Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Just One Black Juror Picked in Trial for Ahmaud Arbery Killing; Groups Still Evacuating Afghans Months After U.S. Troops Left; FAA Has Sent Only 37 Unruly Passenger Cases to DOJ. Aired 10:30-11a ET

Aired November 04, 2021 - 10:30   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:30:00]

ERICA HILL, CNN NEWSROOM: Opening statements scheduled to begin tomorrow in the trial of three white men accused of killing 25-year- old black jogger Ahmaud Arbery. After a nearly all-white jury was picked for the case yesterday, attorneys right now are in court, they're arguing their pretrial motions.

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN NEWSROOM: Arbery's mother says it was, quote, devastating to learn the jury would be made up of 11 white members, only one black member. Even the judge acknowledged that the defense appeared to be discriminatory in its selection but still said the trial will proceed as is.

Joining us now, Criminal Defense Attorney and CNN Legal Analyst Joey Jackson. Joey, good to have you on. I'm sure you've taken part in jury selection before. And as this works, as I understand it, prosecution and defense each has a number -- a certain number of objections, some unexplained, that they could use. I mean, how could a final result end up so skewed and, by the way, not reflecting the percentages of the local population?

JOEY JACKSON, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Yes, it's problematic. Good morning to you, Jim. Good morning to you, Erica.

Listen, the bottom line is that you can exercise, as you mentioned challenges. When you're selecting a jury, the prosecution has a certain number of challenges where you can take someone off the jury for any reason or no reason. The defense has a certain number of challenges where you can take someone off for any reason or no reason, except if the reason is discriminatory. And, usually it's called a Batson challenge, and, usually, it's engaged in by the defense in order to protect their clients' rights to ensure that the panel, the veneer, is diverse.

In this case, it's a reverse challenge. The prosecution is saying, hey, wait a second, why is it that you struck 11, used 11 of your strikes to strike African-Americans?

[10:35:04] More troubling, as we saw the demographic of the community is 70 percent white, 25 percent or so African-American. But jury, you're entitled to a fair trial, as we look at it there. And as a result of that entitlement to the fair trial, the jury should adequately reflect a cross section of that community. It doesn't.

What's troubling here is that you have the judge embrace the notion that there was intentional discrimination or at least apparent discrimination on the defense's part with respect to their actions of excluding jurors but did nothing about it. In the event you're the judge and you feel that the defense is engaged in that conduct, you have to issue a remedy, like, what, Jim, like what, Erica? Like potentially reseating the jurors that you struck because there's no basis for you to have excluded them in the first instance, like getting rid of the whole panel and starting anew. But you just don't say, it seems that way, but the trial will start tomorrow, and that's troubling.

HILL: Yes. And that's what has a lot of people frustrated. We do also want to get your take on what we're seeing in the Kyle Rittenhouse trial. So, new evidence, never before seen FBI aerial surveillance video. So, it shows a little bit what happened before Rittenhouse shot three people, including some interactions with Joseph Rosenbaum.

Now, Rittenhouse's attorney has maintained that Rosenbaum was actually chasing Rittenhouse, but the new video suggests otherwise. What does this say to you about the strategy we're going to see moving forward?

JACKSON: I think the strategies, Erica, are divergent but they're very clear. I think from the prosecution's perspective, you're talking about this person who had no basis or justification in being a vigilante, and coming and being an armed shooter, and just deciding to -- an active shooter, rather, and deciding to shoot for no basis. That's what we call intentional murder.

From the perspective of the defense, they're arguing self-defense. Look, it was a violent crowd. They were milling about. They have tried to attack my client. He was in imminent fear of his life. As a result, he shot. He heard a shot that was fired prior to him even shooting. So, those are the narratives. The prosecution is saying there was no basis for his conduct, that is Rittenhouse, in discharging his firearm. The defense saying, wait a second, there is a basis, we call it self-defense, and he was privileged to do it under the law.

