1 00:00:00,200 --> 00:00:11,960 Speaker 1: Yeah, let's just keep a real straight shright. We know, Jason, 2 00:00:12,080 --> 00:00:15,920 Speaker 1: I'm gonna get a little bit rougher. I'm here for it. 3 00:00:15,960 --> 00:00:19,040 Speaker 1: Those who really believe in the American process, all of us, 4 00:00:19,880 --> 00:00:23,680 Speaker 1: straight shot. No, Chason, what's your gligo on the Black 5 00:00:23,680 --> 00:00:27,440 Speaker 1: Effect podcasting? That word that work? What's happening, straight shoot is? 6 00:00:27,480 --> 00:00:30,000 Speaker 1: This is Tesla and Figaro. I am here again with 7 00:00:30,320 --> 00:00:36,080 Speaker 1: my friend, mentor girlfriend, attorney Natalie Jackson, national renown civil 8 00:00:36,200 --> 00:00:40,400 Speaker 1: rights attorney and just someone that I've always reached out 9 00:00:40,400 --> 00:00:43,160 Speaker 1: to when I have any questions of regarding any legal 10 00:00:43,200 --> 00:00:46,280 Speaker 1: matters or social justice. She is certainly true to the game. 11 00:00:46,840 --> 00:00:50,160 Speaker 1: We're bringing her back again for episode three, Part three. 12 00:00:50,880 --> 00:00:52,400 Speaker 1: If you did not get a chance to check out 13 00:00:52,440 --> 00:00:54,920 Speaker 1: part one and two. Attorney Natalie Jackson joined me on 14 00:00:54,960 --> 00:00:56,600 Speaker 1: the last couple of weeks to talk about the Derek 15 00:00:56,680 --> 00:01:00,400 Speaker 1: Chauvin case. Here we are now with the conviction. The 16 00:01:00,480 --> 00:01:04,160 Speaker 1: last episode we went into the charges, what that looked like, 17 00:01:04,880 --> 00:01:07,720 Speaker 1: what he could possibly be charged with, and now he's 18 00:01:07,760 --> 00:01:10,679 Speaker 1: actually been convicted. Thank you so much Natalie for joining 19 00:01:10,680 --> 00:01:13,800 Speaker 1: me again to break this down to the tribe on 20 00:01:13,840 --> 00:01:16,440 Speaker 1: what we saw happen on last week. During that conviction. 21 00:01:16,640 --> 00:01:19,240 Speaker 1: Thank you for having me on my favorite podcast, right 22 00:01:19,319 --> 00:01:23,160 Speaker 1: shot Coach Chaser. It really is your favorite. He's not 23 00:01:23,200 --> 00:01:25,200 Speaker 1: just saying that. Guy. Truly am her favorite and she's 24 00:01:25,240 --> 00:01:28,759 Speaker 1: my favorite too. So tell us, Natalie, let's get straight 25 00:01:28,760 --> 00:01:32,280 Speaker 1: to it. What happened? Did we expect? We kind of 26 00:01:32,280 --> 00:01:35,160 Speaker 1: expected him to get something, you know, be charged on something, 27 00:01:35,200 --> 00:01:39,360 Speaker 1: if nothing else manslaughter. Shout out to attorney Keith Ellison 28 00:01:39,560 --> 00:01:42,000 Speaker 1: for making sure everything was on the table. I think 29 00:01:42,000 --> 00:01:44,959 Speaker 1: people's worst case scenario was, Okay, he'll get manslaughter. Well, no, 30 00:01:45,040 --> 00:01:47,680 Speaker 1: he gets something. But did I know you and I 31 00:01:47,800 --> 00:01:49,840 Speaker 1: text that day and when the jury came back, you 32 00:01:49,880 --> 00:01:53,880 Speaker 1: said it's murdered too. I certainly wasn't thinking it was 33 00:01:53,880 --> 00:01:56,640 Speaker 1: gonna be all three charges? Did you? And why not? 34 00:01:57,440 --> 00:01:59,320 Speaker 1: I didn't think so because in Florida we have a 35 00:01:59,360 --> 00:02:02,440 Speaker 1: different since them. So remember every state has a different 36 00:02:02,440 --> 00:02:05,040 Speaker 1: system of how that you can be charged, why charges 37 00:02:05,080 --> 00:02:06,880 Speaker 1: you can be brought up on in a criminal case. 38 00:02:07,160 --> 00:02:11,279 Speaker 1: In Florida, you would either be charged for murder or manslaughter. 39 00:02:11,600 --> 00:02:14,760 Speaker 1: You can't be charged for both. So that was really 40 00:02:14,800 --> 00:02:18,840 Speaker 1: interesting to me because manslaughter is a is in Florida's 41 00:02:18,919 --> 00:02:22,960 Speaker 1: accidental killing or murder is a. It can be a 42 00:02:23,000 --> 00:02:26,959 Speaker 1: non intent killing, but it's not in a culpable negligence, 43 00:02:27,200 --> 00:02:30,400 Speaker 1: which is which it is even in Minnesota. But in 44 00:02:30,480 --> 00:02:34,720 Speaker 1: Minnesota you can be convicted on all three counts, the 45 00:02:34,800 --> 00:02:38,600 Speaker 1: murder to count, the murder three count, and the manslaughter, 46 00:02:38,919 --> 00:02:41,639 Speaker 1: which is very different than Florida. Does that make sense? 47 00:02:41,639 --> 00:02:44,560 Speaker 1: Because I know he put he gave the jury that 48 00:02:44,720 --> 00:02:48,040 Speaker 1: so that they could have an option. That's what I thought, right, 49 00:02:48,080 --> 00:02:50,399 Speaker 1: So how how can you say it was an accident 50 00:02:50,720 --> 00:02:53,840 Speaker 1: and it was also intend to commit the assault? Because 51 00:02:53,840 --> 00:02:54,840 Speaker 1: I want to clear it up because I know we 52 00:02:54,919 --> 00:02:57,119 Speaker 1: talked about it on the last thing. The murder was intentional, 53 00:02:57,200 --> 00:03:00,560 Speaker 1: the assault was intentional. He intended to assault resulted in 54 00:03:00,560 --> 00:03:02,720 Speaker 1: the murder. So how can you be convicted on both? 55 00:03:02,760 --> 00:03:04,360 Speaker 1: How does that make sense? I think it's just the 56 00:03:04,400 --> 00:03:07,720 Speaker 1: wording of the charge, because really it seems as though 57 00:03:07,880 --> 00:03:10,560 Speaker 1: these are all man's later charges because you don't have 58 00:03:10,600 --> 00:03:12,680 Speaker 1: an intent in the murder two in the murder three, 59 00:03:12,919 --> 00:03:15,800 Speaker 1: like you and I discussed previously, says there was some 60 00:03:15,800 --> 00:03:17,960 Speaker 1: something we needed to clear up about the murder too. 61 00:03:18,080 --> 00:03:21,640 Speaker 1: There is no intent to commit murder for the murder 62 00:03:21,639 --> 00:03:24,880 Speaker 1: to charge. However, for the murder to charge, you have 63 00:03:25,040 --> 00:03:29,040 Speaker 1: to also commit another crime, which would be the aggravated assault. 64 00:03:29,320 --> 00:03:33,000 Speaker 1: Aggravated assault has an attempt to assault, so he had 65 00:03:33,040 --> 00:03:35,960 Speaker 1: to have intended to put his knee on on George 66 00:03:35,960 --> 00:03:38,680 Speaker 1: Floyd's deck and intended to cause some sort of harm 67 00:03:39,000 --> 00:03:42,160 Speaker 1: to George Floyd by doing that, but in doing so 68 00:03:42,840 --> 00:03:45,960 Speaker 1: he killed George Floyd. So there's no intent to kill 69 00:03:46,040 --> 00:03:49,280 Speaker 1: George Floyd. But there is there was the intent for 70 00:03:49,320 --> 00:03:51,800 Speaker 1: the aggravated assault, and in doing so he killed him. 71 00:03:51,880 --> 00:03:54,840 Speaker 1: That's what murder two is in Minnesota. So as you 72 00:03:54,880 --> 00:03:59,200 Speaker 1: can see, the murder two in Minnesota would actually kind 73 00:03:59,200 --> 00:04:02,680 Speaker 1: of be Man's fad in Florida because you were saying 74 00:04:02,760 --> 00:04:05,480 Speaker 1: that he didn't intend to kill him, but he did 75 00:04:05,520 --> 00:04:08,920 Speaker 1: something reckless and dangerous and committed a crime. Well, when 76 00:04:08,960 --> 00:04:11,360 Speaker 1: I look at manslaughter, I always think about drunk driving 77 00:04:12,080 --> 00:04:14,040 Speaker 1: because that's the case that I think people can usually 78 00:04:14,120 --> 00:04:17,080 Speaker 1: relate to. And so when you said and I guess, 79 00:04:17,120 --> 00:04:18,680 Speaker 1: I see, and you can clear it up because I'm 80 00:04:18,680 --> 00:04:21,479 Speaker 1: asking the question if it was in Florida, when I 81 00:04:21,520 --> 00:04:24,600 Speaker 1: see intent to assault, I think I intended to hit you. 82 00:04:25,120 --> 00:04:28,440 Speaker 1: As a results, you died. Where manslaughter in my mind, 83 00:04:28,560 --> 00:04:31,360 Speaker 1: drunk driving I didn't intend to hit anybody. It was 84 00:04:31,400 --> 00:04:34,440 Speaker 1: an accident, flat out, okay. And that's a great way 85 00:04:34,480 --> 00:04:37,320 Speaker 1: to put it, because that's what that's what murder two is. 86 00:04:37,360 --> 00:04:40,960 Speaker 1: It's called felony murder in Florida. So felony murder is 87 00:04:41,000 --> 00:04:44,279 Speaker 1: when you commit when you commit a crime and then 88 00:04:44,360 --> 00:04:47,960 Speaker 1: the commission of that crime, somebody dies. Right, and I 89 00:04:48,040 --> 00:04:52,320 Speaker 1: intended to commit that crime, right, That's where the word intent. 