Return to Transcripts main page

Cuomo Prime Time

Jesse Jackson: Violent Breonna Taylor Protests "Would Be A Commercial For Trump"; Trump Refuses To Commit To Peaceful Transfer Of Power If He Loses Election; Dr. Fauci On COVID-19 "Long-Haulers". Aired 9-10p ET

Aired September 23, 2020 - 21:00   ET

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


[21:00:00]

CHRIS CUOMO, CNN HOST: Thank you, Anderson. We're monitoring the situation right now. I appreciate your coverage.

I am Chris Cuomo. Welcome to PRIME TIME.

Protests on the street of Louisville after a grand jury today brought down an indictment in the Breonna Taylor case without any impact on Breonna Taylor directly, nothing to do with her killing.

Now, is that the right call legally? I'll take you through it, it's not simple. But it is simple politically, and it is deeply unsatisfying for many.

A curfew is starting right now. We know, terrible news, a police officer has been shot tonight. What are the circumstances, who did it, we're working on that. We pray that they are OK. We're going to try to get you the information.

But here's what's not in question. Violence only makes everything worse. And look, that's where we are. And it has to be said. It's one more thing that should be so obvious, and yet is a divided principle right now, let alone against the men and women that we trust to protect us.

One more thing that should be obvious is that nothing is made better on these streets, if the people that we have in power, who are supposed to calm, who are supposed to create change, stay silent.

That makes us ask why did the President, refuse to address the need for calm in Kentucky when he was asked. Why did he choose to celebrate the prosecutor, celebrate the grand jury determination, but say nothing for those processing pain and outrage?

It is not easy to accept why the police were justified in not just shooting, but killing a non-shooter. Breonna Taylor was an innocent third-party by all accounts.

So, here we are once again, streets filling with people who are outraged, who don't understand, who need counsel, who need guidance. And, in the absence of that, we must have concern of what happens next. It's not just coming from me. It's a word of caution from a legend of

the Civil Rights era. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JESSE JACKSON, CIVIL RIGHTS ACTIVIST: A violent response in Chicago would be a mistake. It would be a commercial for Trump. We can't do that. We must be smart enough not to turn our anguish and anger into set destruction, give Trump a commercial, turn pain to power.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CUOMO: "Turn pain to power," violence will help Trump's cause. You know who believes that? Trump. Helps him with the base that he is constantly scaring about Black marauders.

BLM to him, to his friends on Fox, it's not a Movement, it's a boogeyman. Fox gets it. They struggle to say "Breonna" correctly, but they get the correct play. Blame the outraged for their own pain, say those calling for justice, really want mob rule. The hotter, the better.

Trump gets it. That's why he's refusing to rule out if he loses the election in six weeks, that there will be a peaceful transfer of power.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: There has been rioting in Louisville, there's been rioting in many cities across this country, red and - your so-called red and blue states. Will you commit to making sure that there is a peaceful transferal of power after the election?

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: Well, we're going to have to see what happens. You know that I've been complaining very strongly about the ballots. And the ballots are a disaster. And--

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I understand that. But people are rioting. Do you commit to making sure that there's a peaceful transferal of power?

TRUMP: No. We want to - we want to have - get rid of the ballots and you'll have a very transfer - we'll have a very peaceful - there won't be a transfer, frankly. There'll be a continuation. The ballots are out of control.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CUOMO: Brothers and sisters, this is not OK. "We have to see what happens," from the Commander-in-Chief? Get rid of all the absentee ballots, a legitimate instrument of our democracy, and then he'll be OK. It's not presidential. It's pathetic and you know it.

And every Republican in Washington, who stands for the Constitution, who says that's what matters to him or her, should be calling it out because that is destructive to remaining a Republic, and they know it. I remind you. Forget none of this. These are the days that will be

recorded in history. How do you want to be remembered? What you ignore, you empower. Now, what is less obvious is not what Trump is doing. It's what happened in this case.

[21:05:00]

The grand jury reckoning in the Taylor case is not easy. Here's why. Well it assumes a focus on what happens after the cops entered in the middle of the night. But it has to start with, well, why did they go there? This isn't just about the instant case. It's about the circumstances and what it means in terms of policing.

Police stormed Breonna Taylor's home, not for any reason involving her, but looking for someone else who happened to not be there, her ex-boyfriend, a suspected drug dealer.

Was it a no-knock warrant? Did they just barge in? If so, how did they get it? How good was the sufficiency? Or did they knock? Did they announce or not?

Her boyfriend, Kenneth Walker, says he didn't hear them. And if they - even if they did, he didn't hear it. Someone else says they did hear it. Others say they didn't hear it. Where does that leave us?

