1
00:00:03,200 --> 00:00:07,960
Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg Law with June Brussel from Bloomberg Radio.

2
00:00:09,039 --> 00:00:11,000
Speaker 1: We the jury in the above entitled matter as to

3
00:00:11,080 --> 00:00:14,680
Speaker 1: count one unintentional second degree murder while committing a felony,

4
00:00:15,040 --> 00:00:18,119
Speaker 1: find the defendant guilty. This verdict agreed to this twentieth

5
00:00:18,200 --> 00:00:22,640
Speaker 1: day of April PM. As that guilty verdict for the

6
00:00:22,720 --> 00:00:26,000
Speaker 1: murder of George Floyd was read in the Minneapolis courtroom

7
00:00:26,040 --> 00:00:29,880
Speaker 1: and broadcast to the country. Former police officer Derek Chauvin

8
00:00:29,920 --> 00:00:34,760
Speaker 1: displayed no reaction, but outside the heavily fortified and guarded courthouse,

9
00:00:35,040 --> 00:00:37,760
Speaker 1: the crowd erupted at the announcement of the jury's verdict

10
00:00:37,760 --> 00:00:47,760
Speaker 1: of guilt on all three counts, and jury convicted Chauvin

11
00:00:47,800 --> 00:00:51,400
Speaker 1: of all three charges second degree murder, third degree murder,

12
00:00:51,440 --> 00:00:54,960
Speaker 1: and second degree manslaughter for cutting off Floyd's air supply

13
00:00:55,040 --> 00:00:58,360
Speaker 1: on May as he lay handcuffed and pleading for mercy.

14
00:00:58,840 --> 00:01:02,120
Speaker 1: The verdict, reached after less than eleven hours of deliberation,

15
00:01:02,560 --> 00:01:06,120
Speaker 1: came eleven months after the graphic footage of Chauvin Floyd

16
00:01:06,120 --> 00:01:10,039
Speaker 1: went viral. The conviction could mean decades in prison for

17
00:01:10,120 --> 00:01:13,039
Speaker 1: the forty five year old Chauvin. Joining me as former

18
00:01:13,120 --> 00:01:17,120
Speaker 1: federal prosecutor Robert Mints, a partner Ma Carter in English?

19
00:01:17,440 --> 00:01:20,399
Speaker 1: What's your reaction to this? What I would call a

20
00:01:20,520 --> 00:01:24,600
Speaker 1: quick verdict and slam dung for the prosecution. It was

21
00:01:24,680 --> 00:01:28,360
Speaker 1: a very quick verdict. Usually jurors take their time to

22
00:01:28,480 --> 00:01:31,960
Speaker 1: methodically go through all of the evidence that is presented

23
00:01:32,280 --> 00:01:35,080
Speaker 1: before them during the trial, even if they know at

24
00:01:35,120 --> 00:01:38,080
Speaker 1: the beginning of their deliberation how this might end. So

25
00:01:38,200 --> 00:01:40,880
Speaker 1: this was a very quick verdict given the amount of

26
00:01:40,920 --> 00:01:45,200
Speaker 1: evidence and the complexity of the scientific and expert testimony

27
00:01:45,560 --> 00:01:48,000
Speaker 1: that the jurors heard. But at the same time, it's

28
00:01:48,040 --> 00:01:51,520
Speaker 1: not It's hardly a surprise. I think those nine and

29
00:01:51,520 --> 00:01:55,960
Speaker 1: a half minutes that videotape was really the star witness

30
00:01:56,000 --> 00:01:59,600
Speaker 1: for the prosecution. It was the most compelling evidence and ultimately,

31
00:01:59,640 --> 00:02:02,840
Speaker 1: I think was so seared into the minds of jurors

32
00:02:02,840 --> 00:02:06,440
Speaker 1: that it was very difficult for the defense to overcome. Bob,

33
00:02:06,600 --> 00:02:11,000
Speaker 1: is there any conflict in finding guilty on all three

34
00:02:11,040 --> 00:02:14,120
Speaker 1: of the charges where there is a depraved mind but

35
00:02:14,280 --> 00:02:17,239
Speaker 1: also intent to commit a felony? Is there any kind

36
00:02:17,280 --> 00:02:21,840
Speaker 1: of internal inconsistency? I don't think so. All three of

37
00:02:21,880 --> 00:02:27,000
Speaker 1: them required different levels of recklessness. None of them required

38
00:02:27,040 --> 00:02:30,400
Speaker 1: an intense to murder. The second degree murder charge, which

39
00:02:30,480 --> 00:02:34,120
Speaker 1: is the most serious charge, required an intense to commit

40
00:02:34,160 --> 00:02:36,880
Speaker 1: assault or a felony, which was in this case was

41
00:02:36,880 --> 00:02:40,360
Speaker 1: a sault. And in this case they found that the

42
00:02:40,360 --> 00:02:44,240
Speaker 1: the officer, Officer Shovin, had intended to commit an assault

43
00:02:44,400 --> 00:02:48,000
Speaker 1: on George Floyd, and that that substantially led to his death.