SCIUTTO: And why was he there? A 17-year-old from out of state driving there with this weapon? We'll see how it unfolds. Joey Jackson, thanks very much.

JACKSON: Thank you, Jim. Thank you, Erica.

SCIUTTO: Still ahead, some evacuations, some, from Afghanistan continue, this more than two months after U.S. forces left. Former U.S. Allies there facing increasing danger, their lives at risk. We're going to speak with one of the people trying to get some of the most at risk out of the country. It is hard. It's moving slowly. That's coming up. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:40:00]

SCIUTTO: A U.S. Air Force investigation into a drone strike in Kabul that killed ten civilians, ten innocent people, including seven children, not surprisingly, found that the U.S. military and intelligence agencies made significant errors. The inspector general says, however, they did not break the law with this strike.

The report also found that, quote, execution errors combined with a confirmation bias and communication breakdowns led to tragedy. The I.G. still calls it, quote, an honest mistake.

We're a little more than two months since the U.S. pulled out of Afghanistan, and yet tens of thousands of Afghan translators and members of the Afghan military who fought alongside the U.S. remain behind and under great threat from the Taliban. Some of them have already been killed.

Pineapple Express, you might have heard of this group, it's a group of former U.S. military veterans and others who have been working hard to get some of those people out of the country, are now in particular focused on members of the Afghan elite, Special Operations Forces.

Lieutenant Colonel Scott Mann joins me now. He's a green beret who served in Afghanistan. He's been part of this group for some time. He's going to be briefing members of the House Armed Services Committee today. Scott, good to have you on this morning.

LT. COL. SCOTT MANN, U.S. ARMY SPECIAL FORCES (RET.): Hey. Thanks for having me on, Jim. I appreciate it.

SCIUTTO: So, let's speak specifically about the Afghan Special Operations Forces that you're lobbying for for their safety today, speaking to members of the House. Why are they, in particular, under threat today in Afghanistan?

MANN: Well, Jim, one of the things I would say is there are so many groups that are at risk right now in Afghanistan, whether they are former female judges, LGBTQ, or, of course, the Afghan Special Operations Forces. I think the reason that the Afghan special operators are so concerning, as well, is that also the risk if they are captured. These are folks that we worked intimately, very closely with, so not only is there a moral imperative to that but there's a security imperative to it as well. And, you know, frankly, they stood up against the Taliban all the way to the very end.

SCIUTTO: Yes. They are the units really that kept fighting when we heard that many parts of the rest of the military peeled away. Is it as simple as a life and death situation for them? Are their lives in danger? Are the Taliban hunting them down now?

MANN: We are definitely getting reports that they are being actively hunted, but, you know, also understand that for all of the at-risk communities, winter is coming to Afghanistan, and that is no small thing. Most of these commandos have had to move away from their homes because that's where the risk is associated with it.

[10:45:01]

So, they're living house-to-house with a bagful of belongings with their families. And that plus being hunted, I mean, we really need to put a priority on trying to get these folks out as soon as we can.

SCIUTTO: The sad fact of the math here is that to date, a tiny percentage of overall special immigrant visa applicants, but specifically members of the military, have gotten out of the country. In this category, these elite Special Operations Forces, do you have any sense of what percentage of them have been able to escape safely?

MANN: It is a tiny percentage, Jim. I mean, it is a tiny percentage of these men and women who literally fought to the bitter end, even when their leaders left. They kept fighting. They stood their ground. And only a handful of them have made it out. And, in fact, they are still very much right now very coherent, very connected to our veteran volunteers who have been basically on like an 80-day 911 call with no relief in sight. And this is having a tremendous toll on our veteran volunteers as well, as we approach Veterans Day.

SCIUTTO: An 80-day 911, what a way to describe it.

So, you're going to be briefing members of the House Armed Services Committee today. I know you have plans to speak to the Senate here in Washington in the coming weeks. What specific help are you asking for from Congress? And based on your conversations so far, are they willing to give it?

