Return to Transcripts main page

The Lead with Jake Tapper

New Video Shows Medics Trying to Revive George Floyd; Parents of Marine Vet Held In Russia Turn to Biden Admin for Help; Fourth Day of Testimony in Derek Chauvin Trial. Aired 4-4:30p ET

Aired April 01, 2021 - 16:00   ET

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

[16:00:29]

JAKE TAPPER, CNN HOST: Welcome to THE LEAD. I'm Jake Tapper.

We start today with our national lead, and the trial of former Minneapolis Police Officer Derek Chauvin.

Today, we saw new body camera video of paramedics attempting to revive George Floyd. And we heard firsthand from two of those medics who tried to save Floyd's life. Seth Bravinder testified that Floyd appeared to be motionless, did not appear to be breathing, and multiple officers were still on top of him. The medic said when he started to load Floyd's body into the ambulance, Floyd's body was limp.

Today, we also heard from George Floyd's girlfriend of three years. She testified about both of their struggles with opioid addiction, drug use that the defense will claim was partially responsible for Floyd's death as CNN's Omar Jimenez reports. And before we go to that report, we must warn you, some of the images you're about to see are disturbing.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

OMAR JIMENEZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The moments when paramedics arrived for George Floyd in May 2020 are coming into clear focus. Paramedic Seth Bravinder and Derek Smith responded to the scene and arrived to an unresponsive Floyd.

Smith, seen here checking Floyd for vitals.

DEREK SMITH, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MN EMS: I did not detect a pulse.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: And what did his condition to appear to be to you? Overall.

SMITH: In lay terms, I thought he was dead.

JIMENEZ: The checking began while now former Officer Derek Chauvin still had his knee on Floyd's neck before Bravinder stepped in. What were you attempting to do at that point in time?

SETH BRAVINDER, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MN EMS: Just have the officer move. UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: And why did you need the officer to move?

BRAVINDER: So we could move the patient. Because he was -- I guess limp would be the best description.

JIMENEZ: Bravinder testified a cardiac monitor showed Floyd's heart had flat lined.

BRAVINDER: The heart isn't really doing anything at that moment.

JIMENEZ: During cross examination, the defense asked about whether overdose patients can regain consciousness and be aggressive.

ERIC NELSON, DEFENSE ATTORNEY FOR DEREK CHAUVIN: Have you personally seen that happen?

BRAVINDER: Yes.

JIMENEZ: Drug use was the center of how tearful testimony began Thursday.

Courteney Ross, George Floyd's girlfriend of three years, took the stand. But while emotional throughout, her testimony centered largely on both her and George Floyd's addiction to opioids.

COURTENEY BATYA ROSS, GEORGE FLOYD'S GIRLFRIEND: Classic story of how many people get addicted to opioids.

MATTHEW FRANK, PROSECUTING ATTORNEY: Did he have sports injuries he complained of?

ROSS: Yes, his neck. From his neck to shoulder blade and down his lower back.

JIMENEZ: The defense for Derek Chauvin is trying to make the case drugs in his system killed him, not Chauvin's knee to the neck.

So, when it was their turn to question Ross, they asked about an emergency trip to the hospital Floyd had just two months before his death.

NELSON: Did you later learn that was due to an overdose?

ROSS: Yes.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Objection.

NELSON: Did you learn what that -- what caused that overdose?

ROSS: No.

NELSON: At that timeframe, did you learn that Mr. Floyd was taking anything other than opioids?

ROSS: No.

NELSON: Okay.

You did not know he had taken heroin at that time?

ROSS: No.

JIMENEZ: She testified days before he died, Floyd was using again but never complained of shortness of breath or difficulty breathing.

FRANK: Had Mr. Floyd been an active person physically?

ROSS: Yes. He was very active.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

JIMENEZ (on camera): And court is on a break right now. Recently we've been listening to testimony from Minneapolis Fire Captain Jeremy Norton who got to the scene shortly after paramedics started working on Floyd. He said he actually recognized the off-duty firefighter, Genevieve Hansen, who helped fill him in on what happened. They had to place a device on Floyd to essentially breathe for him. When asked if anyone ever found a pulse, he said no -- Jake.

TAPPER: All right. Omar Jimenez, thank you so much.

Let's discuss with our panel.

Jennifer, let me start with you.

One of the paramedics who treated George Floyd testified when he arrived on the scene he thought that there must have still been a struggle going on because the officers were on top of Mr. Floyd. But then he said he could tell from a distance that George Floyd was unresponsive, wasn't even breathing from his view.

Why is that important?

