Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Police During Briefing: Officer Drew Handgun Instead of Taser, Shot Daunte Wright; Soon, George Floyd's Brother to Testify in Chauvin Murder Trial; Cardiologist Can Say With "High Degree" of Certainty that George Floyd Did Not Die of a Cardiac Event or Drug Overdose. Aired 1:30-2p ET

Aired April 12, 2021 - 13:30   ET

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

[13:30:00]

TIM GANNON, CHIEF, BROOKLYN CENTER, MINNESOTA, POLICE DEPARTMENT: Every circumstance is different around every shooting. It's tragic every time. The loss of life is obviously tragic.

But there are different circumstances around every situation. In this particular situation, it was very important for me to get that have had out as quickly as possible. And that's what I did.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Chief, absolutely -- I've lived in Minnesota several years, worked here. Can you tell us a little bit about how long the officer was on the force here in Brooklyn Center?

Was she around when -- (INAUDIBLE) -- was pulled from the body of water six years ago today?

GANNON: The information on the officer is she's a very senior officer. That's the extent that I can do.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Is there a difference between those -- (INAUDIBLE)?

GANNON: A very senior officer. And I do believe the BCA will be releasing all the information, training records, everything that they have, they'll be releasing that. That's public data. That will be coming out shortly.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Chief, what is the normal protocol and process for response to protesters, and was that protocol and process followed last night?

GANNON: There was strict adherence to the policy of working with the protest when it turns into a riot.

Last night, there were numerous warnings to disperse. Because it was an unlawful assembly. It was declared at least five times while I was there. Plenty of time was given to disperse and it was not.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Was it your decision to release tear gas and to fire bullets -- rubber bullets at the young protesters?

GANNON: This is -- I'm the police chief in this city. Police action is made by me. The decision is made by me.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: So that --

GANNON: Does that answer your question?

UNIDENTIFIED ACTIVIST: So I have a question.

Upon myself, and other organizers and activists coming up to the police station, we were really shocked to see utter darkness, to see all the lights, both interior and exterior, extending all the way out, making the street virtually dark.

We were really shocked and surprised to see that.

From my experience, and I would imagine most other people's experiences, law enforcement would want to have as much light as possible to be able to see whatever is going on.

I was told that the moment the lights all went down, that created a certain level of mood, a certain agitation within the crowd.

What was your thinking? Because I was told that you made the ultimate call to turn all the lights off. Even the streetlights that was out in front of the building, to turn all of the lights off.

What was your thinking about turning off the lights in the midst of people coming and attempting to --

(CROSSTALK)

UNIDENTIFIED ACTIVIST: -- at the police station. What was your decision behind?

GANNON: I don't know about the lights on the street. But I know the building lights were turned off. Because they created a back lighting for the officers that were on the front lines.

They became targets for concrete blocks, frozen cans that I personally saw and ducked. That's what I turned those lights off so --

(CROSSTALK)

GANNON: So --

UNIDENTIFIED ACTIVIST: So the lights made them less of targets?

GANNON: Yes. They weren't back lit. The people in front, they couldn't see.

If we have lights in front of us, that's what the police department would like to have. We'd like to be looking out forward, not behind us, then you get back lit. UNIDENTIFIED ACTIVIST: The lights I'm talking about were all around

the -- so the lights were all around the front part of the building. The police were well behind that.

But it just created an entire darkness around. It seemed very unusual for a station to have all the lights off, including the lights all in the streets, creating utter darkness and a lot of confusion and a real ominous kind of mood.

I would say that is very unusual. I've been to a lot of police stations. I've been to a lot of protests. And I've been to a lot of these types of events. I have never seen the police department utterly shut down all of the lights.

What was your thinking behind, not the back lit lights, but all of the lights, even in the front part of the police station, in general, to create utter darkness?

GANNON: Sir --

(CROSSTALK)

UNIDENTIFIED ACTIVIST: And then, also, one final question.

What was your decision to issue a dispersal order while they were peacefully protesting in front of the police station? What led to you to issue a dispersal order?

