Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

Third Night of Protests Despite Curfew in Charlotte; Tulsa Police Officer Charged with Manslaughter; Trump Weighing Trip to Charlotte Next Week. =Aired 6-6:30a ET

Aired September 23, 2016 - 06:00   ET

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

ANNOUNCER: This is CNN breaking news.

[05:58:32] ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: Good morning, everyone. Welcome to your NEW DAY. It is Friday, September 23, 6 p.m. in the east. We do have breaking news for you this morning.

People taking to the streets for a third straight night in Charlotte, despite the midnight curfew. Demonstrations largely peaceful, people chanting, "Release the tape" over that deadly police shooting of Keith Lamont Scott.

CHRIS CUOMO, CNN ANCHOR: Now, on the tape, we have what could be a major development, and yet, it turned into more controversy. The Scott family did see the video. But they came out of it with a wildly different account from what the police say happened.

This comes as a Tulsa police officer is charged in the shooting death of an unarmed black man. Both of these cases reigniting a debate about policing and race.

We begin our coverage with CNN's Nick Valencia live in Charlotte. The curfew just ending there. What's the situation?

NICK VALENCIA, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Chris.

A welcome sign of relief here on the streets of downtown Charlotte. Peace and quiet. Last night's protests were, by and large, peaceful. You mentioned that curfew that technically went into effect at midnight, just a few moments ago lifted. But it was never implemented by police, they say, because last night went so well.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Hands up.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Don't shoot!

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Don't shoot!

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Don't shoot!

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Hands up.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Don't shoot! UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Don't shoot!

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Don't shoot!

VALENCIA (voice-over): A third night of protests remain largely peaceful Thursday night, despite Charlotte officials enacting a midnight curfew. A small group thanking National Guard members for their service.

Others laying down to protest the shooting death of Keith Lamont Scott.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Release the video!

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Release the video!

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Release the video!

VALENCIA: And demanding that police video of the incident be released to the public. Charlotte's police chief concedes the video doesn't show Scott pointing a gun at officers.

CHIEF KERR PUTNEY, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG POLICE: The video does not give me absolute definitive visual evidence that -- that would confirm that a person is pointing a gun. When taken this the totally of all the other evidence, it support what we've heard in the version of the truth that we gave about the circumstances that happened

VALENCIA: Despite that, police are standing by their account of what happened saying Scott refused to drop his weapon.

MAYOR JENNIFER ROBERTS (D), CHARLOTTE, N.C.: The gun in question is a small gun, and it was not easy to see with the way the motion was happening. So, it is ambiguous.

VALENCIA: After massive public outcry, the Scott family saw two police videos capturing the deadly encounter.

JUSTIN BAMBERG, ATTORNEY FOR SCOTT FAMILY: It was very painful. You know, not just to see him shot and killed, but to see to see the reactions on the rest of the family members' face.

VALENCIA: Attorneys for the family, they insist they saw no aggression in the video, issuing a statement in part, "It is impossible to discern from the video what, if anything, Mr. Scott is holding in his hands. When he was shot and killed, Mr. Scott's hands were by his side, and he was slowly walking backwards."

Two wildly different accounts as more evidence is uncovered. This photo, taken by an eyewitness, appears to show a black object on the ground, which a source close to the investigation says is the gun recovered by authorities.

EDUARDO CURRY, SCOTT FAMILY ATTORNEY (via phone): We're just not sure about that photos and other photos depicted. We did not see a gun in the video. LYRIC SCOTT, DAUGHTER OF KEITH LAMONT SCOTT: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) My

Daddy is dead!

VALENCIA: After the shooting, Scott's daughter suggested the gun was planted by the police.

SCOTT: He was sitting in the car, reading a (EXPLETIVE DELETED) book. My daddy ain't got no (EXPLETIVE DELETED) gun.

VALENCIA: But police are adamant.

PUTNEY: The preponderance of physical evidence there supports exactly what we -- what we made in our initial statement. That yes, he had a weapon. Yes, he refused to drop that weapon, and the officer fired as he perceived that imminent threat.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

VALENCIA: It is the "he said/she said" between the Scott family and police that has added to the public's confusion.

