:09:25.600 --> 0:09:28.480 articulate how and why they would feel for for their 0:09:28.520 --> 0:09:31.480 life or their physical safety? Because if they don't, then 0:09:31.559 --> 0:09:35.280 Daniel Penny has to testify. If they do and it's 0:09:35.320 --> 0:09:39.000 clear of this imminent threat danger, then maybe Daniel Penny doesn't, 0:09:39.200 --> 0:09:41.600 but I would expect him too. I would suspect he 0:09:41.640 --> 0:09:44.680 will testify because he probably will come across as a 0:09:44.720 --> 0:09:48.720 sympathetic person, not trying to attention the hurt another man 0:09:49.000 --> 0:09:51.120 to do what he thought was the right thing in 0:09:51.160 --> 0:09:54.199 that moment. True or not, that's the jury to decide, 0:09:54.280 --> 0:09:56.240 but I would expect that he would testify. 0:09:57.040 --> 0:10:00.800 You mentioned that Penny said that Neely was scored, and 0:10:00.840 --> 0:10:04.920 the judge has rule that the prosecution can introduce that 0:10:05.120 --> 0:10:10.480 video of him describing Neely as squirming to police and 0:10:10.600 --> 0:10:13.520 other things he said to police when he was being questioned. 0:10:14.679 --> 0:10:17.880 The choice of words that Daniel Penny chose in the 0:10:17.960 --> 0:10:21.559 moment are probably words in retrospect he should not have. 0:10:22.320 --> 0:10:24.920 You're not necessarily thinking of the right words to use, 0:10:25.160 --> 0:10:27.960 especially if you're not technically in custody at the time 0:10:28.000 --> 0:10:31.280 and there's just an investigation. But to our certain that 0:10:31.679 --> 0:10:36.199 Jordan Neely was was squirming is not necessarily the right 0:10:36.360 --> 0:10:39.520 language when I think of someone being a violent threat 0:10:39.559 --> 0:10:42.880 to my life and safety or that in others, swirming 0:10:43.040 --> 0:10:46.839 is more squirming to get away from someone, squirming to 0:10:47.280 --> 0:10:52.440 slip away and protect oneself. Not he was flailing his arms, 0:10:52.440 --> 0:10:55.120 who was taking swings, who was cursing me out, he 0:10:55.280 --> 0:11:01.600 was threatening people? He was grudging, squirming difficult word. If 0:11:01.600 --> 0:11:04.200 I'm the prosecution, I might seize on that word of 0:11:04.280 --> 0:11:08.800 squirming because it's not indicative, in my viewing, suggestive or 0:11:08.800 --> 0:11:13.319 honestly of those violent throws and violent actions. Whereas if 0:11:13.320 --> 0:11:15.839 I'm the defense, I may try to explain what I 0:11:15.960 --> 0:11:18.480 mean so I can explain it away and make it 0:11:18.559 --> 0:11:22.040 clear that in the moment when Daniel Penny was obviously 0:11:22.080 --> 0:11:25.240 anxious and this had just happened, he may have chosen 0:11:25.240 --> 0:11:27.760 the wrong words, but the heart of what he was 0:11:27.800 --> 0:11:30.840 saying was the same thing. I was holding this person 0:11:31.160 --> 0:11:32.880 in a way that I felt was the best to 0:11:32.960 --> 0:11:36.240 achieve and the safest for everyone to achieve, him from 0:11:36.520 --> 0:11:39.280 not bringing anyone on their room worst on that train. 0:11:39.720 --> 0:11:41.960 So squirming is something that I might see on as 0:11:41.960 --> 0:11:42.640 a prosecution. 0:11:43.000 --> 0:11:47.280 Police interviewed him on the day that Neely died and 0:11:47.360 --> 0:11:52.760 then released him. That was criticized by some elected officials 0:11:53.200 --> 0:11:58.880 and protesters demanded that Penny be arrested. Will that come. 0:11:58.720 --> 0:12:02.840 In issues of something called Huntley hearing? It statements that 0:12:02.880 --> 0:12:05.679 are made whether you're in custody and it's an interrogation. 