And then, on the back end of that 10-minute dispersal order, then issue of CO2 canisters and gas for the crowd?

GANNON: So --

UNIDENTIFIED ACTIVIST: Can you talk to us about that?

GANNON: Just so everybody's clear, I was front and center at the protest, at the riot. We did not --

UNIDENTIFIED ACTIVIST: It was a --

(CROSSTALK)

GANNON: Don't do that.

UNIDENTIFIED ACTIVIST: There was no riot.

(CROSSTALK)

GANNON: There was.

So, we were being -- the officers that were putting themselves in harm's way were being pelted with frozen cans of pop. They were being pelted with concrete blocks.

And, yes, we had our helmets on and we had other protective gear on. But an officer was injured, hit in the head with a brick. That was a Hennepin County deputy. He was transported to the hospital.

So we had to make decisions. We had to disperse the crowd because we couldn't allow our officers to be harmed.

(CROSSTALK)

GANNON: And I've already answered the question, I believe, about your lighting. I know that's a big deal with you and I understand that.

But I thought I explained that myself. That is -- I told you, it's my decision, and that's why I made that decision.

(CROSSTALK)

Is there another question?

Yes, ma'am?

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: The room is tense. I can feel it.

GANNON: Yes, ma'am?

[13:35:00]

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: What is on your heart?

(CROSSTALK)

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Let him answer, guys.

GANNON: Sure.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Speak to us for real, like keep it 100.

GANNON: This is what I'm here for. OK? I'm the leader of this department. They expect me to lead. Create a safe city. That's what I'm trying to do.

(CROSSTALK)

GANNON: So that's it.

(CROSSTALK)

GANNON: OK? And, yes, I'm emotional.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Guys, he's being honest.

GANNON: I'm just trying to be honest.

UNIDENTIFIED ACTIVIST: When -- I have a question for you.

GANNON: Yes, sir.

UNIDENTIFIED ACTIVIST: When you asked the protesters to take a step back across the street, what was the reasoning for, after they went across the street, you shot your tear gas grenades and flash bangs where the people were, across the street where you had originally told them to be.

GANNON: Sure. The only time that we -- in every situation that we had we returned fire.

So when we got pelted with bricks, or frozen cans, which we've collected -- and we photographed the evidence. We have the evidence. We can show that to you in the future.

But once we got pelted, then we responded in kind.

(CROSSTALK)

GANNON: And you know, the distance that --

(CROSSTALK)

GANNON: There was a distance. And everything that --

UNIDENTIFIED ACTIVIST: -- out there who had nothing to do with throwing anything. That's the danger of turning out the lights --

GANNON: Sure.

UNIDENTIFIED ACTIVIST: -- and firing tear gas and firing rubber bullets and firing flash bang grenades at people who were just exercising their First Amendment rights --

GANNON: Sure.

UNIDENTIFIED ACTIVIST: -- their freedom of speech. That's the problem, Chief.

UNIDENTIFIED ACTIVIST: I understand that.

UNIDENTIFIED ACTIVIST: Would you do things differently?

GANNON: Would I do things differently last night?

UNIDENTIFIED ACTIVIST: Last night --

(CROSSTALK)

GANNON: Absolutely not. Absolutely not.

We had a situation -- we had a situation where we were bringing in arrest teams. We were worried, how many people with were we going to arrest.

When he started moving the people, finally, hours into this situation, do you know how many people we arrested that stayed? Two people.

If we hadn't done that, if we hadn't moved people along, I don't know what would have happened. And I don't know where they would have reformed. But the people that left were allowed to leave. We didn't trap them.

We didn't make mass arrests. We arrested two people.

UNIDENTIFIED ACTIVIST: So what are the plans for tonight at this protest?

GANNON: Tonight? Tonight, if it's a peaceful protest, if it's a First Amendment protest, go to it.

UNIDENTIFIED ACTIVIST: What's your definition of a peaceful protest?

GANNON: Not being pelted with bricks, blocks, and being targeted.

UNIDENTIFIED ACTIVIST: What was it like yesterday when your people up with their hands up --

GANNON: Yes.