Walker also says he thought it was the same drug dealer they were looking for, who used to date Breonna Taylor. That's why he fired. A cop was hit at some point, horrible, Officer Mattingly. But by whom? By Walker or friendly fire? Ballistics make it unclear.

What is clear is that Breonna Taylor didn't fire. Breonna Taylor wasn't under suspicion. She wasn't seen in anyway threatening. She didn't have a weapon. She was shot and killed by police.

The three charges for fired officer Brett Hankison are for first- degree wanton endangerment essentially that he should have perceived a risk that he ignored and fired anyway, for bullets that went into neighboring apartments, not the ones that killed Taylor.

Why? Ostensibly because Taylor's apartment had gunfire coming at them, so it was reasonable. But it was still reasonable to shoot an innocent third-party under the law?

Kentucky's Attorney General says the two other officers who fired shots were justified because of what I just said that their use of force was OK because Taylor's boyfriend fired at them first.

But it leaves you with the same question. So, if you get fired at, it's OK if you kill anybody else who has nothing to do with it? That's OK? Absolutely. And at the grand jury level, that's not something that has to go before a jury? So, what does this mean?

Well, the first instant circumstance we have to deal with is what's going on in the streets and what may have happened to this police officer tonight. We do have reports of a shooting, so let's go to the ground in Louisville with Shimon Prokupecz. Shimon, what do you know about the shooting?

SHIMON PROKUPECZ, CNN CRIME AND JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Yes. So, what we know is what the police have told us, and that is that one of their officers had been shot. We believe, Chris, it happened behind me here. This is why the police here have closed off this road.

We were actually following the protesters when we heard fireworks. And then, moments later, we could hear the gunshots, and then people running. The entire episode appears to have been captured by the Police Department, on their live stream, on their Facebook page.

And here's what it sounded like at that moment.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

(FIREWORKS SOUND)

(CROSSTALK)

(GUNSHOTS FIRED)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Shots fired.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Good?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I'm good.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You all good?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I'm good.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Officer down, right there, officer down. Yes.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Take cover.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Officer down. Take cover.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Cover.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Officer down. Take cover.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CUOMO: Streets of America in the year 2020!

All right, Shimon, listen, obviously that doesn't help us understand anything other than the general context of there is chaos going under - over there. So, we're going to have to find out, see if the video or anything shows or gives any direction, or any kind of reporting about who may have been involved, and what else may happen.

Stay safe. Keep the team safe. That's the priority. I'll check back with you as soon as you tell me to. Other than that, be safe. All right, Shimon?

PROKUPECZ: Thank you.

CUOMO: All right.

PROKUPECZ: Thank you.

CUOMO: In the face of national unrest, over racial perceived injustice, we have a president whose only concern is his own political benefit. Why do I say that? Do you hear him? Have you heard him in the midst of what happens in the streets? Have you heard him do anything but foment?

He is the one person that all should look to, to make things better in situations like this. Let's discuss how we do it in his absence. Let's bring in Van Jones, and Scott Jennings.

Gentlemen, both of you, thank you for being here.

Scott, this is complicated legally, OK? I know some people aren't going to like me saying that.

[21:10:00]

But you have to look before the event, during the event, and then obviously this process after the event, why were they there, the nature of the warrant, the sufficiency of the warrant, what this is about policing, what happened when they want there.

The hardest part of the sell for people will be, "I get it. Somebody shot at them." What bullet hit Mattingly? We don't know. But Walker says he shot. So, certainly that would give an officer a reasonable suspicion of potential injury to fire back.

Why is it OK that a grand jury, a prosecutor, essentially right, because the grand jury is largely his tool, gets to determine that it was also OK, not just to fire back, but to kill an innocent third person.

SCOTT JENNINGS, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, FORMER SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH, COLUMNIST, USA TODAY: Well, first of all, I think, a couple of things.

One, grand juries, in Kentucky at least, are independent bodies. They don't work for the Attorney General. In fact, the Attorney General or the prosecutor, when they get in the room, work for them. So, grand juries are independent bodies, and they make their own decisions. That's number one.

Number two, the point you made about who shot the police officer is actually not in question. The ballistics were clear. It was the shot that the Walker fire. It was a 9-millimeter bullet. The police issued--

CUOMO: That is not my understanding of the evidence.

JENNINGS: --40-caliber round and so--

CUOMO: That is not my understanding of the evidence. You haven't seen it. I haven't seen it.

JENNINGS: Well Chris, I think it's important that you - I think it's important that you get this right, because the Attorney General talked about this today, and the ballistics and the bullet are not in question.

CUOMO: Well but they are. Hold on a second, Scott.

JENNINGS: And so, because it's the crux of the issue--

CUOMO: Hold on it, Scott. Scott?

JENNINGS: --is that the police were shot, and they returned fire.