90 00:04:52,839 --> 00:04:54,600 Speaker 1: And thank you so much for spending so much time, 91 00:04:54,720 --> 00:04:58,280 Speaker 1: you know, just making sure that we understood each other 92 00:04:58,680 --> 00:05:01,320 Speaker 1: so that we can educate for you know, so that they, 93 00:05:01,440 --> 00:05:04,280 Speaker 1: you know, have an understanding. So got it that that 94 00:05:04,320 --> 00:05:07,320 Speaker 1: makes total sense. What about the other murder charge. The 95 00:05:07,400 --> 00:05:10,839 Speaker 1: other murder charge was unintentional killing him someone while you're 96 00:05:10,880 --> 00:05:14,599 Speaker 1: doing act with a depraved heart. So you did an 97 00:05:14,600 --> 00:05:18,720 Speaker 1: evil act and somebody died. That's why murder three isn't 98 00:05:18,800 --> 00:05:22,279 Speaker 1: in Minnesota. And then manslaughter in Minnesota is of course 99 00:05:22,360 --> 00:05:26,680 Speaker 1: culpable negligence. It's something that you did negligently and you're 100 00:05:26,720 --> 00:05:29,400 Speaker 1: culpable for it. I wonder if Natalie, do you think 101 00:05:29,480 --> 00:05:32,200 Speaker 1: since they want because even though the jury said that 102 00:05:32,240 --> 00:05:35,719 Speaker 1: they were not influenced by the civil settlement, you know 103 00:05:35,760 --> 00:05:38,120 Speaker 1: that people are still human. They can sit up there 104 00:05:38,160 --> 00:05:40,880 Speaker 1: all day and say they're not, you know, influenced. But 105 00:05:40,960 --> 00:05:44,520 Speaker 1: since the civil settlement said that he was negligent, because 106 00:05:44,520 --> 00:05:46,960 Speaker 1: as you know, being a civil rights attorney, you don't 107 00:05:47,000 --> 00:05:49,640 Speaker 1: have to prove, you know, to the level of what 108 00:05:49,760 --> 00:05:52,240 Speaker 1: the what the state does? I wonder if they gave 109 00:05:52,279 --> 00:05:56,200 Speaker 1: the manslaughter because he was already you know, quote unquote, 110 00:05:57,800 --> 00:06:00,880 Speaker 1: the city had already recognized that there was I'm negligence. 111 00:06:01,040 --> 00:06:04,000 Speaker 1: And since negligence is tied to manslaughter, do you think 112 00:06:04,040 --> 00:06:06,120 Speaker 1: they could possibly have something to do with it? Well, 113 00:06:06,279 --> 00:06:08,919 Speaker 1: here's the thing. Juries are charged with only listening to 114 00:06:08,960 --> 00:06:12,760 Speaker 1: the evidence that's presented in trial. So if we pretend 115 00:06:12,880 --> 00:06:15,880 Speaker 1: like that's what people do, because that's what you know, 116 00:06:16,000 --> 00:06:17,960 Speaker 1: we pretend that, you know, people don't bring any of 117 00:06:18,000 --> 00:06:20,920 Speaker 1: their outside biases in, which is what you're supposed to 118 00:06:20,960 --> 00:06:24,440 Speaker 1: do when you're a juror not bring anything any knowledge 119 00:06:24,440 --> 00:06:26,600 Speaker 1: that you know from outside. You're only supposed to listen 120 00:06:26,640 --> 00:06:29,400 Speaker 1: to evidence at trial and make your decision based on 121 00:06:29,400 --> 00:06:31,760 Speaker 1: the evidence that was presented in trial. Then no, they 122 00:06:31,760 --> 00:06:35,799 Speaker 1: should not have made their decision based on the civil lawsuit. 123 00:06:36,320 --> 00:06:39,880 Speaker 1: Now could they have? Of course, you know, could they 124 00:06:39,920 --> 00:06:42,720 Speaker 1: have of course, But I will say that in this case, 125 00:06:42,800 --> 00:06:46,280 Speaker 1: it's really interesting to me. This is the gymnastics that 126 00:06:46,400 --> 00:06:49,080 Speaker 1: we in Black America have to go through, right because 127 00:06:49,200 --> 00:06:51,520 Speaker 1: there was a video of a man killed on They 128 00:06:51,560 --> 00:06:54,279 Speaker 1: were killed on video. There was a video of show 129 00:06:54,360 --> 00:06:57,800 Speaker 1: being killing George Floyd. So this is exactly should what 130 00:06:57,880 --> 00:07:00,760 Speaker 1: should have happened. He should have been something that there 131 00:07:00,800 --> 00:07:03,680 Speaker 1: was direct evidence of it. You had witnessed, sins, came 132 00:07:03,680 --> 00:07:06,960 Speaker 1: and testified to it. So this but because we're so 133 00:07:07,040 --> 00:07:09,720 Speaker 1: used to not getting justice for black people, we are 134 00:07:09,760 --> 00:07:13,760 Speaker 1: shocked over something that really should not even take in 135 00:07:13,760 --> 00:07:16,680 Speaker 1: two minutes to deliberate on because you saw a video. 136 00:07:17,320 --> 00:07:19,560 Speaker 1: But we're shocked by this because we're so used to 137 00:07:19,560 --> 00:07:22,640 Speaker 1: not getting justice. I find that part of what we 138 00:07:22,720 --> 00:07:26,280 Speaker 1: are going through as Black America really the interesting part 139 00:07:26,320 --> 00:07:31,600 Speaker 1: of this case that we are happy to get justice, 140 00:07:31,720 --> 00:07:34,960 Speaker 1: and that's what's wrong with the justice system. Okay, So 141 00:07:35,000 --> 00:07:39,280 Speaker 1: with that said, we're shocked in America. People feel a 142 00:07:39,360 --> 00:07:41,720 Speaker 1: little bit of relief. We certainly know this is not 143 00:07:41,800 --> 00:07:44,080 Speaker 1: the end. We know that we have to continue fighting 144 00:07:44,120 --> 00:07:46,680 Speaker 1: for policy Georgia Justice and Policing Act. We know that 145 00:07:46,720 --> 00:07:49,200 Speaker 1: this one case does not apply to everything. There are 146 00:07:49,200 --> 00:07:51,160 Speaker 1: a lot of conversations people say, we feel like it's 147 00:07:51,200 --> 00:07:53,560 Speaker 1: justice for everybody, and I know what they mean when 148 00:07:53,560 --> 00:07:56,800 Speaker 1: they say that, But you, Natalie, as an attorney, knows that, No, 149 00:07:56,960 --> 00:07:59,160 Speaker 1: it's certain a lot of justice for everybody, because every 150 00:07:59,160 --> 00:08:01,760 Speaker 1: case you know to have justice. But we get the 151 00:08:01,800 --> 00:08:06,280 Speaker 1: overall feeling of Okay, something is finally working in our favor. 152 00:08:06,360 --> 00:08:08,920 Speaker 1: Even though this case is very, very unique. You mentioned 153 00:08:08,920 --> 00:08:11,480 Speaker 1: on the last podcast, you do not say cases like 154 00:08:11,560 --> 00:08:15,320 Speaker 1: this with thirty plus witnesses, pro bono attorneys coming in 155 00:08:15,360 --> 00:08:19,280 Speaker 1: to help, lending their expertise. Certainly a nine minute video 156 00:08:19,480 --> 00:08:22,240 Speaker 1: usually as quick quick shot. I couldn't think I didn't 157 00:08:22,240 --> 00:08:24,360 Speaker 1: know what was going on, So this is very unique. 158 00:08:24,440 --> 00:08:26,480 Speaker 1: Even with all of that said, is the fact that 159 00:08:26,520 --> 00:08:30,040 Speaker 1: he's been convicted is that used in the upcoming trial 160 00:08:30,400 --> 00:08:32,920 Speaker 1: or does it stand on its own? Does it say, Okay, 161 00:08:32,960 --> 00:08:35,480 Speaker 1: we're gonna get you for aiding and ebetting this murder 162 00:08:35,559 --> 00:08:37,960 Speaker 1: and we know it's a murder because he was convicted. 163 00:08:38,040 --> 00:08:40,040 Speaker 1: Or is it we're gonna get you aiding and embedding 164 00:08:40,040 --> 00:08:41,679 Speaker 1: a murder and now we have to prove it's a 165 00:08:41,720 --> 00:08:44,720 Speaker 1: murder all over again. Yes, it's gonna be all you 166 00:08:44,720 --> 00:08:46,600 Speaker 1: have to prove that it's a murder all over again 167 00:08:46,640 --> 00:08:49,880 Speaker 1: and that they aided and embedded. So you know, when 168 00:08:49,880 --> 00:08:52,640 Speaker 1: we talk about the convictions of these other officers, uh, 169 00:08:52,640 --> 00:08:54,720 Speaker 1: and I can't do you know that you remember their names. 