UNIDENTIFIED ACTIVIST: -- they were being tear gassed. And you were talking about officers being hurt? We can count how many people got hurt yesterday, too.

(CROSSTALK)

UNIDENTIFIED ACTIVIST: I'm going to ask, again, would you do things differently tonight?

GANNON: We are going to have our officers lined up to protect this building, to protect the city as best we can. That's what we're going to do today.

(CROSSTALK)

GANNON: And that's what we do every day.

UNIDENTIFIED ACTIVIST: I've got one more question.

When the officers were firing tear gas and flash bangs, there was an apartment complex with families behind it. And that's where a lot of the flash bangs were going.

Had a flash bang went into one of those windows and started that building on fire, it could have put a lot of other people at risk.

GANNON: OK.

UNIDENTIFIED ACTIVIST: Why?

GANNON: I didn't see any flash bang that was even close to the apartments

(CROSSTALK)

GANNON: Fourteen hundred, 67th, I was there. I didn't see anything.

UNIDENTIFIED ACTIVIST: Sixty-seven -- GANNON: Forty, 6740.

UNIDENTIFIED ACTIVIST: Right over there, right over the building.

GANNON: OK.

UNIDENTIFIED ACTIVIST: We saw that last night.

GANNON: And I didn't -- I didn't see that myself.

UNIDENTIFIED ACTIVIST: Well, we saw it.

GANNON: I'm not discounting you.

UNIDENTIFIED ACTIVIST: Why was --

(CROSSTALK)

GANNON: Are there going to be more questions?

UNIDENTIFIED ACTIVIST: Why was Daunte Wright's body left in the street for hours?

GANNON: The due respect for Daunte was given at my order, to keep him, keep the respect of his body, whether that be covered it or fenced around.

But we needed to have it maintained because we needed the investigation to be complete and thorough. The documentation is not done by us. It's done by the BCA crime team, the entity that investigates these situations.

They came out as quickly as they could. They processed the scene as quickly as they could.

We did not want to -- as people have mentioned, once the officers left, the protests and the disturbance went away. We were trying to get our officers out there as soon as possible.

UNIDENTIFIED ACTIVIST: Do you understand how dehumanizing that was to have a body lay in the street for five hours?

GANNON: That was a priority of my assignment to get him removed from that as soon as possible without disturbing the crime scene so that we wouldn't be accused of tampering with the evidence.

MAYOR MIKE ELLIOTT (D-BROOKLYN CENTER, MN): All right, now, let me ask, Chief, are there any other questions here from any of the media folks?

No.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Thank you for your time.

ELLIOTT: Thank you.

OK, any --

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: I just have question.

ELLIOTT: Final question.

UNIDENTIFIED REPORTER: Final question.

So, Police Chief, we hear that you have committed to protecting the building and protecting the city tonight. If there are protests, will you commit to protecting protesters and the people of this city?

[13:40:00]

GANNON: I am committed to protecting the peaceful protesters of this city, every day.

UNIDENTIFIED ACTIVIST: Not yesterday.

UNIDENTIFIED ACTIVIST: Not yesterday.

GANNON: Peaceful protesters.

(CROSSTALK)

UNIDENTIFIED ACTIVIST: I was a peaceful protester, and they were targeting me.

GANNON: OK.

ELLIOTT: All right. So thank you, everybody.

Just to reiterate, you know, my commitment, our commitment as a city --

ANA CABRERA, CNN HOST: We've been listening in to what has become a heated press conference.

This is out of Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, just outside of Minneapolis, which, of course, is the location of the ongoing Derek Chauvin trial in the death of George Floyd.

This press conference followed another shooting involving an African- American man who died at the hands of law enforcement. And so as you can imagine, there's a lot of emotion in this community.

In this press conference, we learned that, what the police chief described was an accidental shooting, led to the death of this individual named Daunte Wright, who died after a police encounter.

He was pulled over in a traffic stop. There was a struggle with police officers, which we saw in the video.

And then, the police officer opened fire, shooting Daunte Wright before he got in the car and drove away, and eventually crashed that vehicle, and was determined to be dead.

