Skip to main content

tv   Inside Politics  CNN  April 2, 2021 9:00am-10:01am PDT

9:00 am
only tylenol rapid release gels have laser-drilled holes. they release medicine fast for fast pain relief. tylenol rapid release gels. hello to our viewers in the united states and around the world and welcome to "inside politics," i'm john king in washington, it's a consequential busy friday news day. we're in a break, fifth day of witness testimony in the derek chauvin trial in minneapolis. again we're going to break for ten more minutes after very significant law enforcement testimony in that trial this morning. remember, it is a former police
9:01 am
officer on trial for the death of george floyd. two police officers taking the stand this morning, including the minneapolis police department's senior most officer, its chief homicide detective richard zimmerman testifying about department policy, repeatedly saying that what happened on the scene in his view was inconsistent with the training police officers routinely receive about how to treat suspects in their custody. >> if somebody who is handcuffed becomes less combative, does that change the amount of force that an officer is to use under policy? >> yes. >> if they are not a threat to you at that point you try to -- you know, to help them so that they're not as upset. >> zimmerman also testifying that officers are trained not to kneel on someone's neck unless
9:02 am
it is absolutely necessary because he testified the officers are trained they are told kneeling on someone's neck can kill them. more on that dramatic testimony ahead and again we'll take you back to the trial when it resumes momentarily. big news today, blockbuster economic news, the economy adding a million new jobs last month, president biden says it is proof help is here but he says more is necessary. also brand new cdc guidelines today, quite important as you think about maybe spring break or summer vacation. the cdc says individuals who have been fully vaccinated against covid-19, the government now says for the first time it is safe for those americans to travel, both domestically and internationally as long as even though they're vaccinated they continue to follow health and safety protocols. start coverage with cnn's pete munteen. this is a big deal, a lot of americans, especially as more americans get vaccinated, looking for government guidance, what is safe and what is not safe for me to do?
9:03 am
>> reporter: well the cdc is telling people who are fully vaccinated they can travel with low risk to themselves but there is a big asterisk here, john, they're telling those travelers they can travel, but they should still avoid travel if they can. it is a huge shift, though, something that was notably absent from the most recent cdc guidance on what vaccinated people can do. this says that domestic travelers do not need to get tested before and after their trip, do not need to kwquaranti before and after their trip. international travelers still need to show proof of a negative coronavirus test to their airline before they come back to the u.s. still a lot of caution from the cdc, it's simply telling people if they are going to travel to be smart about it. they still need to wear federally mandated masks on board planes and in terminals. still need to socially distance. this is not meaning the pandemic is over, but this is a huge development and a huge win for major airlines. travel numbers are already up and they were even before this new guidance came out, 22
9:04 am
straight days of more than a million people passing through security at america's airports, 1.56 million people just yesterday alone that almost tied the tsa record of the pandemic, set only back on sunday when 1.57 million people flew. commercial airlines cannot wait for people to come back. they have been clobbered by the pandemic. eastern airlines says bookings are now at 90% of pre-pandemic levels and united airlines just announced it is able to hire pilots for the first time in more than a year. so it could be a big confluence here, john, for a real recovery for the struggling industry, especially with new cdc guidance. >> pete muntean, grateful for the insights. take you live back to minneapolis. testimony resuming. >> of that incident. >> yes. >> and do you recall what that video -- where you saw it? >> yes. >> and was it the -- we've been calling it the darnella frazier
9:05 am
video. >> yes. >> did you watch that in its entirety? >> yes. >> and since then have you had opportunity to watch other video of the incident? >> yes. >> and specifically have you watched body worn camera video of the incident from the involved officers? >> yes. >> and based on that, and your years of training and experience with the minneapolis police department, you saw officer -- then officer chauvin with his knee on mr. floyd's neck. correct? >> yes. >> would you call what you saw there a use of force? >> yes. >> and did that use of force continue until the ambulance arrived? >> yes, it did. >> was there any change in the level of force being used until the ambulance arrived? >> no. >> and what do you think about that use of force during that time period?
9:06 am
>> i'm sorry? >> what do you think about that use of force during that time period? >> objection, vague. >> a little vague. could you limit it to the time frame? >> right, okay. so based on your review of the body worn camera videos of the incident. >> yes. >> and directing your attention to that moment when mr. floyd is placed on the ground. >> yes. >> what is your -- you know, your view of that use of force during that time period? >> totally unnecessary. >> what do you mean? >> well, first of all, pulling him down to the ground face down, and putting your knee on a neck for that amount of time is just uncalled for. i saw no reason why the officers
9:07 am
felt they were in danger if that's what they felt, and that's what they would have to have felt to be able to use that kind of force. >> so in your opinion should that restraint have stopped once he was handcuffed and prone on the ground? >> absolutely. >> and i should add to that question then, also that it appeared he had stopped resisting. >> i'm sorry? >> and it appeared that he had stopped putting up any resistance. >> absolutely i would stop. >> i have nothing further, your honor. >> mr. nelson. >> if i may just have a moment, your honor .