0:12:05.720 --> 0:12:08.400 As a matter of law, those issues aboady been litigated, 0:12:08.559 --> 0:12:10.840 So you're not going to hear that litigation in and 0:12:10.840 --> 0:12:13.480 of itself, but it could very well come in and 0:12:13.520 --> 0:12:16.360 I would expect it to come in that he was 0:12:16.440 --> 0:12:20.000 questioned and arrested only after the fact, because the prosecution 0:12:20.160 --> 0:12:21.760 wants to tell a complete story. They don't want to 0:12:21.800 --> 0:12:24.679 seem like they're hiding the ball and misrepresenting. They want 0:12:24.720 --> 0:12:27.480 to explain why that occurred. Because if I'm the defense, 0:12:27.559 --> 0:12:29.280 I want to seize on that and say, you guys 0:12:29.360 --> 0:12:33.160 didn't arrest me initially. Look at because there's political pressure 0:12:33.400 --> 0:12:35.680 only because of his outside voices and the issues of 0:12:35.760 --> 0:12:38.280 race and the issues of subway safety and politics. Did 0:12:38.400 --> 0:12:41.360 my client get arrested? And that's not just or justice. 0:12:41.520 --> 0:12:43.360 So I would expect it to come in with both 0:12:43.400 --> 0:12:46.920 sides trying to rationalize a reason why. And I will 0:12:46.960 --> 0:12:50.800 say that this is not incredibly atypical. Certainly most people 0:12:50.840 --> 0:12:53.480 are arrested in a moment, but there are times that 0:12:53.600 --> 0:12:56.520 not only does the NYPD not make an arrest initially, 0:12:56.800 --> 0:13:00.320 there are also times when prosecutors' offices DA's all is 0:13:00.679 --> 0:13:03.479 do what's called a DP or a decline to prosecute 0:13:03.480 --> 0:13:08.000 a case even after the process has started for further investigation, 0:13:08.120 --> 0:13:10.360 only to later make an arrest. So this is not 0:13:10.559 --> 0:13:12.560 necessarily typical, but it's not atypical either. 0:13:13.000 --> 0:13:16.080 So what kind of juror are you looking for if 0:13:16.120 --> 0:13:19.080 you are the prosecutor, and what kind if you're the defense. 0:13:19.840 --> 0:13:23.600 Starting with the prosecution, I'm looking for in real New Yorker, 0:13:23.800 --> 0:13:27.080 which is the opposite of what the defense is looking for. 0:13:27.360 --> 0:13:32.080 I don't want my Florida, Texas, California, Iowa transplant. I'm 0:13:32.120 --> 0:13:34.920 not looking for the guy or gal who's been around 0:13:34.920 --> 0:13:38.040 the block once because they had to walk to school 0:13:38.160 --> 0:13:40.040 or their new job, and they're so excited to be 0:13:40.080 --> 0:13:42.800 in the big city, you know, bright eyed and excited. 0:13:43.160 --> 0:13:45.480 Maybe mom and dad are paying the rents. That's the 0:13:45.520 --> 0:13:48.120 person that the defense wants, because the defense wants that 0:13:48.360 --> 0:13:51.679 overreacting individual who is not familiar with the subway life, 0:13:51.800 --> 0:13:55.760 is not familiar with quote unquote goffing. Manhattanites are very 0:13:55.840 --> 0:13:57.920 very different, who've ridden in that subway, who live their 0:13:57.960 --> 0:14:00.720 lives to a better temper of jur that we would 0:14:00.760 --> 0:14:03.400 expect the prosecution to want to take. You know, put 0:14:03.440 --> 0:14:05.920 your head down, walk away, This too shall pass. 0:14:06.000 --> 0:14:09.120 Would you rather be the prosecutor here or the defense attorney. 0:14:09.559 --> 0:14:12.640 In this scenario? Whatman's asking me is trying to be 0:14:12.679 --> 0:14:14.480 sneaky and sly what I think is going to happen. 