44
00:02:48,400 --> 00:02:51,720
Speaker 1: The other charges are sort of lesser included offenses in

45
00:02:51,760 --> 00:02:55,640
Speaker 1: the sense that they require less of a tie between

46
00:02:55,680 --> 00:02:58,520
Speaker 1: the conduct of the officer and the death. Their more

47
00:02:58,560 --> 00:03:01,600
Speaker 1: recklessness and neglige, and they were thrown in there by

48
00:03:01,639 --> 00:03:04,239
Speaker 1: the prosecution in case they could not get jurorsy and

49
00:03:04,440 --> 00:03:08,640
Speaker 1: unanimously agree that the conduct of the officer was in

50
00:03:08,680 --> 00:03:11,720
Speaker 1: fact a criming of itself, that he assaulted George Floyd.

51
00:03:11,960 --> 00:03:14,480
Speaker 1: And those other charges were there because they would allow

52
00:03:14,880 --> 00:03:17,840
Speaker 1: the jurors to still convict even if they did not

53
00:03:18,000 --> 00:03:20,600
Speaker 1: find that there was an intent to commit a felony

54
00:03:20,840 --> 00:03:26,400
Speaker 1: by former officers. Chauvin. What testimony stood out in the

55
00:03:26,480 --> 00:03:30,920
Speaker 1: prosecution's case, Well, the prosecution had a case that was

56
00:03:31,040 --> 00:03:35,440
Speaker 1: really fairly straightforward, and I think the video tape was

57
00:03:35,600 --> 00:03:38,600
Speaker 1: the best and most compelling evidence for them that nine

58
00:03:38,600 --> 00:03:42,200
Speaker 1: and a half minutes where you saw former officers Chauvin

59
00:03:42,280 --> 00:03:45,360
Speaker 1: kneeling on the neck of George Floyd was something that

60
00:03:45,440 --> 00:03:49,040
Speaker 1: was very, very difficult to watch. The defense tried to

61
00:03:49,120 --> 00:03:52,440
Speaker 1: shift the focus of jurors on to all the events

62
00:03:52,440 --> 00:03:55,720
Speaker 1: that led up to that particular moment where they were

63
00:03:55,960 --> 00:03:59,240
Speaker 1: subduing him for nine and a half minutes. The defense

64
00:03:59,320 --> 00:04:02,720
Speaker 1: tried to play up the fact that police officers are

65
00:04:02,880 --> 00:04:09,440
Speaker 1: subject to situations that are inherently difficult to predict, their dangerous.

66
00:04:09,520 --> 00:04:12,600
Speaker 1: You don't always know what a defendant is going to

67
00:04:12,680 --> 00:04:15,000
Speaker 1: do during the course of an arrest, and trying to

68
00:04:15,040 --> 00:04:19,080
Speaker 1: convince jurors that the conduct was reasonable, but that video

69
00:04:19,360 --> 00:04:22,960
Speaker 1: was difficult to overcome the visual image of kneeling i

70
00:04:23,120 --> 00:04:26,560
Speaker 1: George Floyd's neck while a crowd gathered and people started

71
00:04:26,600 --> 00:04:28,920
Speaker 1: to hold up their cell phones at videotape what was

72
00:04:28,960 --> 00:04:32,560
Speaker 1: going on? Sensing that something there was very wrong. I

73
00:04:32,600 --> 00:04:34,960
Speaker 1: think that was just too much for jurors to ignore

74
00:04:35,480 --> 00:04:38,279
Speaker 1: the fact that the blue wall sort of collapsed in

75
00:04:38,360 --> 00:04:41,480
Speaker 1: this trial. Do you think this verdict will have an

76
00:04:41,520 --> 00:04:45,279
Speaker 1: impact on other trials or in real life? I think

77
00:04:45,320 --> 00:04:47,560
Speaker 1: that it will. We have to be mindful of fact

78
00:04:47,640 --> 00:04:50,800
Speaker 1: that most police officers act within the law that they

79
00:04:50,880 --> 00:04:55,600
Speaker 1: use only reasonable force when arresting individuals. But in this case,

80
00:04:55,640 --> 00:05:00,040
Speaker 1: the conduct was so egregious that even officers was in

81
00:05:00,080 --> 00:05:04,159
Speaker 1: the Minnesota Police Department could not come to after Chauvin's defense,

82
00:05:04,640 --> 00:05:07,040
Speaker 1: I think there was a lot of pressure, public pressure

83
00:05:07,040 --> 00:05:09,560
Speaker 1: that was being brought to bear on the department, and

84
00:05:09,640 --> 00:05:13,360
Speaker 1: it was necessary that they step up and testify as

85
00:05:13,400 --> 00:05:16,840
Speaker 1: they felt was accurate and reasonable in terms of whether

86
00:05:16,920 --> 00:05:20,239
Speaker 1: or not the police conduct was defensible. And in this case,

87
00:05:20,360 --> 00:05:23,560
Speaker 1: the officers who testified and they have the prosecution clearly

88
00:05:23,640 --> 00:05:26,159
Speaker 1: crossed that line. As you said, they crossed the blue line.