170 00:08:54,760 --> 00:08:58,719 Speaker 1: I know there's Lane and um Tao. I think Tao 171 00:08:59,040 --> 00:09:01,520 Speaker 1: and I believe the other. And when is King. I 172 00:09:01,520 --> 00:09:03,920 Speaker 1: I know officer Lane because he was the one that 173 00:09:04,000 --> 00:09:06,440 Speaker 1: said shouldn't we turn him over? And he doesn't have 174 00:09:06,480 --> 00:09:08,880 Speaker 1: a pulse, So I remember his name, and I think 175 00:09:08,960 --> 00:09:12,440 Speaker 1: his trial will be very interesting because that can cut 176 00:09:12,480 --> 00:09:16,000 Speaker 1: two ways, right. He was the one that was sort 177 00:09:16,040 --> 00:09:18,559 Speaker 1: of semi kind of trying to intervene, but he didn't 178 00:09:18,559 --> 00:09:21,600 Speaker 1: do too much, so that could help him to a jury. 179 00:09:21,640 --> 00:09:25,800 Speaker 1: But also the fact that he knew that you should 180 00:09:25,800 --> 00:09:28,720 Speaker 1: turn them over and that you should not have him 181 00:09:28,760 --> 00:09:31,280 Speaker 1: in a prose that might have hurt him. So his 182 00:09:31,720 --> 00:09:33,880 Speaker 1: if he decides to go to trial, it would be 183 00:09:33,960 --> 00:09:36,800 Speaker 1: very interesting because he was only on the fourth a 184 00:09:36,840 --> 00:09:39,920 Speaker 1: week he you know, and it'll be interesting to see 185 00:09:39,920 --> 00:09:42,280 Speaker 1: what a jury would do with that with his because 186 00:09:42,360 --> 00:09:45,520 Speaker 1: it could the argument can be made both ways that 187 00:09:45,640 --> 00:09:49,240 Speaker 1: he tried to help and that he knew what he 188 00:09:49,320 --> 00:09:52,360 Speaker 1: was doing was wrong. But then the argument is, again 189 00:09:52,440 --> 00:09:55,080 Speaker 1: he was there being trained, you know, by Derek Chauvin. 190 00:09:55,840 --> 00:09:59,280 Speaker 1: He was knew he did not have the nineteen years experience. 191 00:09:59,520 --> 00:10:01,480 Speaker 1: So he's definitely taking a chance. So if I was 192 00:10:01,600 --> 00:10:03,320 Speaker 1: his attorney, I would definitely be trying to get a 193 00:10:03,320 --> 00:10:06,560 Speaker 1: plea deal. And remember it just came out that Derek 194 00:10:06,640 --> 00:10:08,840 Speaker 1: Joba was offered a plea deal of third three murder. 195 00:10:08,880 --> 00:10:13,240 Speaker 1: I didn't know that. Yeah, yeah, well it's been out 196 00:10:13,520 --> 00:10:17,520 Speaker 1: they yeah, they put that out early on. What happened 197 00:10:17,520 --> 00:10:21,880 Speaker 1: with that was Attorney General bar which is what's amazing 198 00:10:21,920 --> 00:10:23,800 Speaker 1: because a lot of people didn't think that he would 199 00:10:23,840 --> 00:10:26,600 Speaker 1: do that. But because it was such a high profile case, 200 00:10:27,120 --> 00:10:32,000 Speaker 1: he wanted a plea deal with um right, and he 201 00:10:32,040 --> 00:10:34,240 Speaker 1: wanted to be able to what I classify as call 202 00:10:34,320 --> 00:10:37,200 Speaker 1: the shots um you know, be able to determine what 203 00:10:37,280 --> 00:10:39,720 Speaker 1: he was doing, and the type of time that he 204 00:10:39,760 --> 00:10:43,320 Speaker 1: would have gotten would not have satisfied the urgency of 205 00:10:43,360 --> 00:10:47,920 Speaker 1: this case. And so it was Attorney Bar Trump's guy 206 00:10:48,120 --> 00:10:50,000 Speaker 1: this said no, no plea deal. We're gonna have to 207 00:10:50,040 --> 00:10:51,839 Speaker 1: see this all the way out. And people don't see 208 00:10:51,880 --> 00:10:53,760 Speaker 1: that because they see Attorney Bar, which again I'm not 209 00:10:53,760 --> 00:10:55,920 Speaker 1: Attorney bar Fan. I just want I'm glad that you 210 00:10:55,960 --> 00:10:57,920 Speaker 1: brought it up, because a lot of people don't realize that. 211 00:10:57,960 --> 00:11:00,000 Speaker 1: But it was actually Attorney bar that said no, because 212 00:11:00,040 --> 00:11:02,400 Speaker 1: they could have closed the deal. Yeah, and it was 213 00:11:02,480 --> 00:11:04,640 Speaker 1: because he was trying to call the shots. My understanding 214 00:11:04,640 --> 00:11:07,040 Speaker 1: is because he wanted to serve his time in federal 215 00:11:07,080 --> 00:11:09,079 Speaker 1: prison when this was a state charge. Well that's what 216 00:11:09,120 --> 00:11:11,560 Speaker 1: I mean, called the shots. How he wanted to do it, 217 00:11:11,640 --> 00:11:13,680 Speaker 1: you know, but we make it work the way I 218 00:11:13,720 --> 00:11:16,000 Speaker 1: want to do it. And it wasn't, and the plea 219 00:11:16,080 --> 00:11:20,600 Speaker 1: did it wasn't. It wasn't adequate for the levels of 220 00:11:21,320 --> 00:11:23,920 Speaker 1: exactly for the level of they figured because they were 221 00:11:23,960 --> 00:11:26,960 Speaker 1: more concerned about additional riots, in additional you know, all 222 00:11:27,000 --> 00:11:28,920 Speaker 1: of that. It was. It certainly wasn't because they were 223 00:11:28,920 --> 00:11:31,280 Speaker 1: just so concerned about black holes justice. Let's get that straight. 224 00:11:31,679 --> 00:11:34,040 Speaker 1: It was more the politics of it all, right, Well, 225 00:11:34,080 --> 00:11:37,040 Speaker 1: it was more than the politics. You can't, sir, fake 226 00:11:37,120 --> 00:11:40,720 Speaker 1: time in a federal prison. It doesn't work like that, true, 227 00:11:40,760 --> 00:11:42,959 Speaker 1: But that was his suggestion. They could have offered him 228 00:11:43,000 --> 00:11:45,800 Speaker 1: something different. They could have. It had a lot to 229 00:11:45,800 --> 00:11:47,559 Speaker 1: do with the politics of it all and what it 230 00:11:47,600 --> 00:11:49,400 Speaker 1: would have looked like it needed to play out, and 231 00:11:49,440 --> 00:11:51,960 Speaker 1: it was better that it played out then to close 232 00:11:51,960 --> 00:11:54,319 Speaker 1: the deal because from the political standpoint, they thought it 233 00:11:54,320 --> 00:11:56,760 Speaker 1: would make matters worse, which they were absolutely right. It 234 00:11:56,840 --> 00:11:59,480 Speaker 1: would have, Yes, it would have, but I mean they 235 00:11:59,480 --> 00:12:02,679 Speaker 1: did off heavinfly. He just rejected it. They offered her 236 00:12:02,760 --> 00:12:06,040 Speaker 1: a straight plea of jail time in state prison. He said, 237 00:12:06,320 --> 00:12:08,480 Speaker 1: I will do this plea if I can do my 238 00:12:08,600 --> 00:12:12,079 Speaker 1: time in federal prison. Attorney Bar said, wait a minute, 239 00:12:12,160 --> 00:12:14,680 Speaker 1: I'm in charge of federal prisons. No, you can't come here. 240 00:12:15,440 --> 00:12:20,000 Speaker 1: And that's what Attorney Bar could have gave him something better. 241 00:12:20,040 --> 00:12:21,880 Speaker 1: I'm not again, I'm not trying to give Attorney Bar credit. 242 00:12:22,200 --> 00:12:25,320 Speaker 1: I'm just saying that it was some politics involved. Because 243 00:12:25,320 --> 00:12:26,920 Speaker 1: they break the Ruce's wife folks all the time. So 244 00:12:27,000 --> 00:12:28,320 Speaker 1: let's just call it what it is. So I'm saying 245 00:12:28,320 --> 00:12:30,679 Speaker 1: it was some politics involved. Let's say that he didn't 246 00:12:30,720 --> 00:12:32,760 Speaker 1: ask for state, I mean federal when he just asked 247 00:12:32,800 --> 00:12:34,600 Speaker 1: something else. What I'm what I'm trying to say is 248 00:12:35,120 --> 00:12:38,280 Speaker 1: there was some politics involved, and how it would have 249 00:12:38,440 --> 00:12:41,320 Speaker 1: looked if it was not adequate enough to meet the 250 00:12:41,400 --> 00:12:45,960 Speaker 1: need of Yes, of course that was that, but that 251 00:12:46,080 --> 00:12:48,480 Speaker 1: the bottom line was the attorney Bar followed the law. 252 00:12:48,920 --> 00:12:52,600 Speaker 1: He said, you cannot spend state time in federal prison, right. 