Return to Transcripts main page

Legal View with Ashleigh Banfield

Officers Ambushed in Ferguson; Can Trust in Police Be Restored?

Aired March 13, 2015 - 12:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.


ASHLEIGH BANFIELD, CNN ANCHOR: Hello, everyone. I'm Ashleigh Banfield. And welcome to LEGAL VIEW.

The shooter who put a bullet in the face of a Missouri police officer the night before last in Ferguson and who fired a second round into another officer's shoulder and out his back is still on the loose. And for all we know, there could be two shooters on the loose. Police in Ferguson, even the U.S. attorney, keep saying the word ambush. That shooter ambushed those cops. He lay in wait with a gun and shot them when he felt the time was, quote, "just right." Classic ambush.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We've got an officer down, officer down, shots fired at the station.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: All cars in route to the officer down, officer in need of aid.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Officer down, 222 South Florissant.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: (INAUDIBLE) en route for an officer down, possible shooting.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Shots fired, officer down.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: En route to the officer down.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: But a big part of this ambush is still a puzzle. I want you to look at this map. The two officers who were shot were where that blue circle is on your map. The investigators believe that the shooter was where the red circle is. Between them is a tremendous distance of more than a football field.

So we'll take the map down because we are right there on that street and a view that you haven't seen yet on CNN we can show you right now, the very place those policemen were shot or ambushed by someone with a gun. And there's no one better to look at this than from a trained law enforcement perspective than none other the -- the former FBI assistant director Tom Fuentes, who is live in Ferguson for us right now. And he's also with someone who witnessed the shooting, St. Louis newspaper reporter Susan Welch. So, Tom, it's just so lucky to have your perspective from where you

are. And I just want to set the scene for our viewers. You're standing with Susan Welch and you're at the top of that hill. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you are looking down the hill towards the location where the shooting happened in front of the police department, correct?

TOM FUENTES, CNN LAW ENFORCEMENT ANALYST: That's correct, Ashleigh.

At the top of the hill with Susan Welch from "The St. Louis Post Dispatch," who was out here that night when the shooting occurred. Now, she was at the bottom of the hill and took over behind a brick wall down there. But we're at the other end of it where the police speculate that the shooter was.

So, Susan, from your perspective, looking down this, what do you think of this distance for, you know, the speculation that the shots were from this high up going down?

SUSAN WELCH, REPORTER, "ST LOUIS POST-DISPATCH: Well, when I -- when I heard the shots the first -- you know, when I was on the phone with my editor, I heard the shots, I looked up this hill and I was sure that that's where they had come from.

FUENTES: OK. One thing I'd like to point out that's changed my perspective a little bit is, here from the top of the hill it's not elevated enough to shoot over the top of the protesters. But, Susan, you said earlier that the protesters really had already been moved off the street out of the way.

WELCH: That's right. At 11:10, the police who were in the line pushed them across the street and had them stand on the curb in front of this tire store right here.

FUENTES: OK.

WELCH: So they were not in the street at all. They wouldn't have been in the line of fire.

FUENTES: OK. Because from this -- from the elevation that we were at, if shooters were still on the street, they would have been hit. It would not have been high enough to shoot over the top of protesters and then hit those police officers. But Susan, being able to see it that night, saw that the protesters had already been moved to these two parking lots on either side of the street.

WELCH: That's right. That's right. And so I don't -- I don't think anybody could have been hurt by it. But when it happened, they all were hitting the ground and running.

FUENTES: When you heard the shots, how many shots did you believe you heard?

WELCH: I thought I heard four shots.

FUENTES: OK, four shots. And how loud did they sound? Could you tell? WELCH: They were just little pops. Some of the other media said they

thought they were firecrackers initially. They didn't believe they were gunshots.

FUENTES: Yes, often times pistol shots will sound like firecrackers and let's say a rifle shot will be much louder. So, you know, that's important because of the speculation. Some people have thought it almost impossible to fire a pistol that far, 125 yards, and be that accurate to hit two police officers out of four shots. But, you know, the reports of it sounding like a firecrackers are a good indication that it probably was a handgun. Plus, the police recovered bullet casings up at the top of the hill. But you've not heard any more details from the police as to what caliber of shell casings they found?

WELCH: No, no, I haven't heard any of that yet, no.

FUENTES: OK. When the shooting happened and you were on the other side by that brick wall -- is that the brick wall that you were near right over here?

WELCH: Well, I was -- initially, all the media were standing at this brick wall here to the right. And I was supposed to call into my editor every half an hour. So at five after 12:00, I moved over to the other brick wall to talk to her so that --

FUENTES: OK.

WELCH: Because it was kind of loud over there. And -- and right after that, right after I started talking to her, the bam, bam, bam, bam, shots.

FUENTES: OK.