I want to bring in our law enforcement analyst as well as our legal analyst.

We have a former federal prosecutor and CNN legal analyst, Laura Coates, as well as senior law enforcement analyst and the former Philadelphia police commissioner, Charles Ramsey, with us.

So much to talk about.

First, Commissioner Ramsey, at the beginning of this press conference, we saw the police body cam video from this encounter.

And I have to get your reaction to the chief saying it appears the officer pulled her gun instead of her taser.

CHARLES RAMSEY, CNN LAW ENFORCEMENT ANALYST: Yes, I, obviously, watched the video. First of all, let me say, I think the chief did the right thing getting that body worn camera video out there as quickly as he did.

People need to understand the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension have their own protocol around these things. But they did leave it up to the chief to make that decision.

And I think it was good that he did that, even though it did show the shooting is highly questionable and not justified.

So the officer apparently drew the gun instead of the taser, yelled "taser," but drew a gun. I don't know how you do that.

The reason you carry it cross draw, which means you carry it on the side opposite where you carry your firearm, is to avoid that kind of problem.

If you remember, back in 2009, there was a BART officer out in Oakland, California, that shot Mr. Grant, who was in a prone position.

He was carrying his taser and his gun on the same side, I believe, and he drew the gun as opposed to the taser. And departments across the country switch to make sure that couldn't happen again.

I mean, it is tragic. But it does need to play out in terms of the process and the investigation by BCA.

CABRERA: Now, you should note that this man was pulled over for an expired registration, initially. That was what led to the police encounter.

The chief says that this officer was a very senior officer, Commissioner. Just talk about the training, then, that this officer would have or should have received on tasers versus handguns.

RAMSEY: Well, yes, I mean you get all the training. But in the heat of the moment, apparently, sometimes that didn't kick in.

I'm not trying to make an excuse for the officer at all. But, you know, things play out on the street, they don't always go along the lines you'd like to see them go as far as the training goes. But clearly there was not the initial intent to shoot. There didn't

seem to be any indication at all that he was doing anything that would warrant deadly force at that moment in time.

But it happened. And so there are consequences that go along with that. There's absolutely no question about that.

But right now, they've got to be able to deal with the aftermath.

As far as the investigation, getting information out on the officer, dealing with protests that, no doubt, will take place tonight --

(CROSSTALK)

CABRERA: Which have already taken place and turned violent, which we saw last night, resulting in bricks being thrown or objects of some sort being thrown toward police.

Police, it sounds like, dispersed some kind of chemical agent at those protesters. In a separate location, there were businesses that were vandalized.

Laura, from a legal perspective, what did you see and hear in that press conference?

LAURA COATES, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Ana, I heard it also, as a mother, who one day will want her son to call her if there's a question about insurance or anything to do.

And so it's hard to look at exclusively with a compartmentalized lens for me, being a block woman, being the daughter, the wife and mother of black men.

But I look at this case and my immediate thoughts go to: What is the officer entitled to do if the suspect is fleeing?

Well, we have a 1985 Supreme Court case called the Garner case that talks about how officers are not entitled to use even deadly force for a fleeing suspect, unless that person who is fleeing presents a deadly harm to himself, the officers or anyone there.

[13:45:07]

A few years ago, there was a case in -- outside of Pittsburgh, a young man by the name of Antwon Rose shot as he's running away because the officer didn't bother to pursue him by foot.

You know, we have this continuum force that we know about in our country here where we allow officers the privilege to use force, only if it's reasonable, necessary and proportional.

So my first thought is, would she have been entitled to use a taser?

In the video, you see the weapon, or her insert her body in some way into the inside of the car. You wonder about whether that was trained, whether the use of force was OK at that point in time. I also learned that -- of course, from our own journalist, Adrienne

Broaddus, I believe asked the question, was she a senior, a veteran officer?

That factors in, in the calculus for me, about what a senior veteran officer would have been exposed to in the past, what judgment call she would have had to make. The idea of the split-second decision comes back.

And remember the Supreme Court does say we give a benefit of the doubt to officers because of split-second decisions. But we also gauge what they're doing by what other on-scene officers would have done.

