Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Jury Reaches Verdict in Parkland Shooter Sentencing Trial. Aired 10:30-11a ET

Aired October 13, 2022 - 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]

CARLOS SUAREZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Factors, essentially a reason that the state said he should be put to death. They had about five of them for each of the 17 victims.

The defense, they offered up dozens of what they called mitigating factors, reasons that they believe that Cruz should be spared his life and instead should be sentenced to life in prison.

We were expecting the deliberation process to play out for a few more days because each of the 17 counts had four pages of questions that the jurors need to answer. Each of those questions was looking at aggravating factors and the mitigating factors.

It was possible that the jury could come back on an aggravating factor and a mitigating factor and then they have to decide whether those factors outweighed the other. Once they got that done, then they would go ahead and decide whether or not he would die for his actions in Parkland, Florida, back in 2018.

It is important to note that in the state of Florida, a jury's decision on death has to be unanimous. But they only have to be unanimous on one of these charges in order for Cruz to die. If the jury were to hold out on all of them, well, then Cruz, of course, would spend the rest of his life in prison without the possibility of parole.

We are expecting the verdict to be read in court. My understanding is that Cruz is already back in the courtroom up on the 17th floor of the judicial building here behind me. The Parkland families have been here throughout this entire process. We've been covering this case since jury selection got underway five to six months ago and then the witness testimony got underway about three months ago.

And all of these family members have been in that courtroom every single day for several hours. I mean, the witness testimony at times would go on for four to five hours and sometimes you could only hear from two people a day.

The jury themselves, they visited the school, they got a look at a 14- minute piece of video showing Cruz going floor by floor at Marjorie Stoneman Douglas shooting these 17 people. They got a look at all of the autopsy photos. And so now, they are just waiting to come out, deliver their verdict and then we will learn whether or not Nikolas Cruz will die for what he did in Parkland, Florida. Bianna?

BIANNA GOLODRYGA, CNN ANCHOR: Cruz was 19 years old at the time of the shooting, 24 years old now. And we see the family there, as you said. They have been there throughout this trial and obviously this is a big moment for them as we're expecting to hear from the jury.

I want to bring in CNN's Jean Casarez, who has been following this trial, and CNN Legal Analyst Paul Callan.

So, Jean, let me ask you, to get your response to the moment the jury asked to see the AR-15 that was used in that murder. How significant, if anything, was that?

JEAN CASAREZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, it is a short deliberation. And they've asked for a couple of things, one being the AR-15. And I think it is fascinating that yesterday there was an issue because they didn't know if they could go back to the jury room, the prosecutors said it has to go back to the jury room. So, what they did is they took the firing pin out. And this morning when they got to that jury room, the gun was right there. So, that is significant.

But yesterday, they asked for a read-back of Dr. Paul Connor, an expert on fetal alcohol spectrum disorder, who testified that Nikolas Cruz was the victim, you could say, of what his mother ingested while she was pregnant with him and it affected his brain. And there was such an impact that it was, in part, responsible for what he did and why he did it.

Now, of course, they also got a read-back of the cross-examination but they did not want to read back of Dr. Paul Denney, a clinical neuropsychologist, who actually testified that Cruz manipulated the numbers on his assessment test, that he did this intentionally to make sure he looked as bad as it could to help him so that the jury would not render a verdict of death. They didn't want to hear that testimony. They just wanted the defense expert.

And as we just heard, they have to be unanimous. And they obviously have a verdict in this short period of time. But to render a verdict of death, it has to be unanimous. It is a recommendation only.

[10:35:00]

In Florida, the judge decides what the ultimate decision is. She usually listens to the recommendation of the jury. But if they did not able to get unanimity on death, it will be life in prison without the possibility of parole.

Now, they go through each and every victim, all 17. And if solely on one victim they believe beyond a reasonable doubt that he should be sentenced to death, then it is a death verdict. And the prosecutor already proved some aggravating factors, heinous, atrocious and cruel, things like that. And the jury has to believe beyond a reasonable doubt at least one aggravating factor is in place for that verdict of death. So, the process is set up to be very, very foolproof. They really have to believe that.

And it wasn't too long ago that was changed to a unanimous verdict in Florida. Before that, there were other rules in Florida. But I've covered many death penalty cases in Florida. This is the shortest deliberation I've ever seen.

GOLODRYGA: And so, Paul what do you read in that given that it was a short deliberation? They just began yesterday, and as of this morning, they already reached a verdict.