JENNIFER RODGERS, ADJUNCT PROFESSOR, NYU LAW SCHOOL: Well, Jake, it's really powerful testimony in the prosecution's bid to set these building blocks that Derek Chauvin's actions were unreasonable and constitute excessive force because the paramedic comes and sees immediately that George Floyd is limp and in fact he said in layman's terms, he thought he was dead.

Meanwhile, you had all these police officers, including, of course, Officer Chauvin, literally right there on top of Gorge Floyd, and it just raises the question in the jury's mind, how could they have not have known? Why weren't they doing anything about the fact that Floyd was clearly nonresponsive if not dead at that moment?

TAPPER: And, Van, take a listen to one of the paramedics describing why the paramedics did not treat George Floyd onto the scene, instead of loading him into the ambulance and relocating?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

NELSON: You and your partner decided to do what's called a load and go, right?

BRAVINDER: To get into the ambulance, yes.

NELSON: Right. And to leave?

BRAVINDER: To move. We didn't leave. We moved to a different location, yes.

NELSON: Right. And that was out of concern because of the people that were around, right? And the general atmosphere at the scene at that point?

BRAVINDER: Yes. That was part of it, yes.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

TAPPER: This seems to be part of the defense team's argument that police officers on the scene, they were the ones who felt threatened.

VAN JONES, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Yeah, I mean, that's the only thing they can keep coming back to, and the problem is that the video itself tells a very different story. There's -- it's a relatively small crowd of people. You would think there were 10,000 people, like, at the Capitol, doing something horrific stuff. You had a relatively small handful of people who were very upset because of what they have been describing all week of just a horror show of a man being tortured to death.

But there's nobody throwing bricks. There's nobody throwing bottles. They're not calling for backup. The cops are not calling for more police to come out. In fact, if the crowd had been that aggressive, they would have gotten off George Floyd to get in a defensive posture for themselves.

So, you know, they're trying to throw these little seeds of doubt out there. But it doesn't add up. You just have to hope that nobody on the jury falls for it.

TAPPER: And, Jennifer, the prosecution had Mr. Floyd's girlfriend talk in depth about not just the relationship but their drug use and the different types of pills they took. I know the prosecution is trying to head off arguments by the defense that those drugs and Mr. Floyd's prior health conditions are what killed him, not Officer Chauvin.

But do you think that was a risky move at all by the prosecution to introduce this evidence that he was a drug addict?

RODGERS: I don't think so, Jake. You know, they're really trying to, as you said, draw this in. You don't want to have a gotcha moment where the defense lawyer makes it look like the prosecution is hiding something. So, they're going to go ahead and front all this potentially negative information about George Floyd and it's really going to come front and center when we talk about causation which will come in the next few days. So, they're not going to be able to get away from it, better to just to get it out there, explain to the jury what it was all about, and I think nowadays with the way that we've seen the opioid epidemic over the last few years, jurors are not going to be as negative about that.

They're going to be more understanding and having the girlfriend explain how it all happened, how they both struggled with it and letting her tell the jury about George Floyd and his struggles humanizes him in a way that while maybe not helpful on the drug front, at least is not as harmful as it could otherwise be.

TAPPER: Yeah, that struck me, too. And, Van, the conversation about addiction has shifted in recent years, from a criminal issue to a public health issue. There's obviously a racial component here e that that books and half of Chappelle's actor focuses on, but truth of the matter is, this country has much greater awareness theoretically of what addiction to opioids means.

But there's really no telling how this jury is going to take that information.

JONES: There really isn't. It is, in fact, the case that there are enough people now who know someone or have had the experience, somebody goes to get a tooth pulled and they find themselves having a very hard time getting off of opioids, certainly people with sports injuries. And so, you know, I think that for better or worse, fair or unfair, I do think that Americans put the opioid addiction in a different category than other forms of addiction and that could play out well for George Floyd's family.

But you just never know. Some people have a zero tolerance, you know, if you are addicted to anything, you must be a bad person. You only need one person that has that kind of a mindset on the jury to give you a bad outcome here.

TAPPER: And that's all the defense needs, one person.

Van, Jennifer, thanks to both of you. Appreciate it.

We're going to get back to the trial of Derek Chauvin in a second.

But first, almost two years and counting, inside a Russian prison with no communication with mom and dad, we're going to talk to Trevor Reed's parents about the fight to free their son, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:14:15]

TAPPER: In our world lead today, the parents of a U.S. Marine Corps veteran locked up in Russia are putting new faith in the Biden administration to help get their son back safely to U.S. soil. Twenty- nine-year-old Trevor Reed has been in a Russian prison for almost two years now, secretly transferred just last month from one facility to another. Communication with his parents has been cut off.