9:08 am
>> good morning, lieutenant zimmerman. >> good morning. >> you have been been a police officer since june 1985. >> 1985, yes. >> and prior to that you were with another agency? >> yes. >> and when you initially came on to the minneapolis police department you were a patrol officer, correct? >> yes, sir. >> and you were a patrol officer from 1985 to approximately 1993 when you took the sergeant's exam and were promoted. >> yes. >> so it's fair to say that since 1993, so 27, 28 years you've not been on patrol in the city of minneapolis. >> correct.
9:09 am
>> your assignments have been investigative in nature. correct? >> yes. >> and generally speaking an investigative role is more of a follow up type role, right? >> yes. >> so an incident occurs on the street. it gets assigned to a detective. and then your job is to investigate the circumstances of that incident. right? >> yes. >> and so it's fair to say that since 1993 you've not -- other than perhaps for ceremonial reasons you've not worn a uniform on a daily basis? >> well, i don't know if i would call it ceremonial. i have to wear a uniform. >> you have to wear a uniform from time to time, but your daily role is as a plains clothed officer. >> yes. >> you're not patrolling the streets, making arrests, things of that nature? >> no. >> and it's fair to say then
9:10 am
that your experience with the use of force of late has been primarily through training? >> through what? >> your training. >> yes. >> all right. meaning you're not out actively -- other than perhaps arresting a homicide suspect you're not out actively patrolling and arresting people for less serious offenses? >> no. >> and so you describe the use of force continuum as including mere presence being a type of the use of force. >> yes. >> so when you arrive on scene as a lieutenant in the homicide units that is a use of force, right? >> people know i'm a lieutenant, yes. >> or they know you're a police officer perhaps? >> right. >> and then you described like
9:11 am
soft techniques like escort holds, things of that nature. right? >> yes. >> and i'm assuming that in the last -- well, since 1993 and you were promoted to sergeant you've handcuffed some people in that time frame. >> i have. >> right. when's the last time you got in a physical fight with a person? >> about -- in 2018. >> okay. so it's been a couple of years since you've been in a physical fight with a person? >> yes. >> all right. and so you would agree that the use of force as an investigator is -- or the higher levels of force as an investigator is less likely than a patrol officer? >> i'm sorry, i don't understand your question. >> i'll rephrase it. the frequency with which you have to use higher levels of force as an investigator doesn't
9:12 am
happen all that often, right? >> correct. >> and so your experience generally as a use of force -- or involving the use of force is primarily in this annual what's called defensive tactics training, right? >> yes. >> and the defensive tactics training is one of the requirements you need to use or to complete in order to maintain your license as a police officer, right? >> yes. >> and you would agree that -- or i'm presuming that since 1985, until the present day, tactics have changed as a police officer? >> some tactics have changed, yes. >> right. and it's fair to say that you are not a trainer in the minneapolis police academy relevant to the use of force. correct? >> that's correct, yes. >> you do not teach other police officers defensive tactics? >> no, i don't.
9:13 am
>> your -- you would agree, however, that roughly ten years ago the minneapolis police department kind of moved away from trying to hit people to control them, and started using body weight to try to control people. >> i don't think i would agree with that. >> okay. so you think that -- i mean, within the arsenal, so to speak, of a police officer, it's as common to punch or strike someone in the use of force as it is to just use what are called takedown moves or body weight pins. >> yes. >> and that's been throughout your entirety of your career? >> yes. >> okay. and so -- and you're basing on, again, your experience going through the defensive tactics requirements. >> right. >> all right.