89
00:05:26,200 --> 00:05:29,479
Speaker 1: They testified for the prosecution saying that the conduct of

90
00:05:29,520 --> 00:05:33,360
Speaker 1: their former colleague was unreasonable. It then became a battle

91
00:05:33,400 --> 00:05:36,240
Speaker 1: of the experts as to whether or not that unreasonable

92
00:05:36,279 --> 00:05:40,559
Speaker 1: conduct substantially led to George Floyd's death. You know, since

93
00:05:40,839 --> 00:05:45,600
Speaker 1: before the trial, the defense has been stacking up different

94
00:05:45,720 --> 00:05:49,760
Speaker 1: kinds of objections, and so it seems as if there'll

95
00:05:49,800 --> 00:05:53,880
Speaker 1: be a lot of issues for appeal. Yeah, there always

96
00:05:54,000 --> 00:05:57,720
Speaker 1: are appeals in criminal cases. It never happens that someone

97
00:05:57,760 --> 00:06:00,279
Speaker 1: goes to trial and doesn't try to appeal. That can action.

98
00:06:00,360 --> 00:06:04,120
Speaker 1: It's almost automatically something that is taken up because there

99
00:06:04,120 --> 00:06:06,320
Speaker 1: are so many judgment calls that are made during the

100
00:06:06,320 --> 00:06:09,000
Speaker 1: course of the trial, in terms of jury instructions, in

101
00:06:09,080 --> 00:06:11,599
Speaker 1: terms of what evidence is admitted and not admitted. There

102
00:06:11,600 --> 00:06:14,080
Speaker 1: are always issues that they can take up on appeal

103
00:06:14,480 --> 00:06:16,760
Speaker 1: in this case. You know, for example, there's a question

104
00:06:17,000 --> 00:06:19,000
Speaker 1: whether or not think jury should have been moved outside

105
00:06:19,000 --> 00:06:21,080
Speaker 1: of downtown Minneapolis, but there should have been a change

106
00:06:21,080 --> 00:06:24,240
Speaker 1: of venue. Could officer show and have gotten a fair

107
00:06:24,279 --> 00:06:28,400
Speaker 1: trial in front of jurors from downtown Minneapolis. You know,

108
00:06:28,480 --> 00:06:30,520
Speaker 1: that's gonna be one issue certainly that we can expect

109
00:06:30,520 --> 00:06:34,200
Speaker 1: to see. Thanks Bob. That's Robert Mints of McCarter in English.

110
00:06:34,440 --> 00:06:39,760
Speaker 1: Coming up next, possible sentences for Derek Chauvin. The jury

111
00:06:39,800 --> 00:06:44,039
Speaker 1: convicted Chauvin on all three charges, a conviction that could

112
00:06:44,080 --> 00:06:46,800
Speaker 1: mean decades in prison for the forty five year old

113
00:06:46,880 --> 00:06:50,680
Speaker 1: Chauvin when he's sentenced in eight weeks. Joining me is

114
00:06:50,720 --> 00:06:54,640
Speaker 1: former republic defender Krista Groshek, managing attorney of Gross Check

115
00:06:54,760 --> 00:06:58,320
Speaker 1: Law in Minneapolis. So what do you think was the

116
00:06:58,320 --> 00:07:02,560
Speaker 1: biggest factor in a verdict? Well, I think it all

117
00:07:02,600 --> 00:07:06,440
Speaker 1: came down to the number of experts, the credibility of

118
00:07:06,440 --> 00:07:10,800
Speaker 1: the experts, and the intensity of that expert testimony. I mean,

119
00:07:11,280 --> 00:07:14,840
Speaker 1: the States presented a number of experts as it relates

120
00:07:14,880 --> 00:07:17,800
Speaker 1: to the use of force, and then they presented additional

121
00:07:17,880 --> 00:07:20,320
Speaker 1: experts as it related to causation. And I think that

122
00:07:20,760 --> 00:07:23,880
Speaker 1: while Tobin is a I believe a breathing expert or

123
00:07:23,960 --> 00:07:27,600
Speaker 1: a lung doctor, a pulminologist, he gave some really good

124
00:07:27,600 --> 00:07:30,400
Speaker 1: testimony that really broke things down for the jury and

125
00:07:30,400 --> 00:07:32,680
Speaker 1: they could clearly understand its point. You know, there was

126
00:07:32,680 --> 00:07:35,080
Speaker 1: also a fair amount of emotion too, as it related

127
00:07:35,120 --> 00:07:37,800
Speaker 1: to what the bystanders thought and saw and felt at