And what we saw on the scene were other officers who tried to handcuff this young man.

If he had gone away, if he had fled in some way, we knew, based on the warrant, I presume, what his name is, possibly his location. We know his license. We know he's actually driving.

I hear no indication he was armed in some way to justify the use of deadly force.

So when I hear about this idea of an accidental deployment of a service weapon as opposed to the taser, all of these things come to mind.

And it just increases, in many respects, what you saw, that trust gap between the community and the police chief and the mayor.

Because, for the reasons Charles talked about.

I think about Fruitvale Station. I think about Oscar Grant. I think about the word "allegedly" attempted to use the taser instead of the actual weapon.

And this, for me, gives such anxiety, as a mother, a black woman, and also as a prosecutor trying to understand how I can gauge all of these things about reasonable force against a police union that's already going to say, well, due process should go to her as opposed to the young 20-year-old son of a mother.

CABRERA: And of course, nothing happens in a vacuum. Because just 10 miles away from this police-involved shooting in Minnesota is the murder trial of former Minneapolis police officer, Derek Chauvin. It's now in its third week of witness testimony.

They're currently on a lunch break right now. But we will soon hear from George Floyd's brother, who's expected to testify this afternoon.

Earlier today, we heard from Dr. Jonathan Rich. He's a cardiologist who researched George Floyd's medical records. Dr. Rich disputed the defense team's theory that Floyd died from other medical complications or drug use.

Here's what he said while being questioned by prosecutors. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DR. JONATHAN RICH, CARDIOLOGIST: After reviewing all of the facts in the case, I can state with a high degree of medical certainty that George Floyd did not die from a primary cardiac event. And he did not die from a drug overdose.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CABRERA: Let me come right back to you, Laura.

How important was this testimony from a cardiologist, after hearing last week from many other medical experts?

COATES: It's extremely compelling because it builds off what's already been said by the pulmonologist, who is the lung specialist, by a forensic pathologist, by the medical examiner. It reiterated all these points.

But it wasn't just redundant. He added to the actual story. He talked about the idea of what a mildly enlarged heart might have as an impact.

He talked about his discussions about Fentanyl overdose, how neither of those things, he believed, contributed.

And actually made the statement that this death, the death of Mr. George Floyd, he said, was absolutely preventable.

And then outlined the different ways it could have been prevented.

Beginning with taking off this restraint in the first instance, rendering CPR, even once a pulse was no longer detected, talking about even repositioning his body away from the prone position.

All of these things builds off, and reminds the jury where we left off on Friday.

This very compelling testimony about what could have been done to prevent his death, and how just the notion of a duty of care owed was withheld by these officers.

CABRERA: I want to play a clip from the defense questioning the cross-examination of this witness. Let's listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ERIC NELSON, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Did Mr. Floyd have a strong heart?

RICH: So, every indicator is that Mr. Floyd had actually an exceptionally strong heart because he was able to generate pressures of upwards of 200 millimeters of mercury on some occasions.

[13:50:11]

We talked a little earlier about my role as a heart-transplant cardiologist. One of the problems with patients when they need a heart transplant is the exact opposite.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CABRERA: So that wasn't the defense questioning.

But let me bring -- as a result of that sound byte being played, we have a cardiologist joining us and is familiar with the testimony today as well.

Dr. Dave Montgomery is a preventative cardiologist at PREvent Clinic. He's with us as well.

So coming out of what we just heard, Dr. Montgomery, can you have a strong heart, like he says, and still have life-threatening heart disease?

DR. DAVE MONTGOMERY, CARDIOLOGIST, PREVENT CLINIC: No. I think that's pretty clear. You really don't have to go to medical school for that, Ana.

And so thanks for having me on.

If you have a truly strong heart, you can't have, at the same time, life-threatening heart disease. And I think that's clear.

CABRERA: Commissioner Ramsey, what stood out to you from this witness?

RAMSEY: Well, first of all, what stood out to me, which is the same thing that stood out last week, is the skill in which the prosecutor actually asked questions, in a very simple way, straightforward way to elicit the kinds of responses that the jury could understand.