9:14 am
and again, as a lieutenant and the number one senior officer in the minneapolis police department i'm presuming that your understanding of the use of force involves the minneapolis police department policies on the use of force. right? >> yes. >> and the minneapolis police department policies are designed, at least based on your understanding, to address the legal requirements for the use of force? >> yes. >> and so there are factors, correct, to determine whether or not a use of force is proportional, reasonable, things of that nature, right? >> correct. >> and what we look at in any particular case is the totality of the circumstances. agreed? >> yes. >> so there's lots of different information that a police officer has to use in order to determine the level of force to be used under which
9:15 am
circumstances? >> yes. >> agreed? >> yes. now, in terms of the minneapolis police department are you familiar with the minneapolis police department critical thinking or critical decision-making model? >> yes. >> and you would agree, i'm assuming again, based on a long career, that an officer is constantly taking in new information, and that information will affect the decisions here or she makes, right? >> that's correct. >> and would you also agree that the training that you received initially as a police officer is probably a lot different than the academy now? >> yes. >> obviously the available tools that officers have are a lot
9:16 am
different than they were in '85, '90, '95. >> yes. >> body cameras didn't exist when you were first a police officer. >> that's correct. >> tasers were not a thing either, right? >> no. >> you carried a gun and some handcuffs and kind of old school cop, right? >> yes. >> now, in terms of the decision-making, the decision-making of a police officer, would you agree that there are certain pieces of information that that officer has that affect his or her decisions on the use of force? >> yes. >> and some of those -- some of that information is very immediate, kind of low-level information. agreed? >> yes. >> so, for example, what just happened with this particular suspect? right? >> yes. >> is this suspect under the influence of a controlled substance, or is he sober?
9:17 am
>> yes. >> right? what are you looking at in that moment through your own eyes, right? >> yes. >> that's the officer's experience in any situation, right? >> right. >> you look at other things that may be hazards or threats in the immediate vicinity, correct? >> yes. >> so you're going to assess, are there people watching, are there people videotaping, are those people happy or angry, et cetera, right? >> yes. >> you're going to look at what we would refer to as scene security. right? >> yes. >> you have a responsibility as a police officer for your partners who may be close to you. right? >> yes. >> you have a responsibility as a police officer for all of the people in the immediate area, right? >> yes. >> and so scene security is kind of trying to keep it as tight as possible and keep everybody in the area safe, agreed? >> that's correct, everybody.
9:18 am
>> in turn you were asked a series of questions about your -- an officer's medical responsibilities. >> i'm sorry? >> you -- i said -- you were asked a series of questions about your medical training, and an officer's medical -- what they're supposed to do. >> right, yeah, yeah. >> and even in the assessment of a medical emergency there are many factors that come into that assessment, correct? >> yes, sir. >> to your knowledge minneapolis police officers are sort of -- are trained medically at a fairly low level, they're not paramedics, doctors, et cetera. >> that's correct. >> you're a first responder. >> yes, sir. >> basically you're taught how to apply tourniquets, patches for gunshots, stop bleeding, basic cpr, and resuscitative efforts, right? >> that's correct. >> a police officer's job primarily is to keep the scene safe.
9:19 am
agreed? >> i'm sorry? >> a police officer's responsibility is to keep the scene secure and safe, agreed? >> yes. >> minneapolis police policy requires the involvement of a higher level of medical intervention if the circumstances dictate, correct? >> yes. >> and an officer is required, if someone is having a medical emergency, to take what steps are -- they're able to reasonably in the moment. right? >> yes. >> and that would include potentially calling ems? >> that's correct. >> but then -- so you've got all of these immediate factors, right, that come into play, but then you can kind of widen that lens a little bit, and you can -- there are some other factors that come into play in terms of the use of force, again based on your training and experience? >> yes. >> such as what do we know about
9:20 am
the location generally, right? >> yes. >> is this a field in the middle of the woods, or is this a higher crime area, right? >> yes. >> an officer is evaluating that as a process -- as a part of the process involving the use of force. agreed? >> yes. >> you look at other things such as tactical advantages or disadvantages. agreed? >> yes. >> so if you are -- if you are not able to get what's called concealment or cover, that becomes a question. right? >> in what -- >> in a use of force, you're examining the surrounding area, right, to see if something happens, can i conceal and cover? right? >> yes. >> you also, in addition to the scene security, you need to deal with securing the scene, which is different than scene security.