Meanwhile, an update on the investigation. The North Carolina Bureau of Investigation has taken a lead.

And a quick update, Alisyn. You remember that protester that was shot on Wednesday night. He has been pronounced dead. Police say they're thankful that no such violence happened last night -- Alisyn.

CAMEROTA: That is a relief in terms of last night, and it sure would help to see that video. Nick, thanks so much for all of that.

We also have some more breaking news overnight. The Tulsa, Oklahoma, police officer who shot and killed an unarmed black man turned herself in this morning. Officer Betty Shelby booked into jail and released after facing a $50,000 bond. She is facing felony manslaughter charges less than a week after she fatally shot Terence Crutcher.

So let's bring in CNN's Ana Cabrera in Tulsa with the latest. What have we learned, Ana?

ANA CABRERA, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Alisyn.

Police and the district attorney's office wasting no time analyzing video, interviewing dozens of people, completing their investigation in less than a week after that fatal shooting.

Now, this morning, the family of Terence Crutcher is calling this a small victory.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

CABRERA (voice-over): Tulsa Police Officer Betty Shelby turning herself in and released on bond overnight, charged with the shooting death of 40-year-old Terence Crutcher.

DAMARIO SOLOMON-SIMMONS, ATTORNEY FOR CRUTCHER'S FAMILY: We know that nothing that happens -- not charges, not convictions, not sentencing, nothing -- will bring Terence back.

STEVE KURZWEILER, TULSA COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY: I determined that the filing of manslaughter in the first degree against Tulsa police officer Betty Shelby is warranted.

CABRERA: The felony manslaughter charnel coming less than a week after the shooting was captured on this police helicopter video. Crutcher walking with his hands up just moments before he's gunned down by Shelby.

OFFICER BETTY SHELBY, TULSA POLICE: Shots fired!

CABRERA: The prosecutor's office alleging Officer Shelby acted unreasonably by escalating the situation from a confrontation with Mr. Crutcher, who was not responding to verbal commands and was walking away from her with his hands up, becoming emotionally involved to the point that she overreacted.

Shelby told investigators she feared Crutcher was reaching into his car, potentially for a weapon. No weapon was found at the scene.

SCOTT WOOD, BETTY SHELBY'S ATTORNEY: She thought if she didn't take action right then, everyone would be in peril of serious bodily harm or death.

SOLOMON-SIMMONS: All we know is what we saw on the video. We didn't see any point of Mr. Crutcher, Terence, being noncompliant.

CABRERA: Crutcher's family attorneys questioning the officer's story by pointing to an enhanced picture of the window.

BENJAMIN CRUMP, ATTORNEY FOR CRUTCHER FAMILY: You can see that it is completely up, and there is blood going almost to the top of the window.

CABRERA: CNN has independently analyzed the video frame by frame, zooming in. It does appear that the window is up and that a reflection of his arms in the window is visible.

TIFFANY CRUTCHER, TERENCE CRUTCHER'S SISTER: We're demanding full prosecution. We want a conviction. And when that happens, this is a small victory, but we know we've got to get ready to fight this war.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

CABRERA: Now the charge of felony manslaughter in the first degree is a very serious charge. It carries a penalty of four years to life behind bars if convicted. We have reached out to the attorney for Officer Shelby and have not heard back yet this morning.

Also important to note, that while video evidence can seem conclusive, it is never the only evidence presented at trial -- Chris.

CUOMO: Very good point. Ana, thank you very much.

Let's discuss with CNN political commentator and author of "Nobody: Casualties of America's War on the Vulnerable," Marc Lamont Hill. And former NYPD Sergeant, John Jay College of Criminal Justice professor, Joe Giacalone.

So Joe, the Charlotte police will say, "You see what happens? We show the video. We tell you that it's confusing. We tell you to let us process it. You push us for disclosure and transparency. We show it to the family. Now we have more problems."

Is that a fair pushback?