253 00:12:52,800 --> 00:12:56,000 Speaker 1: And my only thing is Attorney Bar has also been 254 00:12:56,040 --> 00:12:59,920 Speaker 1: found not following the law many times. So that's what 255 00:13:00,000 --> 00:13:01,840 Speaker 1: I'm saying that it's not just so he just followed 256 00:13:01,840 --> 00:13:04,000 Speaker 1: the law. It was politics. Reason why I'm stressing that 257 00:13:04,080 --> 00:13:06,280 Speaker 1: overver is because I want people to know how politics 258 00:13:06,280 --> 00:13:09,000 Speaker 1: is and everything that is always connected to something. So 259 00:13:09,040 --> 00:13:11,600 Speaker 1: it's always always gonna look at from the political allends, 260 00:13:11,880 --> 00:13:13,920 Speaker 1: from the legal ends. What does it look like when 261 00:13:13,960 --> 00:13:16,960 Speaker 1: you have the entire world erupting over this one particular case. 262 00:13:17,760 --> 00:13:19,960 Speaker 1: It's some politics involved, just like it was some politics 263 00:13:19,960 --> 00:13:23,840 Speaker 1: involved with Attorney Keith Ellison. Absolutely, he knew that he 264 00:13:23,880 --> 00:13:26,480 Speaker 1: had to do certain things to make sure that this 265 00:13:26,520 --> 00:13:28,840 Speaker 1: case was fair because he knows there was gonna be 266 00:13:28,840 --> 00:13:31,960 Speaker 1: a political consequence. Why am I pushing that because we 267 00:13:32,080 --> 00:13:36,679 Speaker 1: have to start getting in the mindset of political consequences. 268 00:13:36,800 --> 00:13:41,160 Speaker 1: So if we go with the theory that conservatives trump administration, 269 00:13:41,160 --> 00:13:42,640 Speaker 1: I'm just throwing the theory out there. They don't care 270 00:13:42,679 --> 00:13:44,960 Speaker 1: nothing about black folks. They were more willing to let 271 00:13:45,040 --> 00:13:48,160 Speaker 1: him sacrifice this one part let him be the sacrifice 272 00:13:48,520 --> 00:13:51,880 Speaker 1: rather than deal with everything that would have came with 273 00:13:52,000 --> 00:13:55,360 Speaker 1: that by basically letting shop and slide is what I'm 274 00:13:55,400 --> 00:13:58,040 Speaker 1: trying to say. I'm just talking about. I mean, the 275 00:13:58,120 --> 00:14:00,360 Speaker 1: same thing may happen day through those capital right is 276 00:14:00,440 --> 00:14:03,400 Speaker 1: under the bus too politics doing, but they were worried 277 00:14:03,400 --> 00:14:07,199 Speaker 1: about the image there too. So politics does matter absolutely 278 00:14:07,240 --> 00:14:26,200 Speaker 1: every single time. Never forget it. Now, what about town? 279 00:14:26,400 --> 00:14:29,280 Speaker 1: Do you think he would definitely has a strong case 280 00:14:29,280 --> 00:14:31,200 Speaker 1: on aiding in the betting And for the those who 281 00:14:31,200 --> 00:14:33,840 Speaker 1: are listening, that's the guy that was standing there, you know, 282 00:14:33,880 --> 00:14:38,320 Speaker 1: holding quote unquote talking to the Let me tell you why, 283 00:14:38,400 --> 00:14:41,160 Speaker 1: for any of your people have ever watched any type 284 00:14:41,160 --> 00:14:45,640 Speaker 1: of crime show, tw was the lookout. He was the 285 00:14:45,680 --> 00:14:49,440 Speaker 1: one that prevented people from coming to aid to the crime, 286 00:14:49,600 --> 00:14:52,720 Speaker 1: from seeing any of the witnesses that were there. Even 287 00:14:52,720 --> 00:14:55,440 Speaker 1: though TW was not on George Floyd's neck and he 288 00:14:55,480 --> 00:14:59,480 Speaker 1: didn't participate in holding down, you can you can analogize 289 00:14:59,560 --> 00:15:01,720 Speaker 1: him to the look out in a drug deal, right, 290 00:15:02,200 --> 00:15:06,680 Speaker 1: So he was the one that was preventing anyone else 291 00:15:07,120 --> 00:15:10,240 Speaker 1: from interfering in this crime or being able to really 292 00:15:10,240 --> 00:15:13,040 Speaker 1: have a clear indication of what was happening in this prime. 293 00:15:13,280 --> 00:15:16,320 Speaker 1: I think he is the most culpable, even though he 294 00:15:16,440 --> 00:15:20,000 Speaker 1: was not touching George Floyd, He's the one most coupable 295 00:15:20,040 --> 00:15:23,520 Speaker 1: for aidan A Betty, what do you think if there's 296 00:15:23,600 --> 00:15:26,080 Speaker 1: not if these guys walk, what do you think that's 297 00:15:26,120 --> 00:15:30,000 Speaker 1: that's that's going to say about you know, the justice system? 298 00:15:30,040 --> 00:15:32,360 Speaker 1: Are you think it will take away from Derrek shoving? 299 00:15:32,560 --> 00:15:37,960 Speaker 1: I interviewed uh the cousins of George Floyd, and I asked, 300 00:15:37,960 --> 00:15:40,080 Speaker 1: you know them the same question, will it take away 301 00:15:40,360 --> 00:15:43,240 Speaker 1: from the justice with Derrek shoving? And they really believe that, 302 00:15:43,320 --> 00:15:45,040 Speaker 1: you know, the weight of it was definitely on Derrik 303 00:15:45,040 --> 00:15:47,200 Speaker 1: shoving and they wouldn't take anything away, although they would 304 00:15:47,240 --> 00:15:49,440 Speaker 1: like to see everybody convicted. But what is your thought 305 00:15:49,480 --> 00:15:52,280 Speaker 1: on that? I think it would take away because it's 306 00:15:52,320 --> 00:15:55,160 Speaker 1: just like anyone anytime you have when the black persons 307 00:15:55,160 --> 00:15:57,560 Speaker 1: committed of a prime and there are multiple people that 308 00:15:57,600 --> 00:16:01,080 Speaker 1: participated in the crime, it's not just is until everybody 309 00:16:01,200 --> 00:16:04,720 Speaker 1: is convicted. So the same thing here, it's not justice 310 00:16:04,760 --> 00:16:09,040 Speaker 1: into everyone who has participated in this crime is convicted, 311 00:16:09,240 --> 00:16:14,440 Speaker 1: so you know, or at least tried and at least 312 00:16:14,480 --> 00:16:17,360 Speaker 1: tried and given a fair trial with the fair um 313 00:16:17,400 --> 00:16:20,960 Speaker 1: deliberation of the jury. So I do think, and I 314 00:16:21,000 --> 00:16:24,920 Speaker 1: think that the public is going to think. So most 315 00:16:24,920 --> 00:16:27,560 Speaker 1: people are on edge in this case. You know, it 316 00:16:27,600 --> 00:16:31,040 Speaker 1: could have gone anyway for Minneapolis. In Minnesota because of 317 00:16:31,080 --> 00:16:34,240 Speaker 1: the way that this case was handled in the beginning, 318 00:16:34,560 --> 00:16:37,480 Speaker 1: people are still on edge. It's not because there of 319 00:16:37,560 --> 00:16:39,880 Speaker 1: Derek Chauvin. Per se, you talked about this earlier in 320 00:16:39,920 --> 00:16:42,960 Speaker 1: your show. This is a whole culture. This is not 321 00:16:43,040 --> 00:16:46,040 Speaker 1: one person. And this becomes the problem when people say, oh, 322 00:16:46,040 --> 00:16:48,400 Speaker 1: look y'all got justice. No, we didn't get justice with 323 00:16:48,480 --> 00:16:52,720 Speaker 1: Derek Chauvin. Derek Schouvin is one person that is a 324 00:16:52,840 --> 00:16:56,800 Speaker 1: symbol of a larger problem the justice system in America 325 00:16:57,080 --> 00:17:00,400 Speaker 1: and how policing in America is handled. So I don't 326 00:17:00,400 --> 00:17:04,160 Speaker 1: think that one person will ever satisfy people who want 327 00:17:04,240 --> 00:17:08,720 Speaker 1: to see justice, because justice is a revision of the 328 00:17:08,760 --> 00:17:11,919 Speaker 1: way police in America is handled. Justice is putting in 329 00:17:12,000 --> 00:17:16,040 Speaker 1: new policies that protect black people so that they they 330 00:17:16,160 --> 00:17:19,199 Speaker 1: are have their life and they get to have a 331 00:17:19,240 --> 00:17:21,680 Speaker 1: trial just like everyone else, no matter what the crime 332 00:17:21,720 --> 00:17:25,080 Speaker 1: they they committed, instead of dying on the street. Okay, 333 00:17:25,080 --> 00:17:27,119 Speaker 1: and let's let's deal with that. Two things you said 334 00:17:27,160 --> 00:17:29,040 Speaker 1: about the word justice, and then when you say have 335 00:17:29,119 --> 00:17:33,399 Speaker 1: a trial of people take plea deals. So when you're saying, 336 00:17:33,440 --> 00:17:35,480 Speaker 1: you know, we want to see the other officers have 337 00:17:35,520 --> 00:17:38,120 Speaker 1: a fair trial, what is your position on the fact 338 00:17:38,119 --> 00:17:40,360 Speaker 1: that people take plea deals which is not a fair trial, 339 00:17:40,520 --> 00:17:42,640 Speaker 1: which ultimately hurts us too. You know, we normally take 340 00:17:42,680 --> 00:17:43,840 Speaker 1: the plea deal because we know we don't have a 341 00:17:43,920 --> 00:17:47,320 Speaker 1: chance in hell in court. So can you just go 342 00:17:47,359 --> 00:17:49,200 Speaker 1: a little bit deeper than that into your explanation where 343 00:17:49,200 --> 00:17:50,800 Speaker 1: you're saying, you know, we want to see people try 344 00:17:50,800 --> 00:17:53,199 Speaker 1: and evicted. How does the plea deal process, you know, 345 00:17:53,280 --> 00:17:55,280 Speaker 1: work into that? Dude? Is the is the plea deal 346 00:17:55,359 --> 00:17:59,560 Speaker 1: always fair? Well, a police deal is for judicial economy. 