9:21 am
agreed? >> yes. >> scene security is maintaining the safety of everyone around, including yourself and your partners, right? >> yes. >> securing the scene is making sure that the scene itself is preserved and kept tight. right? >> correct, yes. >> and, in fact, a police officer's responsibility, and part of the use of force determination is to prevent or avoid the use of force against other people. agreed? >> yes, absolutely. >> so if you have to use force against one person to avoid using force against others, that's a factor that an officer should consider. agreed? >> i don't know if i would agree with that. >> okay. again, within the training department both people who are -- it's their jobs to do that, they may be better to
9:22 am
answer those questions? >> yes. >> and then even from there you can widen the lens even further, and an officer will look at his training. right? >> yes. >> what he is trained to do or not to do. right? >> yes. >> he will look and take into -- or she, he or she will take into account his or her own experience from their past career. agreed? >> yes. >> so things like fighting with someone, and what's the probability or possibility that that person is going to continue fighting with you in the future. right, even after you have them subdued? >> i don't know -- i don't think i can agree to that totally. but i understand what you're saying. >> okay, there are circumstances where after a person is rendered unconscious, and then you perform -- or you revive that
9:23 am
person, that they are more combative than they were initially. agreed? >> oh, yes, yes. >> and, again, in terms of your own past experience -- an officer's own past experiences they're taking that into consideration as well. >> sure. >> now, you testified that you were never -- you have never been trained as a minneapolis police officer to use a knee on the neck of a suspect. >> that's correct. >> you would agree, however, that in a fight for your life, generally speaking, in a fight for your life, you as an officer are allowed to use whatever force is reasonable and necessary, correct? >> yes. >> and that can even involve improvisation. agreed? >> yes. >> the minneapolis police department policy allows a police officer to use whatever means are available to him to protect himself and others. right? >> yes. >> so if there's a paint can
9:24 am
sitting on the table, and someone is attacking, you can use that paint can as a weapon? >> yes. >> and, in fact, you have been trained in the prone handcuffing techniques, correct? >> yes. >> and it's your testimony that minneapolis police department has never, ever trained anyone to put their knee across the shoulder and to the base of the neck? >> i didn't say that. >> okay. >> so you would agree then that pursuant to minneapolis police department training when a suspect is arrested and in the process of being handcuffed, or being restrained, it would be consistent with the minneapolis police department training you've received to place your knee across the shoulder to the base of the neck? >> i don't know if i've -- part of your question was
9:25 am
handcuffing, and we've certainly been trained to put the knee on the shoulder but i don't know about just restraining a person. i don't recall being trained in that. >> okay, again, possible based on the circumstances, right? >> sure. >> and when an officer is restraining a person, and has called for ems, have you heard the term that we're holding this person for ems? >> yes. >> okay. and essentially that means you want to keep them in that position until ems arrives because they're more capable to deal with whatever this situation is, agreed? >> no, i don't think i would agree with that. >> okay. how would you describe the term hold for ems? >> hold for ems is that you are holding him for ems, or her. >> and sometimes people are held for ems in a restrained position, agreed? >> yes, sometimes, yeah. >> now, you also testified that
9:26 am
once a person is handcuffed, the threat -- i think you said, is gone, it's at the lowest threat level. right? >> yes, that's correct. >> now, that obviously -- a person who's handcuffed can still pose a threat, right? >> i suppose they could, yeah. >> so an officer who is hand -- even though he has someone handcuffed that person could continue to kick the officer. >> yeah, i suppose, yeah. >> that person could continue to this rash his body around, agreed? >> sure. >> and part of the reason police officers restrain people is for that person's own safety. agreed? >> absolutely, yeah. >> now, it also presumes that the handcuffs were placed on
9:27 am
correctly. right? >> yes. >> sometimes in the -- in a struggle or an attempt to handcuff someone, handcuffs aren't placed on properly, and they can pop open or be too big for a suspect. right? >> yeah, i don't know if i've ever seen them too big, you know, for a suspect, sometimes they're too tight. >> okay. >> but if sometimes in the process of handcuffing someone one handcuff goes on, thereby giving the suspect a potential weapon if he were to break free, right, or she for that matter. >> yes. >> and officers have been attacked with their own handcuffs in your experience. right? >> oh, yeah, yes. >> so you would agree that the use of force is a dynamic series of decision-making based on a
9:28 am
lot of different information. >> absolutely. >> and it's based upon a lot of information that is not necessarily captured on a body camera. agreed? >> yes, that's correct. >> the body camera is only so effective to show what the body camera sees, and not what the officer sees. >> that' s correct. >> now, in terms of what you did in this particular case essentially you would be what's called -- are you what's called car 21? is that the homicide unit? and i may -- >> no, it's not. >> car 9, i don't know. you're just homicide. there's some car associated with homicide, right? >> yeah. >> what car is that? >> we would be car -- well, it