PAUL CALLAN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: I read it into that there are so many victims of this homicide. This is a mass shooting. It is one of the biggest mass shootings in American history. Not the biggest but certainly it is right up there. And think when you see that many human beings slaughtered in a crime like this, that the death penalty is going to be seriously considered by a jury.

As Jean explained, the statute is very, very complicated in terms of what the jury has to go through. There are eight aggravating factors that are listed as possibilities. And there are mitigating factors -- I'm sorry there are 16 aggravating factors and 8 mitigating factors. And the jury has to look at each one of these to decide whether the aggravating ones outweigh the mitigating ones.

I think here, Bianna, when they ask to see the AR-15 in the jury room, I think they were looking at the aggravating factor that has to do with the crime being particularly heinous or cruel. And think they wanted to look at the weapon and to try to make a decision as to whether the killing somebody with a weapon like that AR-15 is an aggravating factor under the statute.

So, that probably was the most important aggravating factor the jury looked at but we'll see that when we see the answers to the judge's questions.

GOLODRYGA: And, Carlos, talk about -- and you discussed this earlier, you touched on it earlier, the impact that the families sitting there days after day throughout this trial, that they brought to the courtroom and to potentially this verdict and decision by the jury. They have not only been outspoken and been demanding justice for their loved ones immediately after the massacre, but now all of these years later, throughout the actual trial itself.

SUAREZ: Yes, that is exactly right. One of the more emotional weeks of this entire sentencing trial was when we heard from the family members. They all went on the stand and talked about their loss, their grief and how they've -- many of them have not been able to move forward with their lives. It is important to note that the jury was told that they were not to take into account any of the victim's statements when deciding whether or not Cruz would die because of what he did back in 2018.

But to add to some of what has been said, some of the observations being made here, one of the things that the prosecution spent a great deal of time and effort through this entire process was trying to underscore, trying to highlight just how cruel Cruz was the day of the shooting. During closing arguments, the prosecutor out here, he went into great detail showing how, for some of his victims, Nikolas Cruz walked up to them, shot them several times at point blank range just to make sure that they were dead.

The jury then also got a look at a 14-minute long piece of video showing the shooting. And so at least in our understanding of what was going on, in the observations that we made in court, it seemed pretty clear that the prosecution was confident that they were going to be able to get some of these aggravated factors on three to four of the students because they have just spent so much time and effort walking the jury through just how they died.

Joaquin Oliver, one of the victims, he was hiding in a corner and surveillance video at the school captured Cruz walking up to him and shooting him after he had already been shot. And so our understanding is the surveillance video shows Oliver already wounded when Cruz walks up to him and shoots him several times.

[10:40:06]

Peter Wang, he was one of the other students that was killed here. He was shot more than a dozen times, including in the head. And that was something that the prosecution wanted jurors to remember as they went into this deliberation. And so it seemed that they were pretty confident that they were going to get some of these aggravating factors on some of these students, if not, all of the 17 victims.

GOLODRYGA: Again, we're looking at the families there in a packed courtroom of the loved ones that the 17 that were murdered by Nikolas Cruz, 14 students, 3 staff members back in 2018. The jury has reached a verdict.

And stay with us. Of course, we're going to be continuing to watch the process inside that courtroom. In just minutes, we are expecting to hear that jury recommendation to be shared in the trial of Nikolas Cruz. Of course, we will bring it to you live.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

GOLODRYGA: And we want to welcome our viewers here in the U.S. and around the world, as we're continuing to cover the breaking news out of Florida. You're looking live now inside a Broward County courtroom where we are closely watching and waiting for the verdict to be read in the penalty trial for the Parkland shooter.

I want to bring in CNN's Jean Casarez, who has been following this trial from the beginning, and CNN Legal Analyst Paul Callan.

So, Jean, have you been following this trial since it began. What stood out to you in the fact that, as we talked about before the break, this jury deliberated for 24 hours at that?

CASAREZ: That is right. And one of aspects of deliberation in a death penalty trial is to go through all of the evidence because you're looking to see if the aggravating and the mitigating factors are there because this is really a balancing act for the jury. They're looking at the aggravating factors, which are everything that Carlos Suarez told us about from the scene right there in Miami, and then also gating factors, why he should not get the death penalty.