347 00:17:59,600 --> 00:18:01,920 Speaker 1: That is, you can't try every case in the United 348 00:18:01,920 --> 00:18:04,600 Speaker 1: States of everybody because the courts will be clogged up, 349 00:18:04,640 --> 00:18:07,480 Speaker 1: we'll be behind. So police deals are there for a 350 00:18:07,600 --> 00:18:10,639 Speaker 1: judicial economy if you know you're guilty or you just 351 00:18:10,680 --> 00:18:12,760 Speaker 1: don't want to, you know, And this is the way 352 00:18:12,800 --> 00:18:14,679 Speaker 1: it should work. It doesn't work this way. I'm just 353 00:18:14,680 --> 00:18:16,359 Speaker 1: saying to tell you the way it should work, and 354 00:18:16,400 --> 00:18:18,520 Speaker 1: then we'll talk about the realities of how it works 355 00:18:18,760 --> 00:18:22,679 Speaker 1: for disenfranchised people. But if you know you're guilty, you 356 00:18:22,720 --> 00:18:24,439 Speaker 1: don't want to face a trial because you feel that 357 00:18:24,480 --> 00:18:26,520 Speaker 1: a trial, the jury will convict you because they have 358 00:18:26,640 --> 00:18:29,119 Speaker 1: the evidence, then you should take a plea deal. And 359 00:18:29,119 --> 00:18:31,280 Speaker 1: that's why poleae deals are going to be. You're gonna 360 00:18:31,320 --> 00:18:34,879 Speaker 1: get a lesser sentence and a lesser it's just a negotiation. 361 00:18:35,320 --> 00:18:37,520 Speaker 1: And the reason we have that is because our court 362 00:18:37,560 --> 00:18:40,880 Speaker 1: systems can't handle doing a trial for everybody who's ever 363 00:18:40,920 --> 00:18:46,240 Speaker 1: been arrested. Now in America and under our current justice system, 364 00:18:46,320 --> 00:18:49,640 Speaker 1: what we see is that really it becomes plea deal 365 00:18:49,840 --> 00:18:57,560 Speaker 1: is usually a judicial economy that works too convict poor people, 366 00:18:58,240 --> 00:19:00,800 Speaker 1: people who can't afford a lawyer, people who can't afford 367 00:19:00,800 --> 00:19:03,640 Speaker 1: to go to trial. And you know, many people they 368 00:19:03,720 --> 00:19:06,600 Speaker 1: plead because they don't have a choice because they cannot afford. 369 00:19:07,119 --> 00:19:10,520 Speaker 1: And then you also have the the racist element or 370 00:19:10,560 --> 00:19:13,760 Speaker 1: the racial element, where you know, we have a racist 371 00:19:13,760 --> 00:19:17,840 Speaker 1: society and we're worried that people will look at someone 372 00:19:17,920 --> 00:19:21,080 Speaker 1: and assume that they're guilty without looking at the evidence, 373 00:19:21,119 --> 00:19:23,400 Speaker 1: without doing what they're supposed to do in trial and 374 00:19:23,440 --> 00:19:26,240 Speaker 1: just listen to the evidence that presented a trial. So 375 00:19:26,359 --> 00:19:29,320 Speaker 1: that's where you know, the it kind of breaks down 376 00:19:29,359 --> 00:19:32,679 Speaker 1: a little bit. But I think that, yes, if you 377 00:19:32,760 --> 00:19:37,359 Speaker 1: ask me, I think that if we on the whole, 378 00:19:37,520 --> 00:19:42,600 Speaker 1: a plea deal is a fair mechanism for achieving justice 379 00:19:42,600 --> 00:19:46,639 Speaker 1: in America. But just like everything else in America, you know, 380 00:19:46,760 --> 00:19:51,159 Speaker 1: you also have to deal with the systemic racism in 381 00:19:51,240 --> 00:19:55,159 Speaker 1: the justice system, and and not just racism, the systemic 382 00:19:55,240 --> 00:19:59,720 Speaker 1: classism where poor people can't get justice. So you know 383 00:19:59,840 --> 00:20:19,080 Speaker 1: you do have to deal with those ramifications of it. Okay, 384 00:20:19,160 --> 00:20:22,600 Speaker 1: let's deal with that word justice. Attorney Keith Ellison came 385 00:20:22,600 --> 00:20:26,359 Speaker 1: out and said, this is not justice, this is accountability. 386 00:20:26,440 --> 00:20:28,480 Speaker 1: You and I have had so many conversations on the 387 00:20:28,480 --> 00:20:30,840 Speaker 1: word justice, especially when it comes to the civil side. 388 00:20:31,240 --> 00:20:33,720 Speaker 1: You know, we all wait, what does when people hear justice, 389 00:20:33,760 --> 00:20:37,800 Speaker 1: they mean just fair, equal right, you know, feeling is it? 390 00:20:37,960 --> 00:20:42,639 Speaker 1: Which we know that's not necessarily justice. But the legal mind, 391 00:20:42,760 --> 00:20:47,240 Speaker 1: your brilliant legal mind, is justice. Okay, what's served especially 392 00:20:47,280 --> 00:20:49,280 Speaker 1: when we when we had these conversations on the civil side, 393 00:20:49,280 --> 00:20:50,720 Speaker 1: which we don't have the time to go into it 394 00:20:50,760 --> 00:20:53,080 Speaker 1: as a hold of the show, but what did it 395 00:20:53,119 --> 00:20:55,560 Speaker 1: mean when when Keith Ellison said, you know, this is 396 00:20:55,600 --> 00:21:00,000 Speaker 1: not justice, but as an attorney, it technically, is justice 397 00:21:00,119 --> 00:21:02,600 Speaker 1: based upon the cards that we have been dealt on 398 00:21:02,720 --> 00:21:06,200 Speaker 1: what we consider justice? Or you tell me what is justice? 399 00:21:06,359 --> 00:21:08,480 Speaker 1: What do you do you understand what he was saying 400 00:21:08,600 --> 00:21:12,480 Speaker 1: and do you agree? Do you understand when you say accountability? 401 00:21:12,560 --> 00:21:16,840 Speaker 1: Because in the sense of what justice is for a 402 00:21:16,880 --> 00:21:20,720 Speaker 1: government agent, and that's what a police officer is a 403 00:21:20,800 --> 00:21:25,119 Speaker 1: government agent, they're also has to be accountability for the 404 00:21:25,160 --> 00:21:28,080 Speaker 1: actions of this government agent. Now that's a civil thing. 405 00:21:28,160 --> 00:21:32,920 Speaker 1: Of course, we're judging Derek Chauvin on on the criminal standard, 406 00:21:32,960 --> 00:21:35,399 Speaker 1: which is beyond the reasonable doubt that he did something 407 00:21:35,440 --> 00:21:39,000 Speaker 1: that a reasonable officer would not have done. But when 408 00:21:39,040 --> 00:21:42,800 Speaker 1: you're thinking about accountability, that is that's a good way 409 00:21:42,880 --> 00:21:47,080 Speaker 1: to think about justice in the terms of government agents 410 00:21:47,359 --> 00:21:51,119 Speaker 1: being held to a standard. Because of course police officers 411 00:21:51,160 --> 00:21:53,560 Speaker 1: can take they can kill people, right, they have a 412 00:21:53,640 --> 00:21:56,280 Speaker 1: legal license to kill people if they feel that they 413 00:21:56,320 --> 00:21:59,159 Speaker 1: are a danger to them or a danger to others. 