JOE GIACALONE, PROFESSOR, JOHN JAY COLLEGE OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE: No, it's not. Because listen, he was pretty -- the chief was saying he had a gun. And now he's saying...

CUOMO: Initially, he was saying that.

GIACALONE: And now he's -- now he's backing away from that. So even he has now seen the video and studied it. You know, he should have been doing that prior to going out and talking about it. And that's these guys have to use public information officers. There's no walking back from this now. He is the boss, right? You know, the buck stops with him. Now who's going to now talk for him?

So when you have a public information officer, you can always fix the problems that you had and say, "Listen, yesterday, that public information officer said, 'A,' but after our review and now it's really 'B.'"

But at this point the whole investigation is really under a cloud, because, you know, they're going to look at him and say, like, "What else are you going to tell us this time that's not completely true?"

CUOMO: So you have messaging, OK, and that's what Joe is talking about. You also have the substance of the matter. We started off with my father was sitting in the car, reading a book, waiting for his kid like he does every day. He doesn't have a gun.

Two, the cops saying there was a gun. So now there's this huge shift. Now you get a secondary level of evaluation. OK, let's assume, let's assume he did have a gun. The analysis isn't over, and that's what caused confusion in the video for the Scott family, it seems.

MARC LAMONT HILL, CNN COMMENTATOR: That's exactly right. And that's why this case is so much more complex. When there are cases of unarmed people, the police say, "Hey, just because he's unarmed doesn't mean he wasn't dangerous. Right? You can be unarmed and be a threat."

Similarly, just because you're armed, particularly if it's an open- carry state, it doesn't mean that you -- you should be shot. It doesn't mean you were necessarily an imminent threat. That's why we have to unpack this case. And that's why we need as much information as possible. And for whatever reason, they seem committed to not releasing information.

CUOMO: Now, to compare Charlotte and Tulsa, they both start off in the same place. But then they branch off, I would argue, wildly here in terms of the transparency, what's been put out, how it's been handled and what we're seeing on the prosecutorial side.

Do you think that this is a randomness? Or do you think that you're seeing intentional acts by those in power in Tulsa that are making it a better situation?

GIACALONE: I think that the officials in Tulsa handled this pretty well so far. I mean, they sat down with the community leaders. They sat down with the families. They showed them the videos right away. They had the district attorney right on board. I mean, within, you know, six or seven days, we come to a conclusion into this, and they file charges against the officer.

So, I think we see the difference between, you know -- it's almost bifurcated, where you have Tulsa doing one thing, and then they kind of in North Carolina, like they just entrench themselves and digging themselves deeper into a hole by withholding this information at this point.

CUOMO: And in Tulsa, you see that there's an indictment that doesn't mean that there's going to be a conviction. We always say indict a ham sandwich. Although we've seen in these cases, very often an indictment does not bring a conviction, but what does this do in terms of the dynamic of seeing justice at play?

HILL: Right. Well, first, let me be clear, because people will say, "Well, Marc, of course, you like the outcome so far in Tulsa, because a police officer was indicted."

For me what's helpful and what's instructive here is not just that there was an indictment, but that there was a transparent process. If the transparent process yielded different evidence, I wouldn't want someone indicted. So I'm not happy because someone was indicted. I'm happy because it was a process that seems to have worked.

In this particular case, the indictment seemed just. The indictment seemed fair, and now we can move on with the next stage of the process. But as you said, we cannot assume that, because there's an indictment, there is justice. Because most officers don't get convicted for this. People are very reluctant to not only indict but also to convict these officers for shooting citizens.

CUOMO: And why is that, Joe? In terms of the idea of the presumption of use of force. People often will say when these happen, "How come these cops aren't arrested the way I would be if I did this?"

Explain that there are different presumptions in play for law enforcement officers than there are for citizens when it comes to use of force.

GIACALONE: Well, there's a Supreme Court decision, Graham vs. Connor, that dictates all use of force for police. And this is basically it's not 20/20 hindsight. It's not we don't have the ability to go back and watch a videotape. They have to make split-second decisions, and those decisions sometimes have to be take somebody's life. And the question comes out to the reasonableness standard. Would a

reasonable person in that same situation do what this officer did? And that's what the Supreme Court has said. And that's what we have to deal with.