9:29 am
would be like car 112 or 108 or 110. >> okay. >> that kind of thing. >> all right. so you got called -- or you were made aware of this incident back on may 25th of 2020. you understood it to be a critical incident. correct? >> yes, sir. >> and it is minneapolis police department policy to turn over the investigation of any critical incident, or the majority of critical incidents, we should say, to the bureau of criminal apprehension, right? >> yes, sir. >> and that is to avoid any potential conflicts between the involved officers. right? >> yes, that's right. >> and so your role, you heard this call came out, and you kind of self-assigned to show up here. >> yes. >> and you did that because you wanted to make sure the scene was secure, right? >> yes. >> to make sure the officers who
9:30 am
had responded to the scene were doing the things they should be doing in connection with a critical incident. >> that's correct. >> such as roping off or tying off the tape, or taping off the scene, i should say, right? >> putting up crime scene tape, yes. >> not permitting citizens to come wandering through the scene, right? >> yeah. >> canvassing the area, i think you said. and ultimately your role in this particular case was limited to a couple of hours of time making sure those things were done, and until bca agents arrive and you handed off the scene, right? >> yes, that's correct. >> and it was not until later that you were asked to review the body worn cameras of the officers and consider the use of force. right? >> yes. >> and it would not be within your normal role, or job duties
9:31 am
to do such a use of force analysis, right? >> that's correct. >> i have no further questions. >> redirect? >> lieutenant zimmerman, you had the opportunity to review the body worn cameras. >> yes. >> from officers involved. >> yes. >> did that also capture the bystanders on the sidewalk during the incident? >> yes. >> was there something about that group of bystanders that in your assessment was sort of an uncontrollable threat to the officers at the scene? >> no. >> would there be a way -- well, i'm going to ask it this way.
9:32 am
would there be other ways for officers to deal with bystanders? >> yes. >> and could that include calling for backup? >> yes. >> would the presence of multiple officers at a scene be a relevant fact for an officer to consider when using an amount of force on a handcuffed and restrained subject? >> no, it -- it should be. >> well, but if there's some concern about the crowd would it be relevant that there were other officers already at the scene. >> oh, i see. yeah. no, it doesn't matter the crowd. as long as they're not attacking you, the crowd really doesn't -- shouldn't have an effect on your actions. >> you were asked if the use of force training has changed over
9:33 am
time. >> yes. >> but you still get the most up to date training every year when you go to the use of force training? >> i do, yes. >> and you were asked about, you know, has the academy changed since you went to the academy? >> yes. >> and you haven't been through the academy since then, correct? >> right, yeah. >> but you have some familiarity with how the academy trains new officers? >> absolutely. >> and you think that academy training provides appropriate training for officers? >> yes, it should. >> and would provide the most up to date training on the use of force for minneapolis officers that take the academy type
9:34 am
training? >> yes. >> you were asked if, you know, you were a trainer, and you are not a use of force trainer? >> that's correct. >> you are a student? >> yes. >> and -- but it's your testimony that based on all the training you go through every year, it's well-known that the prone position is dangerous? >> absolutely, yes. >> it doesn't take a trainer to be able to say that. you've learned it. >> yes. >> and that's been something that's been trained --
9:35 am
>> you were asked about continual training model, continually reassessing the need for force, fair statement? >> yes. >> and so that would include reassessing the location? >> yes. >> the tactical advantage? >> yes. >> conceal and cover? >> yes. >> scene security? >> yes. >> security in scene? >> yes. >> or security of the scene? >> yes. >> medical distress of the person restrained? >> yes. >> when you watched the body camera videos, did those videos capture those types of circumstances relative to the
9:36 am
restraint of mr. floyd? >> yes. >> and you were able to assess those things in telling the jury what you thought earlier about the restraint of mr. floyd? >> i am. >> when you watched those videos at some point during the restraint did you see mr. floyd kicking the officers? >> no, i didn't. >> it may have happened initially but after that, did you see any kicking? >> no, none. >> defense counsel asked you about the concept of holding for ems. >> yes. >> so sometimes it's necessary to keep the person there so they can receive medical treatment. >> that's correct. >> does holding for ems excuse an officer from providing medical attention that they've been trained to provide?
9:37 am
>> no, it doesn't. >> does holding for ems excuse officers from continuing to use this decision-making model about the use of force? >> no, it doesn't. >> does holding for ems excuse officers from using other resources, like other officers at the scene? >> no. >> you were asked about handcuffs. if handcuffs are not probably locked, can they tighten? >> yes. >> can they loosen? >> i'm sorry? >> if they're properly connected can they loosen? >> uh-huh. >> and then come open? but if they're locked, can they still tighten? >> that's right. >> if they're not -- i think the term is double locked. >> right, yes.