WELCH: And then we -- I dove behind that brick wall there. And I -- when I looked up, some of the other media had gone behind that wall and there were police officers with their guns drawn. I also noticed there was a -- there was a police van in the parking lot and there were probably 20 police officers behind there. Many of them had assault rifles.

FUENTES: OK.

WELCH: There was also another group of people who got around the police officer who had been hit, one of the police officers, and pulled him back behind the van so they could -- he could get treatment.

BANFIELD: Hey, Tom --

FUENTES: OK. So the police officers responding to this, they were looking up the hill, is that correct?

BANFIELD: Tom --

WELCH: Absolutely, yes. Everybody had all their guns pointed. BANFIELD: Let me just -- let me jump in, Tom, with the two of you, if I can.

FUENTES: Yes.

BANFIELD: I'm looking at -- I'm looking through the two of you, Tom. If you could ask Susan just to listen in for a moment. I know she can't hear what you're hearing. But the perspective that we're seeing past you is the direct view of what the gunman had. But how much distance have you closed? As you walked down from that highest point, how much distance have you closed in on, meaning, how much farther back did that shooter have to shoot from?

FUENTES: Probably from another maybe 80, 90 yards up the hill. We're maybe 20, 30 yards from where the police officers were standing in the grass beyond that sidewalk across the street.

BANFIELD: And then Susan would have seen this, but also, Tom, the protesters were just off to the right of where you are.

FUENTES: Correct.

BANFIELD: And like you said, even from that higher ground, if the -- if the shooter wanted to clear the heads of the protesters, he or she might not have been able to do that, correct? So if they were -- if they were making a line -- a direct target to try to ambush those police officers, they would have very much come close to those -- to shooting the protesters as well, right?

FUENTES: That's correct. We were operating under the assumption from the beginning that the protesters were completely lined up in this street and the shot would have had to go over their heads to hit the police officers. But Susan is telling us that at midnight, when the crowd was dwindling, the police had already cleared them off the street and moved many of the protesters into the parking lot on this side of the street and then moved the other protesters to this parking lot on this side of the street. And, therefore, there was an opening or a parting of the protesters so that there was no one in between the shooters and the police officers.

BANFIELD: Can you ask Susan, Tom, because I know she can't hear me, can you ask her how many people she was able to speak to that night who could hear the bullets actually whizzing past them?

FUENTES: Ashleigh is wondering how many people that night actually told you that they heard the bullets whizzing past them?

WELCH: There was one of the other members of the media was really upset afterwards and actually some cameramen from some local TV stations also were very upset. What they said was, you know, we've been issued bulletproof vests from our bosses, but we didn't have them on because we didn't -- we had no idea that this was going to happen. They had showed up for a 4:00 press conferences and had no idea that it was going to turn violent. And even seconds before it turned violent, no one thought it would. FUENTES: And there's been some criticism from the public that the

police should not be wearing visible ballistic armor out here and protection. That they should look like a kinder, gentler police force and that maybe by having all of that -- what have you heard from the people out here as to that? You know, should the police be protected with full gear or should they take a chance, not wear it and try to appear to be less aggressive?

WELCH: Well, I think after what happened, I think everybody would think that they need to because you just don't know what's going to happen (INAUDIBLE).

BANFIELD: OK, Tom --

FUENTES: Right.

WELCH: But I will say that I think the demeanor of the police that night was kind of very relaxed. And I thought they -- I saw some of the police officers kind of, you know, talking amongst each other. And they didn't look menacing to me at all.

FUENTES: OK.

WELCH: But I will say that there were two groups -- two factions of protesters. Some of them were very organized and others I would just say were extremely angry and were just taunting the police.

FUENTES: OK.

BANFIELD: Tom, I want to jump in for a moment because I know you have a secondary theory that's possible that maybe there wasn't a gunman necessarily on the pavement at a higher ground but maybe at much higher ground on top of a building. And after the break, I want to get into that with you now that you've had a chance to walk -- I mean as an FBI former assistant director, you certainly have the eye when on the ground to see things that the rest of us may not have seen or thought of. After the break, I'm going to join Tom again, and Susan, and we're going to try and figure out if there's any other possibilities, what these police officers might be doing to try to not only track down who the shooter is, but how the shooter did this and whether the intent was specifically to target a police officer or if it was something that could have been different. That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BANFIELD: Want to take you back to Ferguson, Missouri, where Tom Fuentes is standing by. He's a former assistant director of the FBI. He's been walking the scene where those two police officers were shot just after late-night protests. And he's actually looking at the possible trajectories of where the bullets may have come from, all the while the shooter or shooters still on the loose. He's also joined by newspaper reporter from the St. Louis newspaper, Susan Welch.