If we're going to have a discussion about changing that so that we might have less police-involved shootings, then we need to discuss that. But right now, that's the law of the land, and that's what we have to do.

HILL: And that ain't going anywhere. That's Oliver Wendell Holmes moving forward.

But the problem is, for me, this is why it's hard to indict police officers for shooting black people, is that oftentimes, a juror will sit there and say, "Yes, if I saw that guy who looks dangerous, I would have done the same thing." Even a black juror sometimes will say, "You know what? Mike Brown, yes, he did look dangerous. You know, Trayvon Martin, oh, they did look dangerous," because we have this deep, embedded fear of black bodies oftentimes.

CUOMO: Even if you are black?

HILL: Oftentimes, it's not an exclusively white thing. White supremacy itself is not just a white thing. It bleeds into our own consciousness.

So what happens is, I think oftentimes, jurors will invoke the reasonable man standard, saying, "If I were that cop on that dark alley, I would do the same thing, too."

So oftentimes, we didn't codify and normalize a kind of anxiety -- unhealthy, unreasonable anxiety of black folks. So that's why sometimes black people who get shot, even unarmed, still don't get the type of justice that we want to see. And that's the problem.

CUOMO: One button on this on Charlotte: the transparency, the case for and against. Seeing that the -- people will take things different ways, if you don't have an incredibly flagrant situation. You know, either somebody is holding their hands up like this saying, "Please, don't shoot me. Please don't shoot me. I'm unarmed." Or he has a weapon. It's rare that you get something that's so cut and dry.

HILL: Right.

CUOMO: Do you give any deference to the idea of the police saying, "Look, people will take this different ways. Let us process it. Let us go through it. And then we will present what we believe is the best assumption of these facts, and there will be some independent review," which we don't know yet. We know the state is looking at it, but we don't know about there being truly outside review.

HILL: Yes. It's hard to give credence to that, because there are so many -- there are so many instances of police failing to police themselves, effectively. There are so many instances where the evidence is fairly compelling, if not ultimately persuasive. And yet, the police still make a different decision.

Then there's the fact that police often don't have outside bodies overseeing. There are 200 CCRBs in the entire country of, like, 19, 20,000 police departments. There's just no mechanism for policing the police properly. And that's why it's hard to say, "Hey, let us do it." I just don't buy it.

CUOMO: Citizens' complaint review board, CCRB.

Let me ask you this, though, Joe. Review, just quickly. The state's looking at it in Charlotte. You have the feds looking over the shoulder in Oklahoma. Do you believe there should be a fully independent review of all shootings that are officer-involved?

GIACALONE: It's going to have to go that way, yes. Especially now what's going on in North Carolina. Because like I said, I'm having difficulty believing what the chief is telling me now after backing off what he initially said.

So listen, I don't think there's any chance that the DOJ will not look at this. I mean, I think they're going to be in there if they're not there already.

CUOMO: Should it be automatic. And is state enough? Like in New York -- my brother is the governor of New York -- they passed a law that the attorney general steps in, and he either does it himself or appoints somebody to review. Is that enough? Should it be even more removed?

GIACALONE: Well, I think right now at the state level, we should be looking at this, definitely. Because we have so many different rules and laws about -- and Supreme Court decisions, and each state uses it within their own sometimes.

So there's a lot of jurisdictional issues when you're dealing with police use of force and a lot of police procedures.

So I think we start at the state level, and if that doesn't work, then we can at least go to the feds. If we just go right to the feds and it doesn't work, now what do we do? And that's -- and that's really the way the problem lies.

HILL: I say do it for everybody. And I have yet to hear a good argument why we don't. The typical police argument is, "Hey, we usually get it right." My point is, OK, let's say you're right; let me concede that point. Even if you only get it wrong you're looking at 1 percent of the time, that's still a pretty big number. Let's get it right all the time.