9:38 am
>> based on your review of the body cams did you see any need for officer chauvin to improvise by putting his knee on mr. floyd for nine minutes and 29 seconds? >> no, i did not. >> i have nothing further, your honor. >> any recross? >> no, your honor. >> thank you, lieutenant, you may step down. counsel side bar? lieutenant richard zimmerman leaving the stand in the trial of derek chauvin, this is day five of testimony, day 17 of the trial overall, a particularly damning and compelling testimony from lieutenant zimmerman, the senior most officer on the minneapolis police department. let's bring in our legal analysts watching this trial. laura coates, a former federal prosecutor and charles ramsey,
9:39 am
the commissioner in philadelphia. laura coates, the jury hearing repeatedly from the most senior officer currently on the minneapolis police force saying he was trained every year, and they are told in that training putting a suspect down prone is dangerous, putting a knee on suspect's neck can be deadly, that you must use those efforts, that use of force only in the most extreme of circumstances, and lieutenant zimmerman repeatedly saying from the video he's seen he's seen no such circumstance, that mr. floyd was in custody, he's no longer, resisting, compelling testimony. laura, as you come in, the judge is excusing the jury for the day. the first week of prosecution testimony is ending for now. the jury is going home for the weekend. let's listen to the judge say good-bye to the jury. >> let's shoot for 9:15. thank you, have a good weekend. >> just wanted to make sure there were no last housekeeping measures there, the judge letting the jury out early today so they can have some time on this easter weekend. laura coates back to your takeaway, listening to the repeated testimony, the common,
9:40 am
methodical testimony of lieutenant zimmerman. >> make no mistake about it, john, this was damning testimony, this blows out of the water the notion that derek chauvin was trained to do that which he did, that somehow it was part and parcel, baked into the recipe of every police training, everyone knows you do this. remember, they were trying to distinguish between what bystanders who don't have police training, the mma fighter, what he does or does not know, his training at the police academy, it distinguished between the off duty minneapolis firefighter who was trying to implore them to also allow her to render aid. distinguishing the emt workers who were not trained as police officers, then you go into the officers who were saying, actually, this is not how we're trained and this particular lieutenant saying, at least since 1985 he's been repeatedly trained that you know someone in the prone position or handcuffed is going to have difficulty breathing, move them immediately. and saying he clarified the threat is essentially gone.
9:41 am
they may be able to kick you but the use of deadly force is no longer needed here. you have all of these things. the only thing the defense was able to try to do was try to suggest and insinuate that because of his tenure, because he's a veteran police officer and a homicide detective and no longer a patrol beat cop that somehow he was out of touch on the use of force. somehow he has no idea what altercations look like nowadays. if you think about it, john, how outlandish that is. yes, officer training as changed since 1985. yes, weapons have changed since 1985. but the human neck, the human knee, and our ability to r respirate has not changed since at least 1985. >> the importance for the prosecution is you're trying to win over the jury and you can't lose jurors on this question, was officer chauvin acting in his view in a reasonable way with this use of force or was this beyond the pail. the prosecution saying 9:29, no
9:42 am
longer any resistance. what power did you put in this testimony of this investigator being asked, i didn't see it, the situation was under control and well past the point where any force anywhere near what we were saying could be necessary. >> he's a seasoned law enforcement veteran, i mean, he's the most senior person in the entire department, he's been on the job since 1981. he has spent a considerable amount of time at homicides. so he is very familiar with investigating situations in which people have lost their lives. you know, i was just thinking when he said police training has changed, well, yeah, it's changed. i mean, i went to the police academy 50 years ago, 1971 as a rookie police officer, and even then we were not trained to put our knee on somebody's neck for nine minutes. i mean, if anything, training and police policy and procedure has gotten more restrictive in terms of use of force. the training is light years better than it used to be. i mean, if anything, the needle has moved in a positive
9:43 am
direction, not a negative direction and the actions of chauvin are just injustifiable, even when the defense is raising all these, you know, hypotheticals, what if this, what if that, and it has nothing to do with what actually took place on may 25th of last year, absolutely nothing. this case has to stand on its own. and his use of force in that situation has to stand on its own based on the facts and circumstances of that case. not the what if, would have, could have, should have, what took place that day, and why did he use the level of force that he used for that sustained period of time? is that consistent with policy and training? the answer to that is no. >> and so, laura coates, we are now at the end of the first week of testimony. five days of trial testimony. 17 days if you go back to the pre-trial hearings and the selection of the jury. five days for these jurors who go home for the weekend. i want to walk through what played out during the week but i want to start with this, especially as we watched lieutenant zimmerman finish his testimony, then the
9:44 am
cross-examination, and then the redirect from the prosecutor. one of the challenges for a prosecutor, you can plan everything the night before, you can work with your witness the night before, but then you have to react. you have to be nimble and react to what you saw and you mentioned the defense attorney, eric nelson, he's doing the best he can with the material he has, trying to say to your point, well you've been on the desk for a long time, you're not in a patrol car, you're not a guy jumping out of a patrol car in these tense situations, been a long time since you've been on the street in the rough and tumble, if you will, then the prosecutor has to get back up, as mr. frank did, then walking through, well, let's go through this again. your sense, your grading of the prosecution, and their nimbleness in reacting. >> i think they were great at being nimble at this because, of course, they're not only up against trying to have the explanation to laymen about what is actually a common sense issue. they don't have to prove things that the average person would not be able to understand. the average person has a neck, and a knee, and understands the constriction of breathing. the average person would be able