414 00:21:59,640 --> 00:22:03,840 Speaker 1: So it's a different you and I. We we have that, 415 00:22:03,880 --> 00:22:06,320 Speaker 1: but we don't have the protections that police officers have. 416 00:22:06,760 --> 00:22:09,240 Speaker 1: There's two different justices I think that we have to 417 00:22:09,280 --> 00:22:12,280 Speaker 1: consider in the criminal justice system. There's the justice of 418 00:22:12,920 --> 00:22:15,720 Speaker 1: did someone do it? That's what the jury is desides 419 00:22:15,920 --> 00:22:18,520 Speaker 1: that's the justice there. So that's kind of like, do 420 00:22:18,600 --> 00:22:20,960 Speaker 1: you believe that someone beyond the reasonable doubt that someone 421 00:22:21,000 --> 00:22:24,040 Speaker 1: did it? So that's one justice and that just comes 422 00:22:24,040 --> 00:22:27,040 Speaker 1: down to listening to the evidence and being fair. Then 423 00:22:27,160 --> 00:22:32,000 Speaker 1: there's the justice that the judge tholes during sentencing during 424 00:22:32,040 --> 00:22:35,560 Speaker 1: sentencing of what you should get, what what you should 425 00:22:35,560 --> 00:22:39,520 Speaker 1: pay for your crime. That should be a totality of 426 00:22:39,520 --> 00:22:41,879 Speaker 1: who you are and what brought you here and the 427 00:22:41,920 --> 00:22:44,920 Speaker 1: crime and the victims taking the consideration all of that. 428 00:22:45,160 --> 00:22:48,840 Speaker 1: So that justice is really kind of a sliding scale 429 00:22:48,920 --> 00:22:52,719 Speaker 1: of justice to me. And then, of course the civil justice, 430 00:22:52,720 --> 00:22:55,000 Speaker 1: which is a whole another show that we talked about 431 00:22:55,040 --> 00:22:57,600 Speaker 1: a lot because people are still so confused on that 432 00:22:57,680 --> 00:22:59,720 Speaker 1: and no matter how many ways I explained to people 433 00:22:59,800 --> 00:23:01,760 Speaker 1: still gonna stay confused. I think the way to explain 434 00:23:01,840 --> 00:23:05,600 Speaker 1: the civil justice, that's just restitution for your for your act. 435 00:23:06,359 --> 00:23:08,400 Speaker 1: Now that you gotta pay for your act. And then 436 00:23:08,440 --> 00:23:10,639 Speaker 1: the argument is, yeah, but who's really paying for it? 437 00:23:10,880 --> 00:23:13,280 Speaker 1: You know, the officers not paying for the taxpayers pay 438 00:23:13,320 --> 00:23:15,800 Speaker 1: for it. The averages about three hundred dollars per taxpayer, 439 00:23:16,080 --> 00:23:18,840 Speaker 1: which is why we're fighting to end qualified immunity in 440 00:23:18,880 --> 00:23:22,080 Speaker 1: the justice in the Justice Um for George Floyd Policing Act. 441 00:23:22,080 --> 00:23:23,600 Speaker 1: And people say, yeah, they don't put Well, this is 442 00:23:23,600 --> 00:23:25,240 Speaker 1: what we're dealing with now, this is why we're trying 443 00:23:25,280 --> 00:23:27,440 Speaker 1: to fight all of this stuff to change. We can 444 00:23:27,560 --> 00:23:29,560 Speaker 1: just stall and say, hey, we're not gonna foil any 445 00:23:29,560 --> 00:23:31,760 Speaker 1: more lawsuits until they figure it out. Otherwise it may 446 00:23:31,760 --> 00:23:33,960 Speaker 1: not ever be fould And let me tell you not 447 00:23:34,160 --> 00:23:36,680 Speaker 1: all the time. So when we see somebody in civil court, 448 00:23:36,840 --> 00:23:40,280 Speaker 1: we see the officer and the city are the policing agency. 449 00:23:40,520 --> 00:23:43,240 Speaker 1: So the officer does pay for it too. Now he 450 00:23:43,320 --> 00:23:46,920 Speaker 1: might have insurance. Um, many officers go bankrupt if they 451 00:23:46,960 --> 00:23:50,159 Speaker 1: if you win a case against them, the jury is 452 00:23:50,880 --> 00:23:54,879 Speaker 1: making a decision against them because they're being sued individually. 453 00:23:55,320 --> 00:23:58,960 Speaker 1: And then the city is being sued as an agent agency. 454 00:23:59,000 --> 00:24:01,560 Speaker 1: I mean, and it's a paler or the police agency. 455 00:24:01,560 --> 00:24:03,520 Speaker 1: If it's a shaff. So if it's a police department, 456 00:24:03,720 --> 00:24:06,360 Speaker 1: it's gonna be the city being sued. If it's a shaff. 457 00:24:06,400 --> 00:24:09,639 Speaker 1: Most shaffs are independent agencies because the voters vote them in. 458 00:24:09,800 --> 00:24:12,480 Speaker 1: So you see the shaff's department. But in this case, 459 00:24:12,800 --> 00:24:16,120 Speaker 1: the officer also is being sued So what we see 460 00:24:16,160 --> 00:24:19,560 Speaker 1: when people talk about they you know, yeah, the city 461 00:24:19,640 --> 00:24:22,639 Speaker 1: is the deeper pockets for a civil attorney, meaning that 462 00:24:22,720 --> 00:24:26,040 Speaker 1: they have more money. But the goal is the bankrupt 463 00:24:26,040 --> 00:24:29,679 Speaker 1: the officer too. But when you hear the argument that, no, 464 00:24:29,880 --> 00:24:33,800 Speaker 1: the officers don't pay, the city pays, would you say 465 00:24:33,840 --> 00:24:36,199 Speaker 1: that it's fair to say they're talking about the you know, 466 00:24:36,240 --> 00:24:39,960 Speaker 1: the bulk of it falls on the citizens, the bulk 467 00:24:40,000 --> 00:24:42,480 Speaker 1: of it of how it has been done. Now, we 468 00:24:42,560 --> 00:24:46,520 Speaker 1: have seen cases where that's because the city usually retains 469 00:24:46,560 --> 00:24:49,960 Speaker 1: the officer, right, so they keep them on. But now 470 00:24:50,000 --> 00:24:54,080 Speaker 1: we're seeing officers being fired, and we're seeing officers who 471 00:24:54,160 --> 00:24:58,200 Speaker 1: now they're not being indemnified by their employers because that's 472 00:24:58,200 --> 00:25:01,119 Speaker 1: how the city usually pays. When you sue officer, is 473 00:25:01,160 --> 00:25:04,560 Speaker 1: that they're indemnifying them as just like if you work 474 00:25:04,640 --> 00:25:08,800 Speaker 1: for McDonald's, you are are any delivery service. Um you 475 00:25:08,920 --> 00:25:12,160 Speaker 1: delivered for Pizza Hut and you hit somebody's car, then 476 00:25:12,200 --> 00:25:15,719 Speaker 1: the person can sue Pizza Hut because but you're they 477 00:25:15,760 --> 00:25:19,000 Speaker 1: were your employer, even though they also sue you. But 478 00:25:19,119 --> 00:25:21,919 Speaker 1: Pizza Hut is gonna pay for it. But in this case, 479 00:25:22,160 --> 00:25:26,080 Speaker 1: what we're seeing is many many cities are saying, listen, officers, 480 00:25:26,400 --> 00:25:30,399 Speaker 1: if you're doing something that is against our policy, and 481 00:25:30,440 --> 00:25:33,320 Speaker 1: you're doing something that is outside of the law and 482 00:25:33,359 --> 00:25:36,720 Speaker 1: outside of our we add paying for it. Right. But see, 483 00:25:37,440 --> 00:25:39,800 Speaker 1: and this is probably a whole another show, because I'm 484 00:25:39,840 --> 00:25:41,760 Speaker 1: glad you brought it up, because when people are hearing 485 00:25:41,840 --> 00:25:45,240 Speaker 1: in qualified immunity, they're assuming that the officer is not 486 00:25:45,400 --> 00:25:47,679 Speaker 1: being sued. And I think what I'm hearing you say is, 487 00:25:48,240 --> 00:25:51,119 Speaker 1: depending on who that civil rights attorney is, sometimes they 488 00:25:51,160 --> 00:25:53,159 Speaker 1: go after the officers. Sometimes they do not that's what 489 00:25:53,200 --> 00:25:55,640 Speaker 1: you're saying. Typically they go after the city because that's 490 00:25:55,640 --> 00:25:59,040 Speaker 1: where the bigger bucks are. Well, every case that I've 491 00:25:59,080 --> 00:26:02,199 Speaker 1: ever done of the officers and the city, or the 492 00:26:02,240 --> 00:26:05,080 Speaker 1: police or the sheriff's department, every case that being Crump 493 00:26:05,080 --> 00:26:07,600 Speaker 1: has ever done, he's sued the officer and the police 494 00:26:07,600 --> 00:26:10,800 Speaker 1: department or the sheriff's office. Okay, so if you can 495 00:26:10,840 --> 00:26:14,400 Speaker 1: sue the officer, what is ending qualified immunity about qualified 496 00:26:14,400 --> 00:26:17,480 Speaker 1: immunity only applies to the officer, It doesn't apply to 497 00:26:17,520 --> 00:26:21,560 Speaker 1: the to the municipality. So qualified immunity says even if 498 00:26:21,560 --> 00:26:25,359 Speaker 1: the officer did something wrong, that if they were not 499 00:26:25,440 --> 00:26:27,760 Speaker 1: put on notice, that what they were doing was wrong 500 00:26:28,200 --> 00:26:32,040 Speaker 1: by a by a higher court like the Supreme Court, 501 00:26:32,200 --> 00:26:35,840 Speaker 1: the Eleventh Circuit in Florida, the Appellate court. If they're 502 00:26:35,840 --> 00:26:39,240 Speaker 1: not put on notice by a case being decided saying 503 00:26:39,280 --> 00:26:41,920 Speaker 1: that they did something wrong, then they are immune from 504 00:26:41,960 --> 00:26:45,040 Speaker 1: their bad acts. So they're immune from being sued for 505 00:26:45,119 --> 00:26:49,199 Speaker 1: their bad acts. Okay, even I'm getting confused, because if 506 00:26:49,200 --> 00:26:52,560 Speaker 1: they're immune from their bad acts, you can't sue them. 507 00:26:52,960 --> 00:26:54,840 Speaker 1: But that's what I'm saying. That's what they do. You 508 00:26:54,960 --> 00:26:59,600 Speaker 1: sue them. Then during the summary judgment part of a lawsuit, 509 00:26:59,760 --> 00:27:02,320 Speaker 1: they foul for their case to be dismissed based on 510 00:27:02,440 --> 00:27:05,960 Speaker 1: qualified me Okay, that's the part then that like they have. Basically, 511 00:27:06,000 --> 00:27:08,280 Speaker 1: what you're saying is I can I can make the 512 00:27:08,320 --> 00:27:11,399 Speaker 1: act to suit you. It doesn't mean that is actually 513 00:27:11,440 --> 00:27:14,560 Speaker 1: gonna happen, because qualified immunity is they can apply to 514 00:27:14,600 --> 00:27:18,040 Speaker 1: be removed. Correct exactly. So in my mind, just so 515 00:27:18,160 --> 00:27:21,960 Speaker 1: you know lay person's mind, that technically means you're not 516 00:27:22,000 --> 00:27:24,120 Speaker 1: suing them. I know what you're saying. I can go 517 00:27:24,200 --> 00:27:26,680 Speaker 1: down and I can file the paperwork. But in the 518 00:27:26,760 --> 00:27:29,960 Speaker 1: lay person's mind, if you foil the paperwork and they 519 00:27:29,960 --> 00:27:33,280 Speaker 1: say no, they're immune. In our mind, the lay person's mind, 520 00:27:33,359 --> 00:27:36,439 Speaker 1: where you've gone through litigation, you're going so litigation is 521 00:27:36,480 --> 00:27:39,280 Speaker 1: not just a trial, it's a whole procedure. So you 522 00:27:39,640 --> 00:27:43,760 Speaker 1: filed the lawsuit, we've gone through discovery, we were getting 523 00:27:43,760 --> 00:27:48,000 Speaker 1: ready for trial. They foul emotion, call emotion for qualified immunity. Right, 524 00:27:48,520 --> 00:27:52,080 Speaker 1: what I'm saying is in the lay person's mind because 525 00:27:52,119 --> 00:27:55,840 Speaker 1: they can file that for qualified immunity and the result 526 00:27:56,040 --> 00:27:59,920 Speaker 1: is not suing the officer in our in our minds, 527 00:28:00,680 --> 00:28:02,520 Speaker 1: that means you can't sue the officer. I hear what 528 00:28:02,560 --> 00:28:06,840 Speaker 1: you're saying, the officer being dismissed from the correct and 529 00:28:06,960 --> 00:28:09,119 Speaker 1: what I'm saying the lay person's mind, because you're like, no, 530 00:28:09,240 --> 00:28:11,440 Speaker 1: we sue. We went down, we found the paperwork, we 531 00:28:11,440 --> 00:28:13,199 Speaker 1: went through the procedure, we did all of that. But 532 00:28:13,280 --> 00:28:16,879 Speaker 1: because they had that loophole and the result doesn't happen, 533 00:28:17,000 --> 00:28:20,200 Speaker 1: that's where the lay person's mind is. Right. But I 534 00:28:20,200 --> 00:28:23,359 Speaker 1: want to make sure you understand that. So not we 535 00:28:23,600 --> 00:28:26,919 Speaker 1: always the last three trials that we had, the officer 536 00:28:27,040 --> 00:28:31,159 Speaker 1: lost their qualified immunity. So not all the time did 537 00:28:31,200 --> 00:28:34,280 Speaker 1: they win. Okay, so they don't get there's not an 538 00:28:34,320 --> 00:28:36,840 Speaker 1: automatic thing that they get thrown out of court and 539 00:28:36,920 --> 00:28:39,760 Speaker 1: we have to fight that. There's litigation on that whether 540 00:28:39,880 --> 00:28:43,320 Speaker 1: or not they qualify for qualified immunity. Got it, Okay, 541 00:28:43,360 --> 00:28:45,600 Speaker 1: got it, And that's a whole Another conversation is that 542 00:28:45,640 --> 00:28:48,680 Speaker 1: depends on the act, That depends on blah blah blah. 543 00:28:48,920 --> 00:28:52,480 Speaker 1: But overall the issue is pushing too in qualified immunity 544 00:28:52,560 --> 00:28:56,320 Speaker 1: so that they do not have that loophole. And right 545 00:28:56,440 --> 00:28:58,720 Speaker 1: from a late person standpoint, I hear what you're saying, 546 00:28:58,760 --> 00:29:01,160 Speaker 1: all the technicalities, but I want to make sure my 547 00:29:01,280 --> 00:29:04,600 Speaker 1: folks that are listening people understand our understanding because if not, 548 00:29:04,960 --> 00:29:06,720 Speaker 1: it's like, wait anout. I thought you couldn't sue, Well 549 00:29:06,760 --> 00:29:08,520 Speaker 1: you can sue, but then they can get qualified. Of me, 550 00:29:08,800 --> 00:29:11,760 Speaker 1: that's too many details, but I just tell you just 551 00:29:11,920 --> 00:29:15,000 Speaker 1: for your also, but your NOTLEDG is that qualified to me? 552 00:29:15,160 --> 00:29:17,520 Speaker 1: The reason that it is bad is because it's saying, 553 00:29:17,560 --> 00:29:22,000 Speaker 1: even if you did something illegal, you can get immunity 554 00:29:22,040 --> 00:29:25,680 Speaker 1: from lawsuits police officers. That's what it's saying. It's saying, 555 00:29:25,680 --> 00:29:28,800 Speaker 1: even if you did something illegal totally out of pocket, 556 00:29:29,160 --> 00:29:33,320 Speaker 1: you can still be immune from being sued civilly. That's 557 00:29:33,320 --> 00:29:37,320 Speaker 1: why it's bad, Right, you can't be immune from that 558 00:29:37,520 --> 00:29:39,760 Speaker 1: you were a person, so it's given them that extra 559 00:29:39,840 --> 00:29:42,400 Speaker 1: layer you as a lay as a citizen, you can't 560 00:29:42,400 --> 00:29:44,960 Speaker 1: be immune. If you did something bad, people can sue you. 561 00:29:45,360 --> 00:29:49,440 Speaker 1: M hmm, got it, okay, Which ultimately, since they can 562 00:29:49,440 --> 00:29:52,560 Speaker 1: get immune, is either still goes to the taxpayer because 563 00:29:52,560 --> 00:29:56,000 Speaker 1: of qualified immunity, or if the officer is sued and 564 00:29:56,000 --> 00:29:58,840 Speaker 1: their motion is DENI a qualified immunity, the bulk of 565 00:29:58,920 --> 00:30:04,240 Speaker 1: it goes to the taxpayers because they have the bigger check. No, 566 00:30:04,400 --> 00:30:08,240 Speaker 1: so no, let me go figure. I know, we also 567 00:30:08,320 --> 00:30:12,080 Speaker 1: sued the city, so you're suing the officer for the 568 00:30:12,120 --> 00:30:15,200 Speaker 1: bad act. So in Chauvin's case, you would sue Chauvin 569 00:30:15,560 --> 00:30:18,840 Speaker 1: for the wrongful death of George Floyd. You would sue 570 00:30:18,880 --> 00:30:23,200 Speaker 1: the city for their policies that enables Chauvin two. So 571 00:30:23,440 --> 00:30:26,440 Speaker 1: those are two different people. So even if Chauvin got 572 00:30:26,440 --> 00:30:30,040 Speaker 1: disqualified and qualified immunity, you still could go forward with 573 00:30:30,080 --> 00:30:32,240 Speaker 1: your lawsuit against the city. Well, yeah, that's what I meant. 574 00:30:32,280 --> 00:30:35,080 Speaker 1: I'm also saying the city, the taxpayers end up paying 575 00:30:35,120 --> 00:30:38,800 Speaker 1: for it ultimately, even if the if the if the officer, 576 00:30:38,800 --> 00:30:41,120 Speaker 1: and that's what I'm saying, that's not quite right, because 577 00:30:41,120 --> 00:30:44,040 Speaker 1: many times the officer is represented by the police union, 578 00:30:44,720 --> 00:30:48,440 Speaker 1: not by the city. The city has their own lawyers, 579 00:30:48,480 --> 00:30:51,080 Speaker 1: which that's what the taxpayers are paying for. The city lawyer. 