So, Tom, where you are right now, as I understand it, is the place where the officers fell. This is the spot where they were shot in front of the police department. If we look up the street, we have an image on the right-hand side of the screen right now that the viewers are looking at and they can see a trajectory of the bullets coming from up that hill that just barely clears the protesters' heads, which looks absolutely harrowing for everybody involved.

FUENTES: Right. Yes, that's --

BANFIELD: But I did want to ask you about your other theory that perhaps that red line may have been quite a bit more precipitous and that maybe shots came from rooftops directly across the street from where you are, instead of all the way up the street.

FUENTES: Right.

Well, having been here in person with Susan and having her perspective on it, you know, she's very certain -- and we're standing in the spot that she was at the night the shots rang out. So the police officers were actually a few feet further up the sidewalk in the grassy area. But from her perspective, everybody, the police, directed their attention up the street when the shots rang out and were very clear about that. And that the angle of the rooftop of the tire store, which I taught might have been a possibility, or the strip mall to the other side of the street, the reason I thought that originally was for the elevation. That if the shooter was shooting over the top of protesters, they would have needed to be higher up than just, I think, up the street. But Susan can describe again that the police had moved everybody out. So from your perspective, Susan, describe where all the people were now that we're down at the bottom of the street.

WELCH: OK. So, they had been lined up directly in front of the police officers in the grass. And at 11:10, they put their shields up and moved everybody across the street to this parking lot, to the curb there. And then they stood there for 10 minutes to make sure they wouldn't leave. And then they retreated back over here to the grass again. And so I was -- I was standing here. I called in to my editor and I moved away from this brick wall. And when I was on the phone with her, I heard the shots. I heard boom, boom, boom, boom. I looked up the hill because I'm sure that's where they came from. I think I even saw some smoke up there. So, you know, then the next thing I did was run behind the wall. But then I -- I got up and I was looking, trying to see if I could see if anybody had been injured because my photographer was certain that one of the -- at least one of the police officers had been hit.

FUENTES: And then what did you see in terms of the police officers reacting to the officers that were wounded?

WELCH: Well, there -- they -- I looked up, I saw that some of the protesters were on the ground, some were fleeing and then I saw that a whole group of them had almost like laid on top of one of the injured officers to protect him. And then after that was when I -- when I saw all the police officers pulling out guns and they -- they whisked him behind the van. And a firefighter from here came over with a medic bag to treat him. And shortly after that, there were just a convoy of police cars came into the parking lot from all over the St. Louis area.

BANFIELD: Tom, can you --

WELCH: They set up a cover for some of the police officers who had their assault rifles drawn.

FUENTES: OK.

BANFIELD: Tom, can you ask your cameraman to swing that shot back up -- up the hill? I want to see the policemen's perspective, what the policemen would have been looking at. Just swing up the street.

FUENTES: (INAUDIBLE) the perspective looking back up the hill.

BANFIELD: Thank you for that. If we could take that full --

FUENTES: Yes, he's looking back up the hill. And when we -- when we started walking, we were up at the top near the second car at the top of the hill and then we came walking down the hill.

No the reason, when I was standing up at that place --

BANFIELD: That's how far away it was?

FUENTES: Yes. But when we were standing up there, the police officers would not have been in the position to be shot if the protesters would have been on the street. In other words, the protesters would have been shot. It wasn't enough elevation at that time to shoot over the top of the protesters. But what Susan has pointed out that, looking back up the street, you can see that there's parking lots on each side. And that's where the protesters had been moved. Essentially, the police had parted the protesters from being on the street and therefore they were no longer blocking and the shot did not have to go over their head. It just came straight down to hit the police.

BANFIELD: Absolutely fascinating now that you show us, from these perspectives, what the possibilities are and were and may not have been as well. I appreciate it so much. Gosh, thank you -- thank you for all of this perspective. Susan, we appreciate it. Thank you. Tom Fuentes, as always, especially with your insight from your days in the FIB. It's so helpful.

FUENTES: You're welcome.

Ashleigh is thanking you as well.

BANFIELD: Just a remarkable look. I know Susan couldn't hear us, but our thanks go out to her as well with her work.

Coming up next, two policemen shot after the chief had resigned. Did that scathing Justice Department report aimed at fixing relations between Ferguson's citizens and police actually make the situation worse there? And can it be fixed?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BANFIELD: Whatever grief the Ferguson Police Department may have brought upon itself, violence certainly isn't going to solve anything. And that is the message from no less than President Obama, whose Justice Department is pushing wholesale reforms of a force that has abused its authority for years. Here's the president on Jimmy Kimmel's late-night talk show.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: There was no excuse for criminal acts. And whoever fired those shots shouldn't detract from the issue. They're criminals. They need to be arrested. And then what we need to do is to make sure that like-minded, good-spirited people on both sides, law enforcement who have a terrifically tough job and people who understandably don't want to be stopped and harassed just because of their race, that we're able to work together to try to come up with some good answer.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: Back in Washington, D.C., the outgoing attorney general was even more blunt.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ERIC HOLDER, ATTORNEY GENERAL: This was not someone trying to bring healing to Ferguson. This was -- this was a damn punk, a punk, who was trying to sow discord in an area that is trying to get its act together and trying to bring together a community that has been fractured for too long.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: Well, I want to talk more about Ferguson, quote, "getting its act together," those the word of the A.G., with our senior legal analyst, Jeffrey Toobin, and defense attorney and CNN legal analyst Mark Geragos. And in Columbia, South Carolina, Marc Claxton, who's the director of the Black Law Enforcement Alliance.