CUOMO: And also, there's no stronger confirmation of your own argument than someone seconding it. So you know what I mean? It buttresses them.

Marc, thank you very much.

Joe, appreciate it, as always. Now, coming up on NEW DAY, we're going to talk with the attorney for Keith Lamont Scott's family in our next hour about what they say saw on that police video and why they still have questions.

And then at 8, Charlotte's mayor, Jennifer Roberts, is going to join us with her position on what they're doing to ensure justice in this situation -- Alisyn.

CAMEROTA: All right, Chris. Donald Trump sending mixed messages to African-American voters making controversial statements about the black community while also trying to court their vote. Is this working for him? We take a look at those statements ahead on NEW DAY.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

[06:18:11] DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE: We must work with our police, not against our police. They are great people. And they do a great job.

Those pedaling the narrative of cops as a racist force in our society, a narrative -- and this is a narrative that is supported with a nod by my opponent. You see what she's saying, and it's not good. Shared directly in the responsibility for the unrest.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CAMEROTA: Donald Trump blaming Hillary Clinton there, in part, for the civil unrest. This as sources tell CNN that Trump is considering a trip to Charlotte, North Carolina.

So let's bring in CNN political commentator and political anchor of Time Warner Cable News, Errol Louis; and CNN political analyst and national political reporter for Real Clear Politics, Rebecca Berg.

Errol, let me start with you. Let's talk about what Donald Trump is doing in his messaging. So he's, at the same time, trying to court black voters, as we know. And he's also trying to stand with the police and be the law and order candidate. Are these things mutually exclusive, or can he do both?

ERROL LOUIS, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: They're not mutually exclusive, but it takes a pretty soft touch in order to sort of get the right place in between. And it's the kind of thing that requires the political courage that will end up having you really sort of criticized by somebody somewhere along the way.

That is not the Donald Trump side. It's a style. He goes to one side or to the other. So, in any given speech, you'll hear him most of the time saying, "We've got to get tough. We've got to support the police. That's all there is to this." That works directly counter to this other goal that he has had of sort of lessening some of the antipathy that he's getting from black voters.

So it's not going to necessarily work out well for him. If I had to guess, I would say that he's going to probably end up on the side of simply support the police. You know, the Fraternal Order of Police has endorsed him. It's more in keeping with his style. He doesn't have much in the way of connections with black voters or with black institutions. So, I think we can predict where this is going to end up.

[06:20:09] CUOMO: Rebecca, a couple points for the analysis. One is this matters. This isn't, "I'm going to tax at this rate. No, maybe I won't tax at that rate." You know, something where you expect a kind of bi-play from a politician.

And, you know, to Errol's point, everybody should be coming out on the side of, "We support the police." It's what do you do in these instant cases?

Is it fair to say that he's been all over. When the first wave of these came and entered the election, he was decidedly pro-cop and saying that the Black Lives Movement was a problem here, that those in the streets were a problem here. And then he comes to the other side in Tulsa, before we really know anything, and says the cop looks like she choked. You know, so it really seems like it's not just like he's balancing it out, but that he's putting his thumb on the scale in the wrong way each time. How do you see it?

REBECCA BERG, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: He is. Well, he has been all over the place. And it could be to his benefit, potentially, if voters are willing to forgive him his inconsistencies and just hone in on whatever they agree with that he has said.

But that's politically not going to be the case here, because people do take some of the candidates' statements over the course of an election; and Donald Trump has veered wildly from supporting police as Errol noted, to trying to sound compassionate when it comes to African-Americans, who are facing these problems, especially in the inner cities.

And I personally am skeptical that voters are going to take his more recent comments in a vacuum about African-Americans and say, "Oh, well, now Donald Trump has completely changed his tone. He has completely evolved on this issue," because, really, you look at the sum of what he has said over this election cycle.

CAMEROTA: Well, yesterday he did sound a more empathetic tone towards people who are struggling in this country, but then his VP nominee sort of veered off-script, or at least they weren't speaking from the same script in this moment.