128
00:07:37,800 --> 00:07:39,880
Speaker 1: the time. So I think the States had a lot

129
00:07:39,920 --> 00:07:42,160
Speaker 1: of things working for them in their favor, and it

130
00:07:42,200 --> 00:07:44,400
Speaker 1: all came together during the course of the trial. And again,

131
00:07:44,440 --> 00:07:46,600
Speaker 1: you never know what this is gonna look like until

132
00:07:46,600 --> 00:07:49,160
Speaker 1: people sit down and start talking, and you know, you

133
00:07:49,200 --> 00:07:52,960
Speaker 1: make arguments and exhibits go in. I think it all

134
00:07:53,040 --> 00:07:56,440
Speaker 1: just kind of sell their way. Is it unusual that

135
00:07:56,520 --> 00:07:59,600
Speaker 1: they were able to come to a decision so quickly

136
00:08:00,000 --> 00:08:03,480
Speaker 1: on these three different charges? What do you think happened

137
00:08:03,520 --> 00:08:06,960
Speaker 1: back there? If I had to guess, which obviously I

138
00:08:07,000 --> 00:08:09,720
Speaker 1: am the feedback I've gotten from juries is that when

139
00:08:09,760 --> 00:08:12,840
Speaker 1: there's a situation where there's a top count and then

140
00:08:12,840 --> 00:08:15,200
Speaker 1: a middle and then a lower count, if they find

141
00:08:15,320 --> 00:08:18,200
Speaker 1: that the defendant is guilty on the top count, then

142
00:08:18,200 --> 00:08:21,080
Speaker 1: everything goes like a like a line of dominoes. Right,

143
00:08:21,320 --> 00:08:24,200
Speaker 1: they don't bother getting into the analysis of the lower counts,

144
00:08:24,280 --> 00:08:27,480
Speaker 1: because that they've decided that he's guilty on the top counts,

145
00:08:27,520 --> 00:08:29,600
Speaker 1: then it just flows that he's guilty on the other

146
00:08:29,640 --> 00:08:35,040
Speaker 1: accounts as well. What kind of sentence is Chauvin facing, Well,

147
00:08:35,200 --> 00:08:38,960
Speaker 1: what's not great for him is that while the murder

148
00:08:39,000 --> 00:08:42,440
Speaker 1: two and murder three each carry that hundred and fifty

149
00:08:42,559 --> 00:08:47,360
Speaker 1: months mandatory minimum, the maximum on murder two is forty

150
00:08:47,440 --> 00:08:51,920
Speaker 1: years versus twenty five on three, and ten on the

151
00:08:51,920 --> 00:08:56,560
Speaker 1: man's laughter too. So potentially he's looking at because the

152
00:08:56,600 --> 00:08:59,079
Speaker 1: top count is the governing count, right, and it will

153
00:08:59,120 --> 00:09:01,920
Speaker 1: be the governing sent the other charges will merge for

154
00:09:02,000 --> 00:09:05,240
Speaker 1: the purposes of sentencings. It's a prosecution and successful and

155
00:09:05,240 --> 00:09:08,760
Speaker 1: it's did for an aggravated sentence and upload departure to

156
00:09:08,880 --> 00:09:12,040
Speaker 1: go to prison for forty years. I thought the Minnesota

157
00:09:12,240 --> 00:09:16,400
Speaker 1: sentencing guidelines recommended twelve and a half years for each

158
00:09:16,480 --> 00:09:20,240
Speaker 1: murder charge they do so for murder three and murder two.

159
00:09:20,280 --> 00:09:24,600
Speaker 1: Of the mandatory minimum sentence for both is that twelve

160
00:09:24,640 --> 00:09:27,520
Speaker 1: and a half years, that hundred and fifty months. However,

161
00:09:28,120 --> 00:09:31,320
Speaker 1: the prosecution can say, judge, don't give him a guideline sentence.

162
00:09:31,400 --> 00:09:34,360
Speaker 1: This was much more egregious on your typical case. And

163
00:09:34,400 --> 00:09:38,120
Speaker 1: here's all the reasons why we heard information about how

164
00:09:38,160 --> 00:09:40,320
Speaker 1: you know police officers are considered to be in a

165
00:09:40,480 --> 00:09:43,640
Speaker 1: position of trust and authority, that there were children present

166
00:09:43,679 --> 00:09:45,960
Speaker 1: in the area. And I expect the prosecution will have

167
00:09:46,040 --> 00:09:49,800
Speaker 1: a very lengthy list of factors as to why they

168
00:09:49,840 --> 00:09:52,320
Speaker 1: believe the judge should give him more than that hundred

169
00:09:52,360 --> 00:09:56,240
Speaker 1: and fifty months. And with that top count that murder too,

170
00:09:56,360 --> 00:09:59,040
Speaker 1: they have up to forty years. I mean, the prosecution