CUOMO: Not - Scott?

JENNINGS: That's the crux of the issue.

CUOMO: No, it's not the crux of the issue. It's not even close. It's very interesting that you think that's the crux of the issue. It isn't. You ask the people on the streets, you ask Breonna's family, it's not the crux of the issue.

And you haven't seen the ballistics. I haven't seen the ballistics. OK? Walker's attorney has seen the ballistics. He says they are unclear in their determination.

I know what the prosecutor said. You say a grand jury is an independent body. I hope it's always an independent body. A grand jury is always an independent body. A prosecutor never gets to design a finding by a grand jury, except in what they do every time.

Was the defense counsel in the room? Does anybody else present any evidence? Does anybody get to take the stand that the prosecutor doesn't want? No, it is his tool, hence the expression, "You can indict a ham sandwich." So, this was the prosecutor's tool. We know it's an independent body.

But for him to decide, through a grand jury, there's no reason to go to a jury, they are justified, Van Jones, that not only should they have returned fire, because they were being fired upon, but it's OK that they shot and killed an innocent third-party, you and I both know, in the eyes of the law, that usually goes to a jury. It certainly would if it were not a police officer.

VAN JONES, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, FORMER OBAMA ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: (OFF-MIKE).

CUOMO: I don't hear Van.

JONES: Can you hear me? Can you hear me? This is a case of--

CUOMO: I got him.

JONES: --bad policy. This is a case of bad policy, bad policing and bad prosecution. It's a complete trifecta. It's complete disaster. The policy of no-knock in the first place is suspect, because it's led

to so many innocent people being killed. It's led to police officers being killed. So, the policy is terrible, then the policing.

They sprayed this place with bullets. Yes, they were returning fire. But they had other responsibilities, including, once she is shot, it's 20 minutes before she's given any attention at all. Remember the eight minutes with George Floyd? Can you imagine 20?

And then, the police are engaging in cover-up behavior. That is criminal and that's not prosecuted. So, listen, you have so much wrongdoing. The policy is terrible. The policing is terrible. And the prosecutor could come in and find a way forward here, and instead basically just punts.

And the thing that we aren't talking about enough, if someone kicked in your door, tonight, and said nothing, but they had guns, you have a right to defend yourself, unless you're Black. Everybody can stand their ground unless you're Black. Everybody has the Second Amendment right unless you're Black.

If you're Black, and you defend yourself, you defend your girlfriend, then you're on trial, she's dead, and the cops get away with it. So, if you wonder why people are upset, this is why.

That said violence from the Left is completely unacceptable. We don't want lawlessness in the police department. We don't want lawlessness from Right-wing vigilantes, and we don't want lawlessness from the Left either.

We got too much lawlessness, too much violence, too many people getting shot, too many funerals, we need to calm this thing down, and we need leadership from the top, on both sides, to get us out of this mess. But this was a disaster today, an absolute catastrophe.

CUOMO: One point to the record, then Scott, to you.

It is in dispute whether or not this was executed as a no-knock warrant. They did have a witness, according to the prosecutor. He called it uncontroverted testimony. I don't know that that's accurate either, why? I'll get to that in a second.

[21:15:00]

But they had a witness that said he heard them knock and say, it was the police. Now, others interviewed, did not hear anything. Walker says he did not hear anything.

Is that influential? It should be, because the person who has the most to lose in all this is Walker, right? He's the one who shot back. He's the one who may have hit a cop. He's the one who certainly, by shooting, now bears at least some type of guilt about what happened to his girlfriend.

So, for him, to say what he heard and didn't hear, you have to take it under advisement. But with that being unclear under the record, Scott, what's your take on Van's point about how this is being perceived.

JENNINGS: Well, look, I actually - I agree with Van and many people who have expressed this today. This is an absolute tragedy. A life was lost. She should not have been killed. She should not have been shot.

I think there are significant questions about the warrant, and how it was served, and how it was procured that are now being looked at by the Civil Rights Division at the FBI.

And they need to look at it, because as Van pointed out, and as others have said today, if somebody comes to your house, in the middle of the night, and it's unclear who it is, and you may have reason to believe that they're hostile, I mean you can see how Walker was put in an extremely terrible position here. And so, I agree with many of the things Van said.

And so I - the hurt, the anguish that Louisville - I'm in Louisville, by the way. The hurt, the anguish that this entire community has felt is real. The law here was - and the truth of the investigation was laid out by the Attorney General today on the state matter.

I still think the FBI Civil Rights Division matter is ongoing, Chris. And I think some of the topics you raised about the warrants is where that's going to get sorted out.

CUOMO: Now, Scott, also, I know you have contacts down there. If you can get my eyes on the ballistics, I'm happy to clarify it for people. The last thing I want is doubt about the material facts.