All this started in 2019 when reed traveled to Russia to visit his girlfriend after a night out partying, Reed found himself in a Russian jail, accused of assaulting two police officers. His parents say trumped up charges led to a nine-year sentence behind bars.

And his parents, Paula and Joey Reed, join us now.

Thank you so much for taking the time to share this story with us.

JOEY REED, FATHER OF U.S. MARINE VETERAN IMPRISONED IN RUSSIA: Thank you.

TAPPER: Have you -- have you heard from your son since he was moved to a new detention facility last month?

[16:15:08]

J. REED: Ah, yes, we spoke with him this morning. He was able to make a short phone call.

TAPPER: And how is he doing?

J. REED: He's healthy right now. He's just, you know, emotionally, he's obviously concerned that he's going to be there for another eight years, but otherwise, he's doing okay.

TAPPER: And you believe that Trevor's former job in the Marines has something to do with why Russia is so adamant on keeping him in custody? Tell us about that.

J. REED: Yes, sir. First of all, he is innocent. There were witnesses that said what the police said was a lie. The traffic camera video showed that the police lied and videos from inside the police car and the police station were denied to the defense. It was clear to everyone that it was a fact charge.

But Trevor's military background is why we believe he has been held. The FSB came to the police station that morning, interrogated him, asking him nothing other than things about his military career, which he, you know, basically, name, rank and serial number, old school.

And we've not spoken about his military career in Russia or here, but we think it's time that we speak out about his career. In boot camp, Marine boot camp, he joined the infantry, but he was selected for the presidential support program and then later became what's known as a presidential guard. He was assigned marine barracks Washington, D.C. and then he was assigned at Camp David, presidential retreat.

And he was honorably discharged after over five years and we believe this is one of the main reasons that he was held by the Russians and then given the longest prison sentence of anyone in Russia in 20 years for this charge. And he never hurt anyone, never intended to hurt anyone, it's completely bogus.

PAULA REED, MOTHER OF U.S. MARINE VETERAN IMPRISONED IN RUSSIA: Also, that was during the Obama administration.

J. REED: Obama/Biden administration, yes.

P. REED: Yes. TAPPER: Yeah. And, Paula, how are you doing with all of this? I can't imagine you've had any sleep in two years.

P. REED: Yes, basically I do have a lot of sleepless nights. So, some days I'm hardly able to function because of sleep deprivation. Sometimes just from extreme worry, you know, all day long I worry about things, about Trevor. Mostly I worry about the time that's been taken away from him, time being in there. It's some of the best years of his life, you know, so, it is hard. It's hard to deal with.

TAPPER: Since the Biden administration has come into office, I'm told that you have been in touch with the secretary of state, Antony Blinken. What did he have to say?

P. REED: He said he was going to work hard, of course, to bring Trevor home and to every opportunity that they could discuss bringing Trevor home with the Russians, they would do that and they would give us transparency, keep us in the loop about what they're doing, what they plan to do and we were very pleased to hear that.

TAPPER: And, Joey, I understand you've spent the better part of last year in Russia, trying to be there for your son, this entire ordeal has to be so draining on your family, not just financially, but emotionally, as well.

J. REED: Yes, sir, both. I spent over 13 months in Russia on two different trips, working with the attorneys in the embassy to, you know, try and work through the Russian legal system, which we've, you know, we finally realized is -- it's not a judicial system, it's a punishment system, and everyone who gets into that system is considered guilty and it's just a matter of how long your sentence will be.

And in Trevor's case, he was put there, we believe, by the FSB and that's how the case went.

And so it's -- it's been draining on us, you know, emotionally and financially, but we're doing all right, we're hanging in there and just fighting for our son. We want the American public to know about him and maybe elevate his case with the White House.

TAPPER: Let's make sure that President Biden and President Putin know about this and know that we are paying attention and that Trevor Reed deserves to come home.

Paula and Joey Reed, thank you so much for your time. Stay in touch. We'll have you back. Hopefully there won't be much of a need to, but we're going to stay on the case with you.

J. REED: Thank you so much.

P. REED: Thank you very much. We appreciate it.

TAPPER: The trial of Derek Chauvin has resumed. Right now, a retired officer with the Minneapolis police department is testifying. Let's listen in. SGT. DAVID PLEOGER (RET.), MINNEAPOLIS POLICE DEPT. -- result in me

doing that, strikes, any injury, or claimed injury by arresting party.

STEVE SCHLEICHER, PROSECUTING ATTORNEY: And so when an officer uses force, a patrol officer, and you're their supervisor, they have to report it to you and there are circumstances where they just don't, is that right?