171
00:09:59,080 --> 00:10:02,360
Speaker 1: can ask for double triple. We see that happening up

172
00:10:02,360 --> 00:10:04,920
Speaker 1: their amount in terms of departures. You know, they laugh

173
00:10:05,040 --> 00:10:08,800
Speaker 1: for the maximum sentence. Do you think the judge here

174
00:10:09,000 --> 00:10:12,319
Speaker 1: is likely to give a sentence like that. I think

175
00:10:12,360 --> 00:10:14,240
Speaker 1: the judge will give it a lot of thought. I

176
00:10:14,240 --> 00:10:17,839
Speaker 1: think it's very likely that Judge Cahill was seriously entertained

177
00:10:18,720 --> 00:10:23,280
Speaker 1: um that possibility. Judge Cahill isn't afraid to sentence people

178
00:10:23,640 --> 00:10:26,600
Speaker 1: um to terms of imprisonments that are longer than the

179
00:10:26,600 --> 00:10:30,200
Speaker 1: guidelines that he believed that that's recommended. What we didn't

180
00:10:30,240 --> 00:10:35,040
Speaker 1: see here is a Blakely or a sentencing jury and panel.

181
00:10:35,120 --> 00:10:38,080
Speaker 1: Typically speaking, if there's a finding of guilt, then the

182
00:10:38,120 --> 00:10:40,839
Speaker 1: defendant can said, like to have my Blakely hearing now.

183
00:10:41,720 --> 00:10:46,280
Speaker 1: And it's my understanding that um that either isn't going

184
00:10:46,320 --> 00:10:49,160
Speaker 1: to happen, or that that Blakely issue was waived and

185
00:10:49,240 --> 00:10:52,480
Speaker 1: Judge Cahill is going to make that decision. Typically speaking,

186
00:10:52,520 --> 00:10:54,920
Speaker 1: juries really don't have a sense for whether or not

187
00:10:54,960 --> 00:10:57,440
Speaker 1: there's aggravating factors because it was bad enough for them

188
00:10:57,480 --> 00:10:59,440
Speaker 1: to convict, and they don't have a sense of other

189
00:10:59,520 --> 00:11:01,240
Speaker 1: cases that you know, go in and out of that

190
00:11:01,320 --> 00:11:04,959
Speaker 1: courthouse and what the typical case is. So it's not

191
00:11:05,040 --> 00:11:07,840
Speaker 1: unusual for a defendant to waive that sentencing jury and

192
00:11:07,920 --> 00:11:11,040
Speaker 1: argue those issues to the court. The defense almost from

193
00:11:11,080 --> 00:11:14,199
Speaker 1: the beginning was raising issues that seemed like there will

194
00:11:14,280 --> 00:11:15,959
Speaker 1: be a pellet issues. Do you see a lot of

195
00:11:15,960 --> 00:11:18,400
Speaker 1: a pellet issues here? I said, a ton of a

196
00:11:18,480 --> 00:11:23,640
Speaker 1: pellet issues here. I mean everything from the initial requests

197
00:11:23,679 --> 00:11:28,600
Speaker 1: for change of venue. Um to the settlement issues that

198
00:11:28,679 --> 00:11:32,040
Speaker 1: we saw surfacing early on right in a sparing with

199
00:11:32,160 --> 00:11:35,800
Speaker 1: jury selection, we have the issues of process storial misconduct.

200
00:11:36,160 --> 00:11:38,640
Speaker 1: The desfense frequently complained and we saw this during the trial.

201
00:11:39,000 --> 00:11:41,600
Speaker 1: I just got this right, or oh I don't have

202
00:11:41,720 --> 00:11:45,439
Speaker 1: the amended exhibit right, or oh they gave us discovery

203
00:11:45,559 --> 00:11:48,240
Speaker 1: in what they were calling discovery soup right where everything

204
00:11:48,280 --> 00:11:50,240
Speaker 1: was a mess and so the new information that they

205
00:11:50,240 --> 00:11:54,320
Speaker 1: were disclosing couldn't be found. There's also the issue of

206
00:11:54,520 --> 00:11:59,400
Speaker 1: the Brooklyn Center police officer who got charged with second

207
00:11:59,400 --> 00:12:02,600
Speaker 1: degree man. Slaughter says she was reaching for her chaser,

208
00:12:02,640 --> 00:12:05,400
Speaker 1: reached for her gun. Um, there was a request of

209
00:12:05,440 --> 00:12:07,880
Speaker 1: what you the jury the judge that no said no,

210
00:12:08,480 --> 00:12:12,040
Speaker 1: There was NUMSUS requests for miss Trow and there was

211
00:12:12,280 --> 00:12:15,840
Speaker 1: a last request even I believe after closing arguments occurred

212
00:12:16,559 --> 00:12:20,719
Speaker 1: based upon um the very public words of California Representative

213
00:12:20,760 --> 00:12:27,239
Speaker 1: Maxine Waters, who was saying that a jury a Furson acquittal, Um,