So let play you those in contrast to each other.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: We all have to walk a mile in someone else's shoes to see things through their eyes and then get to work fixing our very wounded country. I mean, it's -- we have some real problems, and we do have a wounded country. GOV. MIKE PENCE (R-IN), VICE-PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE: Donald Trump and I

believe that there's been far too much of this talk of -- of institutional bias or racism within law enforcement.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CAMEROTA: So, is there racism and institutional bias or is there not?

LOUIS: There's been too much talk about it, is what the governor said. Which is, yes, that's a very different script. And I think it's very different from what people are seeing on their screens on television every night.

And let's keep in mind that this is not a hypothetical discussion, you know. Early voting is happening right now in North Carolina. So, you know, you go -- you know, you're watching chaos in the streets at night, and you're supposed to go and vote the next day. So, getting the messaging right actually matters. This is not, you know, we're right down to...

CAMEROTA: It's starting to matter.

LOUIS: We're right down to the matter.

CAMEROTA: This is not academic any more. People are now deciding today, whatever the snapshot that exists today. Not 47 days from now; it's now.

LOUIS: That's right. Thousands of votes have already come in, as a matter of fact. So, you know, Mike Pence and Donald Trump are going to have to figure out what it is they want to do. They have studiously avoided, I think, both of them, going to the NAACP to the Urban League. They avoided all of the conventions. There was a lot of bashing of the Black Lives Matter movement at the Republican convention.

You know, that -- if that's what people take going into the voting booth, that's, you know -- I mean, a couple of statements in the teleprompter, carefully read by Donald Trump, about compassion are not going to turn that around.

CUOMO: Change agent. That's what Donald Trump is supposed to be. This is an issue, a situation, a tragedy that screams out for change. How has he done on this issue?

BERG: Well, when you compare Donald Trump to Hillary Clinton, he's always going to win the change agent argument, just because...

CUOMO: Even on this one?

BERG: He hasn't been -- well, right. He hasn't been in politics. His whole message in his campaign has been that "I won't be politically correct. I will actually face these issues head on and not be afraid to talk about them truthfully." Whether you agree with what he said or not, he certainly maintains that sort of blunt tone that earned him this reputation and has allowed him to frame his campaign in this way.

And Hillary Clinton is someone who her husband was in the White House. She was the senator. She's had opportunities to deal with these issues and she has a record of dealing with these issues, as does Bill Clinton.

But that makes it more complicated for her to explain to people that she'll come into the White House with a blank slate and be able to start from scratch.

At the same time, she should be pointing out that President Obama has made some real progress on these issues. His administration has imposed stricter guidelines on racial profiling. He has started a conversation about race that I think is pretty much unprecedented at the presidential level by virtue in part of being the first African- American president. And Hillary Clinton has an opportunity to point these things out as she makes the case that she would be a third term, essentially, for Barack Obama.

CAMEROTA: Right. But you know, it's hard for her to point those out. Or at least Donald Trump can say -- can point to Charlotte and go, "But it's not working. But we still have these issues."

[06:25:15] LOUIS: Donald Trump's strong point, I think, is that there is a lot of Americans for whom this is very difficult. And they don't want to talk about this. If you don't want to talk about race and policing and problems, Trump may be the candidate for you.

CAMEROTA: Errol, Rebecca, have a great weekend. Thanks so much for being here.

CUOMO: Did you hear about this? A massive hack at Yahoo! The accounts of -- wait for the number -- half a billion users compromised in what could be the largest corporate cyber-breach in history. What does this mean if you have an account? Next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CUOMO: There is new surveillance video in this case, and it shows the moment that the New York City bombing suspect plants a pressure cooker bomb hidden inside a carry-on bag. A short time later, two men are seen taking the bag and leaving the bomb behind.

The FBI still hasn't found these two guys, and they want to talk them. They're not saying that they're persons of interest in terms of the investigation. They just want to know what they found in that bag. They want the bag.

Amazingly, the video shows several people kicking the pressure cooker. This one never went off.

CAMEROTA: Well, Yahoo! admitting that hackers stole account information of at least 500 million users.