And what the defense really brought out to the jury lifetimes of struggles in school and at home, a born to a woman who abused drugs and alcohol while she was pregnant, incorrect medical diagnosis that his brain was not fully formed at 19 years old when the shooting took place, struggles with inconsistent administrations of medication, mental disorders. So, the jury has to look at all of this balance it out to this young man that they have looked every day now since April, jury selection time.

GOLODRYGA: And there you see contrasting, the family members there waiting for the verdict and Cruz there conferring with his counsel.

Paul, per Florida law, for a jury to sentence Cruz to death, it has to be a unanimous decision.

CALLAN: Yes, it does. And if there is a single juror among the 12 who has some kind of doubts about this or conscientious objections to the death penalty, and, by the way, the juries are asked during voir dire as to whether they are capable of imposing the death penalty if the evidence warrants it.

[10:45:06]

But, of course, in my experience, I've seen cases where jurors, despite the voir dire, the careful questioning, some people have hesitation about the death penalty that has nothing to do with the particular defendant. If there is somebody like that on the jury who votes, no, then life without parole would be the sentence that must be imposed by the court.

GOLODRYGA: And, Jean, this decision is just a recommendation for the judge, the judge who ultimately decides here.

CASAREZ: But the judge normally goes with what the jury recommends, if they recommend death. I think it's rare. I think I've seen one case that I've covered in Florida where the judge actually deviates from what the jury's recommendation, because they take that very, very seriously.

When we look at this -- and remember there are 17 that they will go through that were killed. And even if in just one of them they decide beyond a reasonable doubt death is warranted, it is a death sentence. And so we have to listen to all of them. But it is pages and pages of this verdict form. It is going to take a long time because they have to go through so much and aggravating factors. But that is what a death penalty case is. It is very tedious and there are a lot of things that the jury has to be sure on. And there is a right of appeal also, Bianna.

GOLODRYGA: There is a right of appeal.

Paul, what do you make of the defense's argument throughout this trial about Nikolas Cruz's background, his upbringing, his mental capabilities and mental acuity at that?

CALLAN: Well, I think they did a very good job in making a presentation on his behalf given the atrocity of the crime that he committed. There is among what they call the mitigating circumstances of the eight that are listed. One in particular says if there is anything in the defendant's background that would mitigate the jury can take that into consideration. And that sort of a very, very general kind of wording that allows anything, really, about the defendant's background that would cause mitigation.

And here, the defense attorneys put together a presentation, which indicated that he may have been brain damaged, he may have been affected by drugs that his mother took, that he may have had even a brain at age 19 that wasn't fully formed. All of these things relating to his background and his upbringing, that a juror looking not to impose the death penalty could rely on as a mitigating circumstance.

And you have to remember, and Jean raised a very, very good point, there is a very, very complex verdict form here. And you have to find aggravating factors in order to impose the death penalty and you have to look at each of the 17 victims. And as Jean said, if only one has those aggravating circumstances, you have to consider the death penalty. But if his background suggests that he deserves a life sentence instead, that one thing cancels out the aggravation or can cancel it out with respect to the aggravating circumstances.

The jury, in other words, has wide latitude in saying whether a mitigating circumstance, you know, overwhelms and is much greater than the aggravating circumstances. It is really entirely up to them to make that decision. And, of course, if they do decide to recommend death, the judge then ultimately must decide. And as Jean said, usually, judges do impose the death penalty in that situation.

GOLODRYGA: Carlos Suarez, any indication as to how the families feel about whether Cruz should be sentenced to death or life in prison? Is that something that has come up? Is there a unanimous view on this point given that we have so many families involved in this atrocity?

SUAREZ: Many of the family members that have been in court this entire trial have been very clear about what they would like to see. They would like to see Cruz put to death. There are -- there was one family member whose name escapes me right now, one of the siblings who said that they were against the death penalty but they haven't been in court throughout this entire process. All of the family members that have been here, the jury -- the judge, I believe, is coming back in.

GOLODRYGA: Yes, we're going to go to the courtroom right now as the judge has walked in. We're anticipating the jury as well. Let's take a moment to listen in.

JUDGE ELIZABETH SCHERER, BROWARD COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT: Okay. Court is back in session. The lawyers are present. The defendant is present. It is my understanding that the jurors have reached a verdict in this case.

[10:50:00] Are both sides ready to bring in the jurors?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The state is ready, your honor.

SCHERER: Defense?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Defense is ready, your honor.

SCHERER: Okay.