0:14:14.520 --> 0:14:17.559 That's what trying do I see, I see they It's 0:14:17.559 --> 0:14:21.440 not my first rodeo. That being said, if I had 0:14:21.480 --> 0:14:24.280 to take a side, which really sounds awkward saying that 0:14:24.400 --> 0:14:26.840 was because this is such a tragic case of matiti result. 0:14:27.080 --> 0:14:28.440 But if I had to take a side from a 0:14:28.520 --> 0:14:31.880 legal perspective, I would want to work aside of the prosecution. 0:14:32.280 --> 0:14:34.080 I think this is an uptill client to what I 0:14:34.120 --> 0:14:38.280 have seen. I granted to process one hundred percent every 0:14:38.320 --> 0:14:41.320 single person, every single time, and the process system, on 0:14:41.360 --> 0:14:45.320 its course, will see the evidence. But that video is 0:14:45.360 --> 0:14:47.760 not some overwhelming piece of evidence that we say, oh 0:14:47.760 --> 0:14:50.640 my gosh, Daniel Plone, you know, was it reckless or negligent? 0:14:50.880 --> 0:14:54.160 Remember not intentionally. It's not irrelevant. And those witnesses on 0:14:54.200 --> 0:14:56.680 the subway from what I have read, which is not evidence, 0:14:56.720 --> 0:14:58.640 and we'll see that evidence. But what I have read 0:14:58.800 --> 0:15:01.840 there's nothing so over well, oh my gosh, you know, 0:15:01.960 --> 0:15:04.560 if you've ridden the subway New York, this happened. 0:15:05.120 --> 0:15:05.720 This happened. 0:15:06.320 --> 0:15:09.920 It's terrible. It's sad in terms of people having episodes 0:15:10.040 --> 0:15:13.960 or madic episodes, or misbehaving or even getting aggressive environment. 0:15:14.160 --> 0:15:17.240 But that's something we see and I would not want 0:15:17.280 --> 0:15:19.600 to be on the side of Daniel Penny. But let's 0:15:19.760 --> 0:15:23.120 journey decide that it's not my job whether let's look 0:15:23.160 --> 0:15:24.240 through process from each course. 0:15:24.400 --> 0:15:26.520 The case is going to take quite a while, so 0:15:26.880 --> 0:15:29.880 we'll check back with you. Thanks so much, Jeremy. That's 0:15:29.920 --> 0:15:34.840 criminal defense attorney Jeremy Salande. Courts in battleground states are 0:15:34.920 --> 0:15:39.360 getting ready to fight potential security threats, and they're expanding 0:15:39.440 --> 0:15:43.800 resources to deal with an expected influx of election litigation. 0:15:44.520 --> 0:15:49.080 In states like Arizona, Pennsylvania, and Nevada, courts are announcing 0:15:49.160 --> 0:15:53.760 plans from speeding up election related cases and shortening appellate 0:15:53.880 --> 0:15:58.040 deadlines to making sure every judge is on call on 0:15:58.160 --> 0:16:02.240 election day and creating new social media accounts to get 0:16:02.280 --> 0:16:07.360 out accurate information. Joining me is Suzanne Monnac, judiciary reporter 0:16:07.440 --> 0:16:11.680 for Bloomberg Law. Let's start by talking about the concerns 0:16:11.760 --> 0:16:16.200 that courts are having right now about the election. First, 0:16:16.240 --> 0:16:20.800 I mean, we've heard about these increased threats against judges 0:16:21.040 --> 0:16:25.040 and other judiciary workers. Tell us about that. If that's 0:16:25.240 --> 0:16:26.520 part of the concern now. 0:16:27.280 --> 0:16:30.760 Absolutely, threats against judges and other judiciary specials have been 0:16:30.800 --> 0:16:33.240 on the rise in recent years. We've seen the number 0:16:33.280 --> 0:16:36.000 of investigated threats by the US Marshals more than double 0:16:36.080 --> 0:16:39.320 between twenty nineteen and twenty twenty three. Obviously, now as 0:16:39.320 --> 0:16:42.600 we're heading into an election, these cases are their high profile, 0:16:42.680 --> 0:16:45.320 they're watched on a national scale, and so as we're 0:16:45.320 --> 0:16:48.400 seeing already this landscape where judges are at increased risk 0:16:48.560 --> 0:16:52.520 of threat of harm, now they're handling a case of significant, 0:16:52.560 --> 0:16:55.200 potentially political importance, especially if it's in any of these 0:16:55.240 --> 0:16:58.400 battleground states, it may be a big decider in the election. 