Mr. Claxton, if I can begin with you.

There is some concern, and it has been raised, that the DOJ report may have the effect of maybe not just changing things within the Ferguson Police Department, but also depolicing, meaning cops won't want to be cops as much, may back off, may actually allow crime to play out rather than get involved. Is that a concern?

MARC CLAXTON, DIR., BLACK LAW ENFORCEMENT ALLIANCE: That is a concern I've heard expressed by many people. I think, however, that that concern is really quite ludicrous when you think about it. Listen, the job of a professional police officer is to uphold the laws, apply them fairly and equally and have an understanding about constitution, state, local laws, et cetera. So I think if you're expecting a professional police department and professional police service, which, by the way, is about public service, you know, then change is inevitable. And the situation, such as what's happening in Ferguson, it's quite mandatory. And I think the DOJ report clearly detailed the areas of concern and suggested some things that need to be changed down there. And I think a smart police department and smart law enforcement will adhere or at least accept it on its face.

BANFIELD: And smart can cost money. The reports, Jeffrey Toobin, I'm sure you've heard that, you know, the Ferguson Police Department had two options, they can fight the DOJ or they can accept the DOJ and both cost the same in terms of implementation costs, hours of billing to get lawyers to watch the process and make sure these things are carried out, or the fight with hours of billing and loads and loads of lawyer, et cetera. Let's go the route that they're going to actually implement. What technically is going to happen? What's the function? What will actually happen? We're just in the aftermath right now. We're not seeing the DOJ coming in and stepping in and saying, here's the way it's going to work from now on.

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Well, I don't think we know. And there's another alternative that you -- that you didn't mention, which is abolishing the police department altogether, which I think is probably the best result. Jennings, Missouri, which is a similarly sized city nearby, their police department was abolished not long ago. There are too many small police departments. This police department is too toxic. It is too white in that community. The best solution for Ferguson and is a solution that I believe is on the table, Eric Holder has said so, is consolidating law enforcement into bigger jurisdictions with more diverse police departments, with less administrative overhead and less bad history.

BANFIELD: And then, ultimately, isn't that backwards, Mark Geragos, from whence we've come? Because isn't the whole idea to get your police closer into the community, walk the streets, meet with kids in the schools, know your neighbors so that they're not the boogeymen at all the times?

MARK GERAGOS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Yes, that's exactly what it's supposed to be, and clearly it isn't here, and that's the problem. These are not people who live in that community that are doing the policing. The people in the community do not feel that they've got a voice. In fact, the -- part of the most damning stuff in this DOJ report was what these municipal court judges were doing in terms of the fines and the -- on the backs of, you know, poor and working people. And it's disgusting, frankly. So I think Jeff's got a real point here. We've seen it in other areas where they disband either the local police department and let the sheriff come in or the county agency come in and take over, or they've got to do something where they have the police live in the community because otherwise you're just never going to bridge the gap.

BANFIELD: By the way, speaking of all of those cases that are now going to be transferred from the municipal court system to the state system, if you're a lawyer defending any of those people in any of those cases, are you just now -- you have just ripe material to choose from to fight your cases? I mean effectively aren't you looking at a whole biased system as you go in to defend your client?

TOOBIN: Mark, wouldn't you like to defend some of those cases?

GERAGOS: Not only would I like to defend some of those cases, I think it's only going to be a matter of time before somebody starts doing some Keaton-style (ph) taxpayer lawsuits to get some of that money brought back and repatriated.

TOOBIN: Yes, I mean it's -- it's beyond just people getting acquitted. There are -- I mean, obviously, Michael Brown's family is going to sue, but there are going to be lots of other lawsuits because this is a police department that did its job very badly.

BANFIELD: And you know that it --

TOOBIN: And that's what happens.

BANFIELD: It's not the only police department. The accusations are that this is a problem that is endemic right across the country.

I hope both of you can stay. I have a lot of other questions for you.

In the meantime, Marc Claxton, thank you so much for your insight as well. Do appreciate you being on the program today. Thank you, sir.

So, can a handful of resignations and policy reforms actually fix the current situation in Ferguson or is something much more drastic needed? Coming up next, we're going to show you how another troubled town did it and did it with success. That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)