[16:20:05]

PLEOGER: That's correct.

SCHLEICHER: And there are some circumstances where they have to write a report and some where they do not, true?

PLEOGER: Right.

SCHLEICHER: So, are you particular with use of force reporting requirements 5-306? That policy generally?

PLEOGER: You'd have to read the headline for me to get it.

SCHLEICHER: Well, I'm going to show you then what's been marked for identification at exhibit 221, 5-306. You read the title there?

PLEOGER: Use of force reporting in post-incident requirements.

SCHLEICHER: And you see the -- did I introduce this? I'm sorry, Your Honor. At this time, the state offers Exhibit 221.

JUDGE PETER CAHILL: Let's go side bar for a second.

TAPPER: While the lawyers take a little side bar there, we're going to sneak in another break and we'll be right back with more in the Derek Chauvin trial.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[16:26:05]

TAPPER: Welcome back to THE LEAD.

The trial of former Minneapolis Police Officer Derek Chauvin is continuing. Let's listen in.

SCHLEICHER: I'd like to talk to you about another policy and if I could pull up exhibit 225, are you familiar with the Minneapolis police department policy regarding the use of maximum restraint technique or the hobble?

PLEOGER: Yes.

SCHLEICHER: OK, this is very high level. Can you explain what a hobble is?

PLEOGER: Basically a device used to take control of someone's hands and feet at the same time to prevent them from kicking or acting out aggressively.

SCHLEICHER: Is this a situation in which the subject would already be handcuffed?

PLEOGER: Yes.

SCHLEICHER: All right. And so, you -- hands would be restrained. How would the feet be restrained?

PLEOGER: They'd be hooked together with the hobble and then the end of the hobble oftentimes ran through the belt or somewhere by the waist to prevent them from kicking.

SCHLEICHER: And that was my next question, that would be the purpose is to prevent kicking of a restrained subject, is that right?

PLEOGER: Yes.

SCHLEICHER: And the hobble or the maximal restraint technique also requires supervisory reporting, is that right?

PLEOGER: It does.

SCHLEICHER: If you would highlight section Roman four -- three? And you can see here, by policy, that a supervisor shall be called to the scene where a subject has been restrained using the MRT or the hobble, is that right?

PLEOGER: Yes.

SCHLEICHER: And then as a supervisor, you would have to go and evaluate whether the hobble was properly and necessarily used, is that right?

PLEOGER: Yes.

SCHLEICHER: And then, if you could highlight section B, on that same page. After a hobble is used on an individual, and typically, when a hobble is used, it means that the person has been placed in a prone position, is that right?

PLEOGER: That's correct.

SCHLEICHER: At least initially to get the hobble on?

PLEOGER: Yes.

SCHLEICHER: Can you explain to the jury what the prone position is?

PLEOGER: Basically flat on your stomach on the ground.

SCHLEICHER: All right. Once a hobble is used to restrain the hands and the feet, and the subject is on a prone position, what does the policy require an officer to do?

PLEOGER: Put them in the side recovery position. SCHLEICHER: What is the side recovery position?

PLEOGER: Basically roll them up on their side to ease their breathing rather than leave them laying on their stomach or chest.

SCHLEICHER: And do you know why that's important?

PLEOGER: Well, it helps them breathe better, rather than having all the weight on their chest, it gets them up on their side so they can breathe easier.

SCHLEICHER: Are you familiar with the term positional asphyxia?

PLEOGER: Yes.

SCHLEICHER: How are you familiar with that term?

PLEOGER: We've had it in training at MPD.

SCHLEICHER: How long have you personally been aware of positional asphyxia?

PLEOGER: A lot of years, 10, 15.

SCHLEICHER: Okay. Based on your experience as a Minneapolis police officer, are the dangers of positional asphyxia generally known throughout the department?

PLEOGER: Yes, I believe so.

SCHLEICHER: That's something that officers are trained on?

PLEOGER: Correct.

SCHLEICHER: And when we talk about positional asphyxia at a high level, could you explain what positional asphyxia is, as you've been trained?

PLEOGER: If you restrain somebody or leave them on their chest and stomach for too long, their breathing can become compromised and so you'd want to get them up out of that position after awhile so they don't suffer breathing complications.

SCHLEICHER: And that's why the policy requires and the training is that you roll someone onto the side recovery position?

PLEOGER: Yes.

SCHLEICHER: And are you aware of whether or not people are allowed to be transported in the prone position restrained?

PLEOGER: I believe they should be transported in the recovery position.

[16:30:00]