0:16:58.840 --> 0:17:02.040 So anytime we have judges handling cases like that, especially 0:17:02.080 --> 0:17:04.840 in this heightened threat landscape, you know there are just 0:17:04.920 --> 0:17:07.679 going to be heightened security concerning what are they. 0:17:07.520 --> 0:17:10.600 Doing about that? I mean, are they giving judges more security? 0:17:11.280 --> 0:17:13.600 Obviously I had judges I spoke to for this story, 0:17:13.800 --> 0:17:16.440 or hesitance has evolved too many you know details about 0:17:16.440 --> 0:17:19.399 their specific security planning for obvious reasons. But we have 0:17:19.440 --> 0:17:22.000 seen quite a bit of you know, improvement, ius I'll say, 0:17:22.080 --> 0:17:25.800 more resources given to security thance the last election for example, 0:17:26.080 --> 0:17:28.200 and a big reason for that is the tragic event 0:17:28.240 --> 0:17:30.520 that happened in summer of twenty twenty when the son 0:17:30.600 --> 0:17:32.879 of a New Jersey federal judge was murdered in his 0:17:32.960 --> 0:17:35.480 own home by dis frontal attorney posing as a delivery 0:17:35.480 --> 0:17:37.920 man in this horrible event was really a bit of 0:17:37.960 --> 0:17:40.000 a wake up call for the judiciary on security. And 0:17:40.080 --> 0:17:43.000 so we saw Congress past legislation a few years ago 0:17:43.080 --> 0:17:46.560 trying to crack down on, you know, having publicly posted 0:17:46.600 --> 0:17:50.639 personal identifying information for judges on the Internet, like their addresses, 0:17:50.880 --> 0:17:54.000 or seeing judges being encouraged to use software to delete 0:17:54.040 --> 0:17:57.520 information that may already be online. The judiciary has changed 0:17:57.520 --> 0:18:00.240 their system to sort of try to encourage judges to 0:18:00.400 --> 0:18:02.919 have home security systems and then get those reinverse. So 0:18:02.960 --> 0:18:05.120 we are seeing programs on more of a national level 0:18:05.280 --> 0:18:08.760 to you know, try to better protect judges. And obviously 0:18:08.760 --> 0:18:11.119 every year the judiciary ask Congress for more money for 0:18:11.160 --> 0:18:14.400 these security resources, and that's continued. So while there hasn't 0:18:14.440 --> 0:18:17.800 been you know, necessarily you know, more bodyguards for individual judges, 0:18:18.200 --> 0:18:20.600 per say, we are seeing really an increased focus on 0:18:20.600 --> 0:18:21.320 this in Washington. 0:18:21.920 --> 0:18:24.520 And so what are some of the other concerns that 0:18:24.600 --> 0:18:27.520 the courts are having now as you know the election 0:18:27.640 --> 0:18:28.280 is approaching. 0:18:28.640 --> 0:18:31.480 These security concerns you know, are true for election cases. 