580 00:30:51,600 --> 00:30:55,560 Speaker 1: The officer usually pays into they have like an insurance 581 00:30:55,560 --> 00:30:58,320 Speaker 1: with the police union, sure that the union pays for. 582 00:30:58,400 --> 00:31:00,600 Speaker 1: But separate that from a side. What when I'm trying 583 00:31:00,600 --> 00:31:02,440 Speaker 1: to tell you is the argument that people say that's 584 00:31:02,480 --> 00:31:05,040 Speaker 1: going on the taxpayers. I'm strictly talking about the city part. 585 00:31:05,480 --> 00:31:08,000 Speaker 1: I'm not talking about the union. That's that's also putting 586 00:31:08,000 --> 00:31:11,960 Speaker 1: money in the pot. I'm talking about, correct, So I'm 587 00:31:12,000 --> 00:31:14,240 Speaker 1: not talking about that because that's when they say, you know, 588 00:31:14,320 --> 00:31:17,000 Speaker 1: the unions, but that's that's their ship. Excuse my friend, 589 00:31:17,040 --> 00:31:20,280 Speaker 1: you know that's them. Hey, y'all mess up, right, But 590 00:31:20,400 --> 00:31:22,920 Speaker 1: that's what I'm saying. That's they're being accountable in some 591 00:31:23,000 --> 00:31:25,800 Speaker 1: type of way with the union or them alone. What 592 00:31:25,960 --> 00:31:28,760 Speaker 1: I'm talking about is the argument where people say, we're 593 00:31:28,760 --> 00:31:33,840 Speaker 1: tired of taxpayers the city having to pay for these officers, 594 00:31:34,520 --> 00:31:37,080 Speaker 1: so they should not have they should in qualified immunity 595 00:31:37,120 --> 00:31:40,160 Speaker 1: to remove that loop and all the responsibility. Telling you 596 00:31:40,200 --> 00:31:43,280 Speaker 1: what the argument is on the grassroot, all the responsibility 597 00:31:43,320 --> 00:31:45,360 Speaker 1: should be on the officer and the union of the 598 00:31:45,440 --> 00:31:47,040 Speaker 1: union of the officer. However, y'all want to do it, 599 00:31:47,240 --> 00:31:49,600 Speaker 1: but not on the taxpayer. That's the part problem that 600 00:31:49,680 --> 00:31:53,080 Speaker 1: I'm trying. That's the reason that activists want that is 601 00:31:53,120 --> 00:31:58,040 Speaker 1: because now if that you remove that immunity. Now, if 602 00:31:58,040 --> 00:32:00,360 Speaker 1: a jury gives a verdict of a million always to 603 00:32:00,400 --> 00:32:03,760 Speaker 1: the city for their policies and procedures against the city 604 00:32:03,800 --> 00:32:06,240 Speaker 1: for their policies and procedures at a million dollars to 605 00:32:06,280 --> 00:32:09,920 Speaker 1: Shavin for killing George Floyd, Savin ain't got a billion dollars, 606 00:32:10,120 --> 00:32:12,840 Speaker 1: So you're about to bankrupt his ass now unless he 607 00:32:12,960 --> 00:32:17,360 Speaker 1: has the insurance from the police union that will pay 608 00:32:17,480 --> 00:32:20,520 Speaker 1: that verdict. Well, that's a whole another show. You probably 609 00:32:20,520 --> 00:32:22,840 Speaker 1: can come back and if that's may even be served 610 00:32:22,840 --> 00:32:25,440 Speaker 1: to be good to go deeper in once week because 611 00:32:25,520 --> 00:32:28,000 Speaker 1: right now everybody's pushing the George fla adjustin Policing Act. 612 00:32:28,040 --> 00:32:29,640 Speaker 1: One of the main things going to keep it from 613 00:32:29,640 --> 00:32:33,360 Speaker 1: passing the Senate is qualified immunity. So we certainly could use, 614 00:32:33,480 --> 00:32:35,960 Speaker 1: you know, another opportunity when that goes to the floor 615 00:32:36,320 --> 00:32:38,280 Speaker 1: to have you back, Natalie, just to go into a 616 00:32:38,280 --> 00:32:40,640 Speaker 1: little bit deeper. So that people, you know understand. I 617 00:32:40,760 --> 00:32:43,440 Speaker 1: certainly appreciate you breaking that down before we get out 618 00:32:43,440 --> 00:32:45,719 Speaker 1: of here. What is the next step? You know, what 619 00:32:45,760 --> 00:32:47,840 Speaker 1: do we do how do we make sure you know 620 00:32:47,920 --> 00:32:50,520 Speaker 1: that police officers? I know that's a broad question, and 621 00:32:50,560 --> 00:32:52,719 Speaker 1: you know it's not a one simple answer. But what 622 00:32:52,760 --> 00:32:55,360 Speaker 1: would you say to tell folks what can they do, 623 00:32:55,840 --> 00:32:58,160 Speaker 1: uh to to keep us on this path? I think 624 00:32:58,200 --> 00:33:00,520 Speaker 1: the next step would really be to put pressure on 625 00:33:00,520 --> 00:33:04,480 Speaker 1: our politicians to pass the George for Policing, Justice and 626 00:33:04,480 --> 00:33:09,280 Speaker 1: Policing Act, because that has many of the reforms that 627 00:33:09,760 --> 00:33:13,560 Speaker 1: many different organizations have been pushing for. So I think 628 00:33:13,600 --> 00:33:15,920 Speaker 1: that's the next step if we want to if we 629 00:33:15,960 --> 00:33:20,360 Speaker 1: want to do something holistically on this on the federal level, 630 00:33:20,400 --> 00:33:23,200 Speaker 1: because when we have states you know who may have 631 00:33:23,280 --> 00:33:26,120 Speaker 1: passed similar, you know laws that are in the George 632 00:33:26,120 --> 00:33:28,400 Speaker 1: for that, because we know that a hundred cities have 633 00:33:28,600 --> 00:33:32,080 Speaker 1: either changed policy or law, the federal level is what 634 00:33:32,320 --> 00:33:35,600 Speaker 1: supersedes it all and it thinks it all, and that's 635 00:33:35,600 --> 00:33:39,040 Speaker 1: what's really really key and important, especially talking about that 636 00:33:39,160 --> 00:33:41,800 Speaker 1: database that can give us data, you know, on these 637 00:33:41,840 --> 00:33:44,280 Speaker 1: police officers as well. So I said, I would love 638 00:33:44,320 --> 00:33:45,960 Speaker 1: to have you come back and break down that law 639 00:33:45,960 --> 00:33:48,040 Speaker 1: at least the high points, you know, and what what 640 00:33:48,120 --> 00:33:50,680 Speaker 1: we know they're going to be fighting, especially qualified and 641 00:33:50,760 --> 00:33:52,680 Speaker 1: meaning because that's what's holding it up. And it's a 642 00:33:52,720 --> 00:33:55,280 Speaker 1: reason why, and that's because the unions have the money. 643 00:33:55,560 --> 00:33:57,960 Speaker 1: And who ell it's has the money, is who runs 644 00:33:57,960 --> 00:34:01,080 Speaker 1: the show of politics. That's right, have the power. Thank 645 00:34:01,120 --> 00:34:04,960 Speaker 1: you so much, Attorney Natalie Jackson for joining me again, Yes, ma'am, 646 00:34:05,080 --> 00:34:07,040 Speaker 1: Thank you again. Hey guys, make sure you check out 647 00:34:07,120 --> 00:34:09,440 Speaker 1: Heart one Part two, just to kind of catch you up, 648 00:34:09,520 --> 00:34:12,320 Speaker 1: you know, on what it is that Attorney Natalie Jackson 649 00:34:12,360 --> 00:34:14,840 Speaker 1: I are talking about. Certainly, send me your questions, let 650 00:34:14,920 --> 00:34:16,440 Speaker 1: me know if there's anything else we can answer as 651 00:34:16,480 --> 00:34:18,719 Speaker 1: we move forward. This is just one of many to 652 00:34:18,760 --> 00:34:22,360 Speaker 1: move forward with. Certainly I will be covering obviously the 653 00:34:22,400 --> 00:34:26,080 Speaker 1: other officers to see, you know, what happens with that. 654 00:34:26,360 --> 00:34:28,520 Speaker 1: We'll bring Attorney Natalie Jackson back on to kind of 655 00:34:28,520 --> 00:34:32,120 Speaker 1: break that down and continue to provide her excellent, brilliant 656 00:34:32,200 --> 00:34:35,000 Speaker 1: legal commentary. Thank you so much for listening. Guys. Again, 657 00:34:35,080 --> 00:34:38,000 Speaker 1: you can find Attorney Natalie Jackson. What's your website, Natalie, 658 00:34:38,160 --> 00:34:41,120 Speaker 1: It's It's Natalie Jackson Law dot com, My Twitter is 659 00:34:41,239 --> 00:34:45,160 Speaker 1: nat jack tweets, and my Facebook is Natalie Jackson Underscore 660 00:34:45,239 --> 00:34:48,000 Speaker 1: seventy five perfect. All right, y'all check in on my 661 00:34:48,040 --> 00:34:50,360 Speaker 1: sister to follow her. She tweets all the time, opinions, 662 00:34:50,400 --> 00:34:54,239 Speaker 1: she takes, questions, she answers. She's very much engaged. She 663 00:34:54,440 --> 00:34:56,600 Speaker 1: is not somebody just kind of sits back and doesn't 664 00:34:56,600 --> 00:34:58,319 Speaker 1: get engaged or what I followed, So make sure you 665 00:34:58,360 --> 00:35:00,640 Speaker 1: follow her. Thank you so much, guys for sitting until 666 00:35:00,680 --> 00:35:03,000 Speaker 1: next time. If you like what you heard on Straight 667 00:35:03,040 --> 00:35:06,160 Speaker 1: Shot No Chaser, please subscribe and dropify, star review and 668 00:35:06,160 --> 00:35:08,600 Speaker 1: tell a France. Straight Shot No Chaser is a production 669 00:35:08,680 --> 00:35:11,520 Speaker 1: of the Black Effect podcast networking I Heart Radio at 670 00:35:11,840 --> 00:35:14,720 Speaker 1: Figure and I'd like to thank our producer editor mixer, 671 00:35:15,040 --> 00:35:17,759 Speaker 1: the one and only Marcy d pinut A, mixed master 672 00:35:18,080 --> 00:35:21,600 Speaker 1: Dwayne Crawford, and our executive producer Charlavagin Nagod. For more 673 00:35:21,640 --> 00:35:25,200 Speaker 1: podcast from I Heart Radio, visit the I Heart Radio app, 674 00:35:25,280 --> 00:35:28,000 Speaker 1: Apple podcast, or wherever you get your podcasts.