I'm just going on what Walker has said through his attorney, and his attorney who has said, he has observed these documents. I have no reason to believe he's lying. I'm happy to clarify it through first- person reporting. I'm happy to do it. Let me know.

Now we get to the macro issue here. Scott, why isn't the President saying what you guys are saying right now? We have one leader in these situations. He has only given voice to these situations to warn White people of more of this happening unless he stays president. You're OK with that?

JENNINGS: No, I'm not. Look, I agree with Van.

Anybody in a position of leadership, from the president, to an attorney general, to a governor, to a mayor, anybody in any city or jurisdiction has the responsibility to say the things that we want them to say, which is to calm the nation, to calm their jurisdiction, to say violence should not beget other violence, to say that when someone dies, it is a tragedy, no matter how the investigation turns out, no matter what the truth of it is, it is a tragedy to understand, to empathize, to reflect the emotions of our communities and of our nation. And so, when he doesn't do that, it is a failure.

Now, at the same time, he believes that and has confidence in, obviously, the Attorney General of Kentucky, and he gave voice to that today. But there are two things you have to do. You can support that, and

that's good. But you also have to reflect and internalize the hurt of the American people and--

CUOMO: Right.

JENNINGS: --and the people of Louisville and other cities on this, and he needs to do it.

CUOMO: But why doesn't he, Van?

JONES: Look, I don't know why he doesn't. But I do want to tell you this. He really needs to, especially on this one.

I don't think you people understand, Black women, across this country, they gravitate to this case, because too often, frankly, the whole system comes down on women because of their boyfriends. How many women are serving time because their boyfriend was doing something, their boyfriend had something in their car, their boyfriend this, their boyfriend that.

So, there's a whole unspoken amount of pain about how Black women get treated worse in the system than almost anybody else, maybe actually more than anybody else, and there's no justice.

Most of our movements around criminal justice are about the brothers and the brothers this, and the Black man that, and the women are left out. They're abused by the system, and they're left out by the Movement.

And Black women, across the country, said "Not this time. Not this time. We're not going to let this happen anymore." And the NBA came, and this became a cause celeb, and Black women fighting for their humanity through the cause of this case. And then for this outcome to be people being spat in the face, by the prosecutor!

There is something that can be charged here, I guarantee it. They throw the book at kids in the neighborhood over nothing. You mean, all these bullets fired, no help for this woman, and no charges, having anything to do with her body, with her humanity is completely outrageous.

[21:20:00]

And so, on this one, he needs to speak, because as much as you can talk about everything else, an innocent Black woman, shot down, in her own house with no recourse, no justice, in the criminal justice system, that should offend everybody in the country, especially given the amount of passion that's been shown and the tenacity that's been shown by Black women.

CUOMO: Van, Scott, thank you very much for speaking to what matters tonight on the show. I appreciate you both.

We're going to take a break. Then we're going to bring in very key components here, OK? The lawyer

for Breonna Taylor's family, how does Breonna's family process this, what does this mean.

And the attorney I was talking about before, Mr. Walker's attorney has had access to certain parts of the police file. That's why I say what I said about the ballistics.

We have someone who understands forensics in this situation, and who can speak to what matters here, in terms of fact, and law and, of course, policy, next.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TEXT: CUOMO PRIME TIME.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TEXT: LET'S GET AFTER IT.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CUOMO: Temperature's rising again, why? Another decision by our criminal justice system is hard to reconcile with what we understand of the circumstances surrounding Breonna Taylor's death.

[21:25:00]

So, on the streets, in Louisville, we've had protests, we've had a report of a policeman being shot. We don't know what happened. That's really pretty much all we know. And as we get more information, we will give it to you.

Now, this is not what the Taylor family wanted. They have been calling for manslaughter charges at a minimum. Now, we have what the family wants, the political overtones of this, and then we have the facts of the case, and we can actually bring them all together in this segment.

We have Lonita Baker, one of the family attorneys to the Taylor family.

Thank you, ma'am for being with us.

And Steven Romines, an attorney to Kenneth Walker, OK? Key individual in the case, why? He was Breonna Taylor's boyfriend. He was the one who got worried when they broke in, so he fired, OK? This is perfect for us to understand.

First, Counsel Baker, what is the family's reaction to this? Do they understand what a Black Attorney General said made sense in this case?

LONITA BAKER, ATTORNEY FOR BREONNA TAYLOR'S FAMILY: They understand it, but it does not make sense. And unfortunately, I could not help make sense of it, because the logic, the Attorney General's logic, does not make legal sense.

You can't say that Brett Hankison wantonly endangered three neighbors, but that same reckless behavior does not apply to Breonna. You can't say that he endangered three neighbors, but he did - that reckless behavior also does not apply to the Black neighbors upstairs.