9:45 am
to understand what you would not advise your own child to do in rough play or otherwise. he's really trying to point out methodically and i understand the constraints of the defense, and again, john, we have yet to see the defense case or the battle of the experts on that substantial causal factor of death and the autopsy, medical examiner. but so far the prosecutors are buttressed in their ability to understand common sense and what jurors are thinking here. what i thought was striking, every single law enforcement officer we've seen so far, you hear about this blue code of silence and trying to protect one of their own, you saw a distancing of a ten foot pole away from derek chauvin. not trying to filter their testimony through the filter of, hey, look, he's one of us, i can understand what he did. no, they were quite forthright and resolute about this officer being rogue in a sense so i think that's very powerful and going into a weekend, time is going to be the best friend of the prosecution because all these questions that have not been answered as to what would
9:46 am
it have taken to take his pulse, to take your knee off him. what would have taken to do those things? that's lingering in the jurors' mind for friday, saturday and sunday into monday, we have no indication the defense case is going to happen next week, this is going to stew and fester, and not to the benefit of derek chauvin. >> and chief, to that point, you're watching as an expert somebody as you just mentioned, five decades of experience in law enforcement and you're also watching as a human being as this plays out, to laura's point, the prosecution hopes it won the first week. it knows this is a long journey. it knows the prosecution controls the pace and the witness list, the defense will get that choice. but just from watching throughout the week, yourself, if you were a juror, are you going home with questions? the prosecution left me wondering this, or are you going home thinking, so far these guys have made a compelling case? >> well, the prosecution has made a compelling case, and the defense is fortunate it's not wrapping up today, that there's still more to come because quite
9:47 am
frankly they don't really have a leg to stand on, right now in my opinion. i do think it's going to come down to the more expert witnesses, especially the autopsy report, medical examiner, what was the cause of death, was the actions of chauvin, the substantial contributing factor to his cause of death once you go through the whole thing about his enlarged heart and drugs, and so forth. you know. and that's going to be critical, and who whipsins that battle an that's going to decide this case, in my opinion because clearly as far as what we've seen so far, and what we've heard so far, this isn't something that they're going to be able to say at the end of the day that was consistent with his training and with policy of the minneapolis police department. they've lost that one. they can only hope now that when the expert witnesses come forward, and they will find somebody to testify more in their favor in terms of that medical examiner's report, i think everything's going to wind up hinging on that. >> chief ramsey, laura coates, grateful for your time and insights throughout this first
9:48 am
week of testimony. we'll continue the conversation next week, of course, as the trial resumes but i'm grateful for your help in this important first week. up next for us, big news today and big upbeat economic numbers, 916,000 jobs added just last month. the pandemic recovery gaining steam. step, unparalleled safety at every visit, and flexible payment options for every budget. now, during the everyday smiles event new patients get a full exam & set of x-rays with no obligation. no insurance? no worries, it's free. plus, now all patients can get 20% off their treatment plan. find every reason to smile. every day at aspen dental. call 1-800-aspendental or book today at keeping your oysters business growing
9:49 am
has you swamped. you need to hire. i need indeed indeed you do. the moment you sponsor a job on indeed you get a shortlist of quality candidates from a resume data base claim your seventy-five-dollar credit when you post your first job at
9:50 am
9:51 am
is skincare from around the world better than olay? olay regenerist faced 131 premium products, from 12 countries, over 10 years. olay's hydration was unbeaten every time. face anything. find out more at
9:52 am
the march jobs number out from the government this morning are beating expectations. employment growth booming last month. the fastest pace since last summer. employers you see it right there, adding 916,000 jobs. the unemployment rate nationally dropping from 6.2% to 6%. president biden responding to this encouraging news just last hour. >> we saw the economy gain traction in march as the american rescue plan moved and got past bringing new hope to our country. next week, over 130 million households will have gotten their $1,400 per person rescue
9:53 am
check. funds are on their way to local communities to put educators, health care workers, home health care aids, police, firefighters, sanitary workers back on the job. >> but the president insists the economy needs more help for down the road and he went on to pitch his big infrastructure plan. the president saying he is not at the moment giving up on getting republican support for that piece of the package, joining me now with more, our senior white house correspondent phil mattingly. that strikes me as more aspirational than a reasonable expectation. >> yeah, optimism abounds, which is very on brand for president biden when you talk to senior white house officials. they make clear, regardless of the situation, he is taking an optimistic viewpoint and he's going to need one when it comes to gaining republican support for this proposal. keep in mind, the $2.25 trillion infrastructure and jobs package will lead to spending over $4 trillion. as you note, the president making clear, he's not giving up hope with republicans.