MANN: Well, it's just a select adjustment to what you said. It's select members of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, and we hope ultimately the Senate and the Armed Forces. But here is what we're asking for, is we need a broader discussion along immigration lines for the Afghan Special Operations Forces. They're not eligible for an SIV right now, but they need to be. These are fighters and operators who pose a national security risk if captured, but also it's a moral imperative.

And we're asking Congress to help us create language that will allow a path to citizenship for these amazing operators and professionals who fought to the very end.

SCIUTTO: Listen, Scott, you're doing great work, and I know that the folks on your team are doing great work, and, by the way, a lot of folks on the ground risking their lives to do this. Our thanks to you for the effort that you're making.

MANN: Yes, thanks so much, Jim. And please, again, keep our veterans and your families in your minds this Veterans Day. It goes far beyond thank you for your service. They're carrying a heavy hold.

SCIUTTO: I hear you. We will do. Lieutenant Colonel Scott Mann, thank you.

HILL: Still ahead, a fresh warning for unruly airline passengers. An exclusive first look at the video you'll soon begin seeing from the FAA.

And here's a look at what else to watch today.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:50:00]

HILL: There have been thousands of incidents of unruly airline passengers reported this year. This morning, though, we learned only a very small fraction of those incidents are actually being investigated and prosecuted.

SCIUTTO: Yes. If you've been on one of these flights, like I have, it's no fun. The FAA has sent only 37 of the more than 5,000 passenger complaints on to the Department of Justice.

CNN's Pete Muntean has the details.

PETE MUNTEAN, CNN AVIATION CORRESPONDENT: Jim and Erica, this is a bit of good news because the FAA cannot press criminal charges. It can assess civil fines, and it can refer cases to the Department of Justice. These 37 cases that have just gone to the Justice Department are the most extreme cases of unruly passengers the FAA tells me. It has just released a new public service announcement. You're seeing it first on CNN, in which it shows the letter that a passenger would get if they're facing FAA fines and their case is being referred to the DOJ.

But these numbers also highlight an issue. In many cases, passengers are walking free, not meeting law enforcement at the gate. FAA Administrator Steve Dickon just told a Senate hearing about this, and he says he is trying to close the gaps to make sure passengers ultimately face punishment and maybe prison time. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

STEVE DICKSON, FAA ADMINISTRATOR: I think we're making good progress, but there's certainly more to be done. And it really does require the cooperation of all those private sector stakeholders, including the airports, as well as the various aspects of the federal government, FAA, TSA and DOJ. And we'll continue to stay focused on that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MUNTEAN: We could be seeing a start of a shift here. That American Airlines incident, where a passenger allegedly punched a flight attendant in the face, was charged earlier this week, and the FAA says federal investigators did meet him at the gate. He could face up to 20 years in prison. Jim and Erica?

SCIUTTO: Goodness. Let's hope they police better. Pete Muntean, thanks very much.

HILL: A quick programming note, a CNN town hall.

[10:55:02] I'm very excited. I hope you will join us this weekend for our sixth annual town hall with our friends at Sesame Street. Dr. Sanjay Gupta and I teaming up to answer questions that you and your kids have about getting vaccinated. Join us for the ABCs of COVID vaccines this Saturday morning at 8:30 Eastern.

Now, that our kids -- I know, Jim, we both have kids in that 5 to 11 category that are now eligible, but a lot of, understandably, kids and families still have a lot of question.

SCIUTTO: Listen, plus Big Bird, Elmo and Erica, three of my favorite people, they're all going to be there.

HILL: I mean, it's a fine way to kick off your weekend.

SCIUTTO: I'll be there. Lots of important questions answered.

And thanks to all of you for joining us today. I'm Jim Sciutto.

HILL: And I'm Erica hill.

Stay tuned. At This Hour with Kate Bolduan starts after a quick break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:00:00]