So, and it was also disappointing that Daniel Cameron didn't have the courage to tell her that the three counts of wanton endangerment had nothing to do with the death of Breonna, but with those neighbors. I had to break that news to her.

So, they're upset, justifiably, and I'm - and we're upset and outraged at the decision that was made today. And we question whether any charges against Breonna Taylor were even presented to the grand jury today.

CUOMO: Counsel Romines, a couple of questions of law, one of fact.

To what Lonita Baker is saying there, is the Attorney General under any type of duty to tell you what he presented or didn't present? Is the grand jury allowed to be interviewed afterwards to find out what they heard or didn't hear?

STEVEN ROMINES, ATTORNEY FOR BREONNA TAYLOR'S BOYFRIEND, KENNETH WALKER: They are allowed to be interviewed, but he is under no obligation to tell us.

We are subpoenaing, in Kenneth Walker's case, tomorrow, the grand jury transcript. And we - let's be transparent about it. Let's see what they presented. And I will guarantee you they did not present any charges on the other - any homicide charges on the other cops.

CUOMO: Under the law--

ROMINES: It's because - and here's the other thing about it, Chris. It is--

CUOMO: Go ahead.

ROMINES: --if he - if Brett Hankison wantonly endangered neighbors, then he has to wantonly endanger Breonna Taylor, but because she died, he would be charged with wanton murder. Therefore, they just had to completely ignore the fact that he endangered her as well by recklessly firing into her apartment.

The other thing that--

CUOMO: Well that's my question. Hold on, one point at a time, Counselor.

The pushback point is, "No, no, no, when they got fired upon, it created different circumstances in Taylor's apartment than the other ones, so while it was reckless to fire into any other apartment, because they received fire, it was reasonable to fire back, and when Breonna Taylor was hit, that was an unintended consequence, not actionable by law."

ROMINES: Well that's false under Kentucky law. You are not allowed to rely on a justification of self-defense, when you recklessly kill a third-party. You must identify the person who is using imminent deadly force against you, and you are permitted to use deadly force against them. You are not permitted--

CUOMO: Is it different for police?

ROMINES: No, it's not. And that's the whole thing, Chris. Somehow we have created this artificial heightened level of self-defense that police get that ordinary citizens do not. That's not the case. Every - self-defense laws in Kentucky, apply to everyone, police--

BAKER: Exactly.

ROMINES: --and citizens alike. And it does not apply when you recklessly kill a third-party, who did not imminently put your life in danger.

CUOMO: Lonita, I'm coming back to you, but one more fact question for you, Counselor Romines.

I was having a discussion in the segment before, you may have heard, you may not have, where one of the guests said, "Well, the A.G. was clear. The ballistics are clear. Mattingly was shot by walker."

ROMINES: Yes.

CUOMO: Have you examined any documents and can you comment on that, Sir?

ROMINES: I have the ballistics from the Kentucky State Police, and they indicate that they could not determine that Mattingly was shot by Walker's gun.

[21:30:00]

So, and that inconclusive determination that Attorney General Cameron relied on, to clear Brett Hankison, from killing Breonna Taylor, he tried to use it to implicate Kenny Walker, because the ballistics from Kentucky State Police do not show that Kenny Walker's weapon fired that.

And what he also said was, "We know that Walker fired a 9-millimeter and the police used 40-caliber." According to LMPD's own records, Brett Hankison is issued a 9-millimeter.

So every - again, what I have said is, everything I have said today that contradicts Attorney General Cameron, release the entire file, and we'll see who's telling the truth. And if Scott Jennings knows him, call him up tonight, tell him to release it.

CUOMO: I offered the same.

ROMINES: Because absent it, and I know what it says. CUOMO: I offered the same. I said, "You have contacts down there." I was being vague because it's not for me to disclose what he's doing and what he isn't doing. But put it out there. I'm happy the first person put a set of eyes on it, and be straight about what it tells everybody. I'll put it on TV, so you can tell it yourself.

Counselor Baker, now, what happens? People are frustrated. You put it perfectly. They understand what they're being told. They're not stupid. But it doesn't make sense to them, under the law, if they understand it, or just common sense.

So now, they take to the streets. And people are angry, and they feel humiliated, and they feel that this case counts on its own, but also as proxy for so many others, and they want to act out.

How does the Taylor family process its own grief and tell everybody else to be calm?

BAKER: I don't think it's fair to ask the Taylor family to do that. Right now, they're still dealing with this. They've not given any statements.

But what I would say is, we need the protesters to stay safe, so that they can use their voices at the ballot box, because this is where it shows, where elections are important, that people we're putting in positions of as prosecutors are very important because we need people who are not just going to allow police to fire blindly.