214
00:12:27,280 --> 00:12:29,839
Speaker 1: you know, people should take to the streets and protests,

215
00:12:29,880 --> 00:12:35,040
Speaker 1: which could amount to jury intimidation. On one hand, said hey,

216
00:12:35,080 --> 00:12:36,959
Speaker 1: you may have a good appeal issue there, but then

217
00:12:36,960 --> 00:12:39,720
Speaker 1: denied the miss trout on the ground that well, nobody

218
00:12:39,760 --> 00:12:44,439
Speaker 1: listens to you know, a representative from California. UM. So,

219
00:12:44,880 --> 00:12:48,000
Speaker 1: I think there's just a number of things that children

220
00:12:48,000 --> 00:12:51,400
Speaker 1: can appeal. We can even look at that reinstatement at

221
00:12:51,400 --> 00:12:53,760
Speaker 1: the third degree murder charge that Judge Cahill was red

222
00:12:53,880 --> 00:12:59,760
Speaker 1: sent to put in place that overturned centuries worth of decisions,

223
00:12:59,760 --> 00:13:02,040
Speaker 1: that that you can't use that charge in the way

224
00:13:02,080 --> 00:13:05,080
Speaker 1: it was used here in this case. So I think

225
00:13:05,200 --> 00:13:07,800
Speaker 1: Chauvin has you know, a number of issues to contest

226
00:13:08,640 --> 00:13:11,520
Speaker 1: for his appeal, and you know that doesn't even take

227
00:13:11,520 --> 00:13:14,960
Speaker 1: into account the typical appellate issues that are existing now

228
00:13:15,000 --> 00:13:18,320
Speaker 1: on the day of COVID and maths and separation and

229
00:13:18,440 --> 00:13:21,760
Speaker 1: can't see people's faces. I mean, there's a lot here

230
00:13:21,800 --> 00:13:24,360
Speaker 1: that he can make hay with down the road. Will

231
00:13:24,400 --> 00:13:27,440
Speaker 1: this trial in any way affect the trot the upcoming

232
00:13:27,480 --> 00:13:30,920
Speaker 1: trial of the three other police officers, I mean, will

233
00:13:30,960 --> 00:13:34,880
Speaker 1: there be any kind of plea deals offered? Now? Perhaps

234
00:13:35,080 --> 00:13:38,920
Speaker 1: the defense attorneys will consult their clients and say, hey,

235
00:13:38,960 --> 00:13:41,080
Speaker 1: you know, this is how it went down with regard

236
00:13:41,160 --> 00:13:44,840
Speaker 1: to Mr Chauvin. I don't know how co ordinated um

237
00:13:44,920 --> 00:13:48,880
Speaker 1: the defense attorneys are with regard to sharing experts. Um,

238
00:13:48,960 --> 00:13:51,600
Speaker 1: I know that the defense attorneys representing the three other

239
00:13:51,640 --> 00:13:57,120
Speaker 1: individuals are seasoned, accomplished, very dynamic characters that may have

240
00:13:57,200 --> 00:13:59,679
Speaker 1: in fact sought off their own experts and pursue the

241
00:13:59,720 --> 00:14:02,800
Speaker 1: case in a much different fashion, knowing of course, that

242
00:14:03,440 --> 00:14:07,439
Speaker 1: their clients are situated much differently, right, and and much

243
00:14:07,480 --> 00:14:09,760
Speaker 1: of money of them being rookies, many of them not

244
00:14:09,920 --> 00:14:12,720
Speaker 1: calling the shots with Chauvin. You know the main guy

245
00:14:12,760 --> 00:14:17,000
Speaker 1: on the scene. Thanks Krista. That's Krista Groschek of Groschek Law.

246
00:14:18,679 --> 00:14:21,920
Speaker 1: In Battle. New York Governor Andrew Cuomo is now the

247
00:14:21,960 --> 00:14:26,200
Speaker 1: subject of four investigations. The latest is an investigation by

248
00:14:26,200 --> 00:14:30,120
Speaker 1: the New York State Attorney General, Letitia James into Cuomo's

249
00:14:30,200 --> 00:14:34,920
Speaker 1: use of state resources for his book American Crisis Leadership

250
00:14:35,000 --> 00:14:38,480
Speaker 1: Lessons from the COVID nineteen Pandemic. Joining me is Bloomberg

251
00:14:38,520 --> 00:14:41,720
Speaker 1: Legal reporter Patricia Hurtado. So Pat tell us about this

252
00:14:41,840 --> 00:14:46,880
Speaker 1: latest investigation. Well, Cuomo allegedly, according to The New York Times,

253
00:14:47,000 --> 00:14:51,680
Speaker 1: you stafford to help write and do edit and make

254
00:14:51,760 --> 00:14:56,240
Speaker 1: copies on his book. So the New York Times suggested

255
00:14:56,320 --> 00:14:59,960
Speaker 1: that there might be an impropriety there that government employee,