GOLODRYGA: And, Jean, as we are waiting for the jury to come in and announce their decision, you were just explaining to me that there is a long process here and paperwork that they're going to read through but it really just takes one count.

CASAREZ: Right. And they're going to start with count one, obviously, and they're going to go through and they're going to read this jury form that we hear talking about, did you find aggravating factors, and they'll go through the various aggravating factors.

On page four of count one, it finally gets to the point, are you recommending death. Yes or no. So, that is what we ever to listen for right there, because that first count, that possibly will show their state of mind.

GOLODRYGA: All right. Let's listen to the jury.

SCHERER: Okay. All jurors are present. Everyone else may be seated. Ladies and gentlemen, it is my understanding that you have reached a verdict in this case. Mr. Thomas, you're the foreperson?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, ma'am.

SCHERER: Would you please pass the verdict forms to the bailiff?

All of the verdict forms have been properly executed and dated and signed by the foreperson.

[10:55:00]

At this time, I'm going to publish the verdicts.

The state of Florida versus Nikolas Cruz, veteran form as to count one, we, the jury, find as follows as to Nikolas Cruz in this case. Aggravating factors as to count one, victim Luke Hoyer. We, the jury, unanimously find that the state has established beyond a reasonable doubt the existence of the aggravating factor Nikolas Cruz was previously convicted of another capital felony or felony involving the use or threat of violence to another person. Yes.

We, the jury, unanimously find that the state has established beyond a reasonable doubt the existence of the aggravating factor, Nikolas Cruz created a great risk of death to many persons. Yes.

We, the jury, unanimously find that the state has established beyond a reasonable doubt the existence of the aggravating factor, the first- degree murder of Luke Hoyer was committed while Nikolas Cruz was engaged in the commission of a burglary. Yes.

We, the jury, unanimously find that the state has established beyond a reasonable doubt the existence of the aggravating factor, the first- degree murder of Luke Hoyer was especially heinous, atrocious or cruel. Yes.

We, the jury, unanimously find that the state has established beyond a reasonable doubt the existence of the aggravating factor, the first- degree murder of Luke Hoyer was committed in a cold, calculated and premeditated manner without any pretense of moral or legal justification. Yes.

Reviewing the aggravating factors that we unanimously found to be established beyond a reasonable doubt, we, the jury, unanimously find that the aggravating factors are sufficient to warrant a possible death sentence. Yes.

One or month individual jurors find that one or more mitigating circumstances was established by the greater weight of the evidence. Yes.

We, the jury, unanimously find that the aggravating factors that were proven beyond a reasonable doubt outweigh the mitigating circumstances. No. Signed October 13th, by the foreperson.

Mr. Benjamin. Verdict form as to count two, victim Martin Duque. We, the jury, unanimously find that the state has established beyond a reasonable doubt the existence of the aggravating factor, Nikolas Cruz was previously convicted of another capital felony or felony involving the use or threat of violence to another person. Yes.

We, the jury, unanimously find that the state has established beyond a reasonable doubt the existence of the aggravating factor. Nikolas Cruz knowingly created a great risk of death to many persons. Yes.

We, the jury, unanimously find that the state has established beyond a reasonable doubt the existence of the aggravating factor, the first- degree murder of Martin Duque Anguiano was committed while Nikolas Cruz was engaged in the commission of a burglary. Yes.

We, the jury, unanimously find that the state has established beyond a reasonable doubt the existence of the aggravating factor, the first- degree murder of Martin Duque Anguiano was especially heinous, atrocious, or cruel. Yes.

We, the jury, unanimously find that the state has established beyond a reasonable doubt the existence of the aggravating factor, the first- degree murder of Martin Duque Anguiano was committed in a cold, calculated and premeditated manner, without any pretense of moral or legal justification. Yes.

Reviewing the aggravating factors that we unanimously found to be established beyond a reasonable doubt, we, the jury, unanimously find that the aggravating factors are sufficient to warrant a possible sentence of death. Yes. One or more individual jurors find that one or more mitigating circumstances was established by the greater weight of the evidence. Yes.

We, the jury, unanimously find that the aggravating factors that were proven beyond a reasonable doubt outweigh the mitigating circumstances established as to count two, Martin Duque Anguiano. No. Signed and dated by the foreperson, Mr. Benjamin Thomas.

[11:00:00]

Count three, Gina Montalto. We, the jury, unanimously find that the state has established beyond a reasonable doubt the existence.