9:54 am
take a listen. >> when congress comes back, after this easter break, i'm going to begin meeting with democrats, republicans about this plan. i've spoken to republicans on the phone. looking forward to meeting with them. they all have their ideas about what it will take, what they like, and what they don't like. that's a good thing. that's the american way. debate is welcome. congress should debate my plan. offer alternatives if they think that's what they have to do but congress should act. >> you know, john, you listened to that last point and it's a crucial point, regardless of whether or not republicans want to come on board or decide to come on board the white house is full go, full steam ahead on trying to get this through. if that means democrats only, white house officials tell me that's the route they will take. as the president noted he plans to meet with republicans as soon as next week, wants to have them in the oval office, he has five designated cabinet secretaries already in contact with key senior republicans in both the house and senate. those meetings are expected to
9:55 am
continue next week as well. so they're going to put an effort in here, i think the biggest question right now, if you just want to bottom line things, republicans rejected what the president outlined on wednesday out of hand, making very clear, physical infrastructure, happy to talk, everything else you have in the plan, absolutely not. and it's that everything else you have in the plan that the white house officials are very enthused about at this point in time, shifting the paradigm. the president often talks about, that's the everything else in the plan and that, john, is something i'm told the white house just simply has no plans to back off of anytime soon. >> fascinating moment, phil, and they think they have leverage, when you have rising job numbers in the country, lower unemployment rate in the country, that helps the new president make the case. see if he can thread the needle. grateful for your time today on "inside politics," erica hill picks up our coverage after a quick break. doug? [ding] never settle with power e*trade. it has easy-to-use tools and some of the lowest prices.
9:56 am
don't get mad. get e*trade and start trading today. i've got moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. now, there's skyrizi. with skyrizi, 3 out of 4 people achieved 90% clearer skin at 4 months, after just 2 doses.
9:57 am
skyrizi may increase your risk of infections and lower your ability to fight them. before treatment, your doctor should check you for infections and tuberculosis. tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms such as fevers, sweats, chills, muscle aches, or coughs or if you plan to or recently received a vaccine. ♪ nothing is everything ♪ now is the time to ask your dermatologist about skyrizi. ♪ (car horn) ♪ turn today's dreams into tomorrow's trips... with millions of flexible booking options. all in one place. expedia. this... is a big deal. now, at, millions more people can afford health coverage. due to the covid relief law, you can pay less with financial help. in fact, 4 out of 5 customers can get a plan for under $10 a month. from doctor visits to preventive services to prescription drugs- these are quality plans. you can do this.
9:58 am
you can have coverage as soon as may 1st if you sign up now at [tv announcer] come on down to our appliance superstore where we've got the best deals on refrigerators, microwaves, gas ranges and grills. and if you're looking for...
9:59 am
wanna help kids get their homework done? where well, an internett deals onconnection's a good start., but kids also need computers. and sometimes the hardest thing about homework is finding a place to do it. so why not hook community centers up with wifi? for kids like us, and all the amazing things we're gonna learn. over the next 10 years, comcast is committing $1 billion to reach 50 million low-income americans with the tools and resources they need to be ready for anything. i hope you're ready.
10:00 am
'cause we are. rely on the experts at 1800petmeds for the same medications as the vet, but for less with fast free shipping. visit today. i'm erica hill in new york. we have been watching day five of the testimony in the murder trial of former minneapolis police officer derek chauvin charged in the death of george floyd. compelling testimony this morning from the most senior officer in the minneapolis police department, lieutenant richard zimmerman who heads up the homicide unit was called to the crime scene shortly after the deadly incident and offered a damning assessment of


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on