We talk about Kenny Walker firing one shot. Daniel Cameron's own testimony today counted 32 rounds fired into Breonna Taylor's apartment and neighboring apartments by law enforcement. How do you justify that?

So, we need people to stay safe, so that we can continue to exercise our voice, continue to protest, where we got to turn that protest into power and change the laws.

CUOMO: And just to pick up one point of Counselor Romines, and I'll let you two go, I know it's been a long night, and you have a long way to go.

It is very unusual for a prosecutor to determine that level of justification in a grand jury. Whether or not it was probable cause, which is the grand jury standard that a crime was committed is a pretty low bar, hence the expression, "You can indict a ham sandwich." And the idea of--

ROMINES: Well it--

CUOMO: --whether or not this was a justified shooting, you would think would go to a jury. It certainly would--

BAKER: It should.

CUOMO: --if it didn't involve cops. But Counselors?

BAKER: It should.

ROMINES: That's exactly right.

CUOMO: Counselors, we will talk again. I want to be fair. I want to understand the facts. I don't want you to violate any discovery rules. But anything I can be given, that helps people understand this situation, I will willingly process it, and I will always protect my sources.

Lonita Baker, Steven Romines, thank you.

BAKER: Thank you.

CUOMO: All right, look, now you have an idea of the law, and you get why it's frustrating, all right?

And look, I don't want the Taylor family to have to take on the mantle of leadership, in all their pain, but that's where we're left in the vacuum of people stepping up. And yes, I do start with the President. This is a national problem. There is nothing special about Kentucky. Anybody can fall prey to this, this dynamic.

So, let's look more into the intricacies of why a grand jury making the determinations it did is worthy of curiosity. Two top legal minds, next.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TEXT: CUOMO PRIME TIME.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[21:35:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TEXT: LET'S GET AFTER IT.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CUOMO: On Breonna Taylor, Mr. Attorney General, you're welcome to come on the show, the Governor, you're welcome to come on the show.

Please release the entire file. This is all about people having clarity and clarity gives confidence. Let us see what the ballistics show. Let us see what the interviews show and how many you did.

Is it true that the person, the witness who told you he heard the police announce? So, we hear that they knocked, but who was knocking? Did they announce? Is it true that the person you interviewed, who went to the grand jury, and said they said "Police," said "No" the first time you asked him about it?

Please release the information. The more that is out there, the more people can get their mind around even something they don't like as an outcome. Fairness under law does not guarantee outcomes.

Now tonight, we're monitoring the fallout, one police officer shot and wounded this evening, unacceptable. It's against everything we're supposed to be about as a society. The more we learn about their condition, and who did it, the more I will tell you.

We're also working to understand - the case goes nowhere from here after this. Criminally, that's it. Unless they have new evidence, the grand jury is saying there's nothing to indict on. That's that.

Let's bring in Joey Jackson, and Laura Coates.

You heard me ask for the file to come out. Laura Coates, relevant - if I seem like I'm doing a little too micro on this, blow it up, and go macro, that's fine.

But my head is in the weeds, right now, because I'm upset that I got told one thing about the ballistics, from one person, who said they saw it, or knew about it, and another thing from somebody who is reading it off a piece of paper.

This should not be difficult to determine, right, in a ballistics report about whether or not they believe they know where the bullet came from that hit Officer Mattingly, true?

[21:40:00]

LAURA COATES, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR, SIRIUSXM HOST, "THE LAURA COATES SHOW": It should not be difficult to assess, particularly given that they have all the information, they've had, what, a 190-plus days to figure it out?

And you have an Officer, who has fired, months ago, the Officer who is now charged, the Police Chief was able to come to some conclusion about the case at that point in time. And now, all these months later, we're still finding out.

Imagine if your head is spinning, imagine the family of Breonna Taylor, who has essentially been told that as an innocent bystander, she happens to have been converted into collateral damage, and how callous does that sound, because they're saying, "Doesn't really matter as long as they justify the use of force by the officers."

We don't know whether they presented that to the grand jury, whether they actually told the grand jury arguments in favor of the person, the officers, actually using reasonable amount of force or the other.

All we know right now, is that the officers who posed a threat to life has been charged, but those who actually took a life had walked away scot-free. That's hard to reconcile for even the greatest minds.

CUOMO: Now, people will say, "Joey, who cares what bullet hit Mattingly? Walker fired and then they were justified, they had to fire back."

JOEY JACKSON, CNN LEGAL ANALYST, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: At what point, Chris, does force become so excessive that it goes into the bounds of criminality, right?

So, let's back this up. When you look at a grand jury, I think everyone should be clear on the standard. We're not talking about a body that convenes, that has to make the unanimous decision. We're talking about a body that votes, and they have to, by majority, make a conclusion.