0:18:31.520 --> 0:18:33.080 There are of course also true for any you know, 0:18:33.160 --> 0:18:36.080 high profile case you're dealing with, you know, a celebrity 0:18:36.160 --> 0:18:38.960 or maybe some viral true crime case. But election cases 0:18:38.960 --> 0:18:41.560 can be kind of like a unique situation for the courts, 0:18:41.760 --> 0:18:44.119 and that they can be maybemaquely vulnerable to some of 0:18:44.119 --> 0:18:47.719 these disinformation campaigns we've seen targeting the judiciary. This might 0:18:47.760 --> 0:18:50.240 be you know that judges are biased or you know, 0:18:50.440 --> 0:18:52.879 helped for one side over the other. While at the 0:18:52.920 --> 0:18:55.040 same time we're seeing a lot of you know, claims 0:18:55.040 --> 0:18:58.320 of elections broad including from former President Donald Trump. So 0:18:58.359 --> 0:19:01.119 those two kinds of just them for me campaigns together 0:19:01.600 --> 0:19:04.560 can really just put judges hearing election cases in a 0:19:04.760 --> 0:19:06.280 really uniquely difficult situation. 0:19:07.040 --> 0:19:11.160 What are they able to do about the disinformation either 0:19:11.240 --> 0:19:15.960 Russian disinformation or Trump's disinformation or all the rest of 0:19:16.040 --> 0:19:18.600 the inaccuracies we see online. 0:19:19.080 --> 0:19:21.959 And it's certainly a difficult problem to tackle. You know, 0:19:21.960 --> 0:19:24.240 I think we've seen some courts fetiship away at it 0:19:24.280 --> 0:19:28.240 by trying to better publicize information about election cases, maybe 0:19:28.280 --> 0:19:31.160 having a landing page on the home page of their website, 0:19:31.160 --> 0:19:34.600 so the public, maybe especially amid increasing distrust in the 0:19:34.600 --> 0:19:36.600 media and reporters, the public can go onto the court 0:19:36.640 --> 0:19:39.840 website and click the case and see the filings for themselves. 0:19:39.880 --> 0:19:42.520 The Pennsylvania State Court system, for example, a state we're 0:19:42.840 --> 0:19:45.919 highly expected to have some contentious election litigation in that 0:19:45.960 --> 0:19:49.320 battleground state, has launched a blue sky page and we 0:19:49.440 --> 0:19:52.400 were social media platforms to kind of push out information 0:19:52.480 --> 0:19:55.040 about high profile election cases. So I think we're trying 0:19:55.040 --> 0:19:57.399 to see more transparency from the court, trying to make 0:19:57.440 --> 0:20:00.560 these cases accessible to the public, where like court you know, 0:20:00.640 --> 0:20:03.080 docket page may not be quite as accessible to someone 0:20:03.119 --> 0:20:06.280 who isn't used to, you know, waiting through litigation. But 0:20:06.320 --> 0:20:08.560 at the same time, of course, you know, these campaigns 0:20:08.560 --> 0:20:11.000 are a challenge on a national scale, and you know, 0:20:11.040 --> 0:20:13.800 there are researchers I've spoke to who really study disinformation 0:20:13.880 --> 0:20:15.920 and they say it's coming from Russia and maybe other 0:20:16.000 --> 0:20:19.399 foreign actors and sometimes from domestic actors as well. So 0:20:19.520 --> 0:20:21.360 I mean it's, you know, one of those things that 0:20:21.800 --> 0:20:24.120 you know, there's not one solution to you know, fight 0:20:24.280 --> 0:20:27.239 election disinformation, and I think it's become you know of 0:20:27.400 --> 0:20:29.080 increasing concern in racing years. 0:20:29.400 --> 0:20:33.400 Is there more emphasis on this in the swing states, 0:20:33.480 --> 0:20:37.560 the states that we think might determine the election. You 0:20:37.600 --> 0:20:40.679 mentioned Pennsylvania that seems to be a you know, a 0:20:40.800 --> 0:20:41.320 must win. 0:20:41.800 --> 0:20:44.800 Absolutely. I mean, of course, election litigation can happen anywhere. 0:20:44.800 --> 0:20:47.240 It can be contentious in any state. But I think, 0:20:47.480 --> 0:20:49.239 you know, I bring up the battle around states, these 0:20:49.280 --> 0:20:52.359 swing states, because I think probably the contensus is that 0:20:52.359 --> 0:20:55.600