I think that's incredibly important when you have highly technical witnesses providing information. The average layperson doesn't understand the terminology and the like. So he walked it through.

I also think this whole issue of just how severe the enlarged heart was and all the things associated with that, at least from that medical opinion.

He was able to describe, you know, what he believed to be the case, in terms of the role that may have played in Mr. Floyd's death.

So I think it was a strong witness, much like I thought Dr. Tobin was very strong last week.

Obviously, they'll bring forth people to counter that when the defense has opportunity. But I think it did leave an impression with the jury.

CABRERA: Let's listen now -- I believe we have the sound byte with the defense cross-examining Dr. Rich. Let's listen in.

Set seven.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) NELSON: Had Mr. Floyd simply gotten into the back of the squad car, do you think that he would have survived?

JERRY BLACKWELL, PROSECUTING ATTORNEY: Objection, You Honor. (INAUDIBLE).

PETER CAHILL, HENNEPIN COUNTY DISTRICT JUDGE: You may give -- if you have a medical opinion as to that.

Overruled.

RICH: So had he not been restrained in the way in which he was, I think he would have survived that day.

I think he would have gone home or wherever he was going to go, had he not been subjected to the prone and positional restraint that he was.

NELSON: So, in other words, if he had gotten into the squad car, he'd be alive?

RICH: I think my answer remains the same.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CABRERA: Laura, that -- that question caught my ear. What did you make of it?

COATES: I was shaking my head. I thought to myself, so let me get this straight, Defense Counsel, you want to make the argument that but for your client's action he would have walked away.

And he also wants to go a different level and essentially affix blame on to George Floyd because he is the reason that he was restrained for nine minutes 29 seconds.

Because he knew that was actually going to be the sequence of not going into the back of the squad car because of claustrophobia. And instead, asking to lay on the ground or made to sit on the ground.

That sort of notion reminded me of what happened just last week with Dr. Thomas, the forensic pathologist, when he tried to do a dangerous hypothetical.

And say, if you were to have found George Floyd at home and he had died, and never had a police encounter, would you say the police officers were responsible?

In other words, if he had not been killed at the hands of the police officers, would you say the cops were to blame?

It's a non-sensical hypothetical. And the very reason why prosecutors and defense do not like to and should not use hypothetical because it points out the obviousness of the fallacy of their position.

CABRERA: Clearly, based on the cross-examination we've been hearing, not just with this expert, but with others, the defense plans to use the heart condition are or drugs as part of the attack on the prosecution here.

I want to ask you, Dr. Montgomery, about, you know, one of the questions and answers where we saw the exchange where Dr. Rich was asked if he had limited scope of the Floyd medical records. And Dr. Rich said he had three years.

Is that enough time to get a picture of someone's health or is three years too short?

MONTGOMERY: Yes, so, you know, Ana, great question.

And what typically happens, typically, in a doctor's office is, on one note, is a synopsis of that person's history.

[13:55:06]

So, you know, if I am a cardiologist looking at that case, like the cardiologist there, I would have access to all of his adult history.

And so three years of notation means a lot of real information about the strength of his heart. And I think you can tell a lot about the status of his heart from those things.

I think there's nothing missing there that will help him make the case that his heart was strong enough to -- if he weren't, you know, restrained the way he was, that he probably would have survived.

CABRERA: Dr. Montgomery, Laura Coates and Commissioner Ramsey, my thanks to all of you for being with us this past hour.

I want to say thanks to all of you who are joining me today for this first show, anchoring this hour of CNN NEWSROOM. I hope to earn your trust and loyal viewership as we go forward.

You can count on me to bring you the facts, to dig for truth, to seek diverse voices and perspectives, to explore issues and to share stories and issues that make a difference. That is my goal.

And you need to know I will always strive to serve you to the best of my abilities, so that the time you spend here feels like well spent every day. And I look forward to doing it again tomorrow.

Until then, you can follow me on Twitter, @AnaCabrera.

My colleague, Brooke Baldwin, picks up our coverage right after this.

Have a great rest of the day.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)