We're also talking about a body that's not talking about proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. We're talking about whether there's reasonable cause to believe that a crime was committed, and the subjects before the grand jury committed it.

In addition, when you just said before, about a grand jury indicting a ham sandwich, well if that's the case, what happened here?

Well I'll tell you what happened. Grand juries are controlled by the prosecutor. And grand jurors generally reach outcomes that prosecutors advance upon them and what they talk to them and they recommend and advise.

And so, what I'd like to determine here, is what specifically was put before them? What information did they have? We talk about the issue of the conflict, with respect to, did the police identify themselves? You heard the Attorney General say that one did.

Well what about the other 12 who said they did not? Were those people presented before the grand jury or were they not presented? Was selective information given to the grand jury or was it not?

Final point, we can debate night and day, was the force excessive, was 32 shots was it proportionate to the threat posed, was there an immediacy of the threat, where did the ballistics come from? These are determinations that jurors make every day in this country.

And if we allow a prosecutor to present it to a grand jury, and they get an indictment, ham sandwich remember, then you could have a jury in a jury room rendering verdicts, having these arguments.

But when you short-circuit the process, Chris, it goes to the issue of accountability and a lack of transparency with regard to you calling for every record to be shown. That's what upsets people so much, because the system does not work for everyone and that's problematic.

CUOMO: So Laura, the pushback on that is, "Well hold on a second. This wasn't a buddy of the cops. This was an A.G., happened to be a Black A.G., and he's working on the part of the people to bring a case.

So, that's everything that you supposedly wanted, as a concerned citizen here, Laura. It wasn't a local prosecutor who may be too close to the police. It was the A.G. It's a Black guy. Why isn't that enough?"

COATES: Well the standard of objectivity is neither distance from the actual occurrence or the race of the person who is assessing and evaluating. It's about whether somebody has approached it in a meritorious

fashion, whether they are bringing with them the objectivity of receiving the information and presenting it in a way that they would if it was a civilian-involved shooting, who actually pulled the trigger, and left somebody dead.

And so, the idea here that his race or the fact that he is a specially-assigned prosecutor does not have much weight, if there is evidence to suggest that he did not, or as a part of the team, did not look at the data without giving a benefit of the doubt to the police officers.

As you know, the Supreme Court case law, unfortunately, is quite clear on giving a very broad and over-inclusive benefit of the doubt that's akin to a carte blanche to officers, when there is a reasonable standard that it has to be viewed from the eyes of an officer, not somebody like you and I. As long as that persists, the objectivity of every prosecutor examining these cases will always be questionable.

CUOMO: I got to tell you something.

[21:45:00]

This determination, by the grand jury and the reckoning by the Attorney General starts to bring into sharp focus, the decision of that municipality to settle the wrongful death civil claim for Breonna Taylor, which was an historic mark in terms of how much money was given to a Black female victim before the criminal matter was finished.

That is very unusual. You usually wait for the criminal case, and then do the civil liability. Didn't happen here, and it makes you wonder why, given what just happened.

Joey Jackson, Laura Coates, thank you both.

JOEY JACKSON: Thanks.

CUOMO: All right, we're going to stay on this breaking story. The police say that they're going to hold a press conference. We're hoping that it sheds some light on what may have happened to an officer tonight.

There are reports that an officer was shot in Kentucky, surrounding the events in Louisville with Breonna Taylor. As soon as I get the information, I will bring it to you. We'll be right back.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TEXT: CUOMO PRIME TIME.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) TEXT: LET'S GET AFTER IT.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CUOMO: All right, we're waiting on the police, in Louisville, to give us a press conference about what happened to one of the officers tonight and the situation on the ground. As soon as it comes, we will give it to you.

[21:50:00]

But right now, I want to bring in something that's very important, not getting enough attention. Our next guest was mentioned by Dr. Fauci today, while he raised concerns about long-haul syndrome.

We've been talking about this. You are going to hear more about it.

People who were largely asymptomatic, or have short cases that end and resolve quickly, they're not out of the woods. We're learning about weird symptoms that sometimes kill people, plague people for weeks and months that they don't know anything about.

Listen to Dr. Fauci.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DR. ANTHONY FAUCI, DIRECTOR OF THE NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ALLERGY AND INFECTIOUS DISEASES: I bring to your attention the fact that a number of individuals, who virologically have recovered from infection, in fact have persistence measured in weeks to months of symptomatology that does not appear to be due to persistence of the virus.

They're referred to as long-haulers. They have fatigue, myalgia, fever, an involvement of the neurological system as well as cognitive abnormalities such as the inability to concentrate.