256
00:15:00,400 --> 00:15:05,720
Speaker 1: and expenditures were made on government time for his purposes

257
00:15:05,800 --> 00:15:09,040
Speaker 1: of writing his book and getting his book published. So

258
00:15:09,560 --> 00:15:12,040
Speaker 1: as results of that um, the New York Times wrote

259
00:15:12,040 --> 00:15:15,280
Speaker 1: a story about it, and the New York State Controller

260
00:15:15,960 --> 00:15:19,880
Speaker 1: recommended that this possibly be a new avenue to investigate

261
00:15:19,960 --> 00:15:23,640
Speaker 1: Kama and if there was anything improper, did he suggest

262
00:15:23,680 --> 00:15:29,000
Speaker 1: that to the attorney general. Basically, he authorized the opening

263
00:15:29,120 --> 00:15:33,600
Speaker 1: of an investigation the big controller, the state controller has

264
00:15:33,640 --> 00:15:37,600
Speaker 1: to recommend that the Attorney General investigates, so he authorized

265
00:15:37,680 --> 00:15:41,400
Speaker 1: her to launch an inquiry into whether state resources were

266
00:15:41,520 --> 00:15:46,040
Speaker 1: used for Cuomo's pandemic book. I assume that a lot

267
00:15:46,080 --> 00:15:49,160
Speaker 1: of people at work have things copied, and if you

268
00:15:49,240 --> 00:15:52,240
Speaker 1: have an assistant, you have an assistant copy some personal things.

269
00:15:52,720 --> 00:15:54,960
Speaker 1: Is it that picky you know what they're talking about,

270
00:15:55,040 --> 00:15:57,320
Speaker 1: or is it much more well, it depends on who

271
00:15:57,400 --> 00:16:00,240
Speaker 1: you're talking to. I mean, the Times and some of

272
00:16:00,280 --> 00:16:04,440
Speaker 1: the employees were alleging that this was work that was

273
00:16:04,800 --> 00:16:09,520
Speaker 1: done during office hours and it was unseemly and improper.

274
00:16:10,040 --> 00:16:13,920
Speaker 1: Now the governor has claimed that this was minor work,

275
00:16:14,640 --> 00:16:18,760
Speaker 1: It was incidental. It was people who volunteered to copy

276
00:16:18,960 --> 00:16:22,400
Speaker 1: edit and look over, you know, look at a draft

277
00:16:22,520 --> 00:16:26,760
Speaker 1: of a chapter and that this didn't merit any kind

278
00:16:26,800 --> 00:16:29,920
Speaker 1: of possible you know, there wasn't in any kind of

279
00:16:29,960 --> 00:16:35,160
Speaker 1: flagrant violation of any state laws or any violations of impropriety.

280
00:16:35,760 --> 00:16:39,040
Speaker 1: And in fact, the governor his staff came out with

281
00:16:39,160 --> 00:16:43,320
Speaker 1: a very strong comment after this happened, and they actually

282
00:16:43,400 --> 00:16:47,520
Speaker 1: his spokesman Rich as a Party said, we've officially jumped

283
00:16:47,600 --> 00:16:51,720
Speaker 1: a shark. The idea that there was criminality involved here

284
00:16:51,880 --> 00:16:55,200
Speaker 1: is patently observed on a space and it's just furthering

285
00:16:55,320 --> 00:16:58,520
Speaker 1: of a political pylon. So it depends on who you're

286
00:16:58,560 --> 00:17:02,200
Speaker 1: looking for. But you know, there's a series of avenues

287
00:17:02,240 --> 00:17:05,840
Speaker 1: of investigation that that the governor is subject to. So

288
00:17:05,920 --> 00:17:09,440
Speaker 1: he's being looked at for possible sexual harassment and at

289
00:17:09,480 --> 00:17:14,639
Speaker 1: work as the governor by a impeachment committee formed by

290
00:17:14,640 --> 00:17:17,760
Speaker 1: the state Assembly, and he's also the subject of a

291
00:17:17,800 --> 00:17:23,000
Speaker 1: separate investigation being conducted by a law firm by Latitia James,

292
00:17:23,000 --> 00:17:27,159
Speaker 1: the attorney General. And then he's also been investigated for

293
00:17:27,280 --> 00:17:32,320
Speaker 1: alleged in the States and proprieties involving possible misreporting of

294
00:17:32,440 --> 00:17:36,480
Speaker 1: nursing home depths last year during the pandemic. So you know,

295
00:17:36,640 --> 00:17:40,439
Speaker 1: it just seems to show that Chromo isn't walking away

296
00:17:40,520 --> 00:17:45,440
Speaker 1: anytime soon from allegations of impropriety. You know, in his actions,

297
00:17:45,480 --> 00:17:49,360
Speaker 1: I guess he's opened himself up to possible claims that