These are the kind of things that tell us we must be humble, and that we do not completely understand the nature of this illness.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CUOMO: Completely understand? They don't know anything. I can't tell you how many experts and people who are with Fauci call me to talk about what I'm experiencing. And I'm on the mild side.

Let's bring in Dr. William Li, who studies the long-term impacts of COVID-19. He and I have kind of been going on this journey together with long-haul. He's joined by Andrea Ceresa, a long-hauler, waiting for her coverage via the ACA.

All right, so now we have a conflation here, right? She's a long- hauler. I want her to tell you what she's dealing with. And now, she would have a pre-existing condition.

What if this case in November finds that the ACA has been to be completely done? Trump says he's going to fix it by executive order. He can't. He can't cover pre-existing conditions by executive order. What happens to somebody like her, who has to pay for it?

So Andrea, let's start with you. Thank you for joining me.

ANDREA CERESA, COVID-19 LONG-HAULER: Thank you so much, Chris.

CUOMO: You look great for someone who's struggling. Tell the audience what you're dealing with and what your concern is.

CERESA: So, I'm sorry you're still going through it as well, Chris, and I appreciate you having me, and being such an advocate for all of us long-haulers.

It was certainly amazing to hear Dr. Fauci today as I'm sure you felt the same way.

So, today is actually Day 160 for me. I started to feel ill April 17th. And I was feeling flu-like, and I had severe gastro issues. Since then, I am running the gamut of everything.

I have brain fog, hearing loss, severe nausea, every gastro symptom you can imagine. I have heart palpitations, severe neuropathy in my hands, my feet, now it's in my arms, and my legs. I have extreme exhaustion, weight loss. I have severe weight loss--

CUOMO: And you had none of these things before?

CERESA: I was very healthy. I'm 46-years-old. I have a fantastic diet. I had a successful career, singing career, as well, on the side of my day job.

No pre-existing conditions. I have never had a problem. I have always had health insurance through my job. It's never been an issue. So, no, this is completely new to me. I have never had to deal with anything like this before in my life.

CUOMO: So, Dr. Li, first of all, what solace can you give Andrea in terms of - I see you nodding your head because I know you've heard exactly this before.

DR. WILLIAM LI, STUDYING LONG-TERM IMPACTS OF COVID-19, PRESIDENT & MEDICAL DIRECTOR, THE ANGIOGENESIS FOUNDATION: Well that's the amazing thing, Chris. And Andrea, thank you for appearing and telling your story.

CERESA: Hi, Dr. Li.

LI: This is a - this is a lung condition is what we thought. And now, it actually affects the whole body and weeks to months later.

And so, the solace is that number one, thanks to people like Andrea, and her fellow advocates, and to you, Chris, doctors are finally starting to recognize that this thing even exists. And Dr. Fauci made it absolutely clear today in his statement.

And so, knowledge is the first step to actually finding an effective treatment. But here's the dilemma. If long-haulers didn't exist before the COVID, and now it exists, is that a pre-existing condition? We can't get on top of it.

Is this going to actually add to the burden of healthcare and make it difficult for people to get insurance? That is one of the big problems that's facing everyone ahead.

[21:55:00]

CUOMO: And Andrea, I just want you to know something. I hope you know already. Don't listen to the President when he says it affects nobody. I know that's deeply insulting. I know you get that he's saying it because he's just trying to mitigate it.

But I've heard from so many people, like you, who say how demoralizing that was, how dehumanizing, and humiliating, and that you feel like you suffered in silence already, let alone to know that he doesn't even care apparently.

It's not about him. It's about people coming together and the systems in the society working to help one another and to help the people who need it. Leave the politics out of it because it's not going to be the solution for it, at least not on his end.

So, I wish you the best. We're family now.

CERESA: Thank you.

CUOMO: You stay in touch with me about what's going on. If there's an update that's necessary, I'll bring you back, if you want to do it. And Dr. Li, as always, thank you for providing the proper context, OK?

LI: My pleasure.

CERESA: Thank you.

CUOMO: Now again, we got to focus on what matters. We got to keep our eye on a lot of different balls these days. When the Louisville Police want to explain what happened there tonight, as soon as they give us the information, I'll go there with you.

Let's take a quick break.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TEXT: CUOMO PRIME TIME.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TEXT: LET'S GET AFTER IT.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CUOMO: I've got to pass the baton to the star, D. Lemon. "CNN TONIGHT" continues. We are monitoring coverage in Louisville. The police are about to have a presser. As soon as it does, Don will go to it.

DON LEMON, CNN HOST: And here we go with another night of unrest in America, after so many nights, both of us covered this summer, Chris. I'm going to get straight to it. Thank you. I'll see you soon, buddy.

This is our breaking news tonight, protests in cities around the country demanding justice for Breonna Taylor.