298
00:17:49,520 --> 00:17:52,239
Speaker 1: he has improperly used his job. And this is just

299
00:17:52,280 --> 00:17:56,439
Speaker 1: another one. Do we know where those other investigations stand

300
00:17:56,560 --> 00:17:59,399
Speaker 1: right now? You know, I think that this is in

301
00:17:59,600 --> 00:18:03,480
Speaker 1: for a long haul. It's unclear how long the investigation

302
00:18:03,560 --> 00:18:06,000
Speaker 1: is going to take. What is clear is it's probably

303
00:18:06,040 --> 00:18:08,600
Speaker 1: going to take a long time. And the reason I

304
00:18:08,680 --> 00:18:12,360
Speaker 1: say this is because Latitia James, the Attorney General, when

305
00:18:12,400 --> 00:18:16,320
Speaker 1: she did an investigation of what happened with the nursing

306
00:18:16,359 --> 00:18:20,040
Speaker 1: home death, she started it in March of last year

307
00:18:20,080 --> 00:18:22,960
Speaker 1: and it it finally came out in January. So is

308
00:18:23,000 --> 00:18:26,240
Speaker 1: a month long process. And these things are pretty detailed.

309
00:18:26,720 --> 00:18:30,800
Speaker 1: So it's unclear how long it will take. But you know,

310
00:18:30,920 --> 00:18:36,399
Speaker 1: certainly a federal investigation of the nursing home reporting that

311
00:18:36,600 --> 00:18:38,640
Speaker 1: is being done by the Eastern District of New York

312
00:18:38,680 --> 00:18:42,479
Speaker 1: and Brooklyn and the FBI, that's likely to take a

313
00:18:42,640 --> 00:18:45,360
Speaker 1: very long time. And we do know that the impeachment

314
00:18:45,560 --> 00:18:49,480
Speaker 1: investigation that's being done for the State Assembly, they said

315
00:18:49,480 --> 00:18:51,639
Speaker 1: that it could take months, and so they're on the

316
00:18:51,680 --> 00:18:55,040
Speaker 1: record same month. I imagine it's going to be a

317
00:18:55,080 --> 00:18:58,560
Speaker 1: while before we hear anything. But they've also said that

318
00:18:58,640 --> 00:19:01,280
Speaker 1: this is another element that is going to be investigated

319
00:19:01,320 --> 00:19:06,120
Speaker 1: by both the Impeachment Assembly and investigation as well as

320
00:19:06,440 --> 00:19:08,919
Speaker 1: now Kiss James is going to start one. So it

321
00:19:08,960 --> 00:19:11,600
Speaker 1: seems like Cuomo is just going to try to ride

322
00:19:11,640 --> 00:19:14,800
Speaker 1: the whole thing out. Yeah, and in meantime, he's it

323
00:19:14,840 --> 00:19:17,720
Speaker 1: looks like Pomo might end up being like a political

324
00:19:17,760 --> 00:19:21,280
Speaker 1: pinata here. Do we know how much he made for

325
00:19:21,320 --> 00:19:24,840
Speaker 1: this book. It was at the height of his popularity

326
00:19:25,040 --> 00:19:29,120
Speaker 1: during COVID that he made the deal. He will not

327
00:19:29,280 --> 00:19:32,359
Speaker 1: say how much he earns, but he said that everybody

328
00:19:32,560 --> 00:19:36,520
Speaker 1: has constantly asked him about his taxes, and he's released

329
00:19:36,560 --> 00:19:41,560
Speaker 1: his tax information. So he calls this Albany politics at

330
00:19:41,560 --> 00:19:43,919
Speaker 1: its worst, and he says that the Controller and the

331
00:19:44,000 --> 00:19:46,840
Speaker 1: a G have spoken to people about running for governor

332
00:19:46,920 --> 00:19:50,960
Speaker 1: and it's unethical for them to wield criminal referral authority

333
00:19:51,280 --> 00:19:53,960
Speaker 1: for their political self interests. So you can see that

334
00:19:54,040 --> 00:19:56,720
Speaker 1: he's calling this out that claiming this is all just

335
00:19:56,840 --> 00:20:01,359
Speaker 1: payback for people who possibly want to run for Thanks Pat,

336
00:20:01,760 --> 00:20:05,399
Speaker 1: that's Bloomberg Legal reporter Patricia Hurtado. And that's it for

337
00:20:05,400 --> 00:20:08,000
Speaker 1: the edition of the Bloomberg Law Show. Remember you can

338
00:20:08,040 --> 00:20:10,920
Speaker 1: always get the latest legal news on a Bloomberg Law podcast.

339
00:20:11,119 --> 00:20:13,960
Speaker 1: You can find them on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and at

340
00:20:14,119 --> 00:20:19,320
Speaker 1: www dot Bloomberg dot com, slash podcast slash Law. I'm

341
00:20:19,400 --> 00:20:21,960
Speaker 1: June Grosso and you're listening to Bloomberg