Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

Third Night of Protests Despite Curfew in Charlotte; Tulsa Police Officer Charged with Manslaughter; What Will Congress Do about Deadly Police Shootings? Aired 7-7:30a ET

Aired September 23, 2016 - 07:00   ET

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

CHRIS CUOMO, CNN ANCHOR: What the heck are you going to do all night then, if you're not going to check with -- we'll have to wait and see.

[07:00:05] ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: We will. We're looking forward to it. Thanks for the analysis.

CUOMO: All right. There is a lot of news for you on this Friday. Let's get to it.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No justice, no peace!

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No justice, no peace!

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No justice, no peace!

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I'm urging each of you to come together in peace.

DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE: We must work with our police, not against our police.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Release the videos! Release the videos!

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Release the videos! Release the videos!

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Release the videos! Release the videos!

CHIEF KERR PUTNEY, CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG POLICE DEPARTMENT: Transparency is in the eye of the beholder.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Don't release some information. Release everything.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You have questions.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We need answers!

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We need answers!

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We need answers!

HILLARY CLINTON (D), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Too many people have lost their lives who shouldn't have. OFFICER BETTY SHELBY, TULSA, OKLAHOMA POLICE: Shots fired!

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The death of Terence Crutcher. The felony crime of manslaughter, first degree, against Tulsa Police Officer Betty Shelby is warranted.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The first step in the long road to justice began today.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ANNOUNCER: This is NEW DAY with Chris Cuomo and Alisyn Camerota.

CUOMO: Good morning. Welcome to your NEW DAY.

Protesters taking to the streets for a third straight night in Charlotte despite a curfew aimed at stopping violence which largely worked. Demonstrators were largely peaceful, calling for the police to release the video of the deadly shooting of Keith Lamont Scott.

CAMEROTA: Scott's family finally seeing some of the police video that they say did not help clear up what happened. This comes as a Tulsa, Oklahoma, police officer is charged in the shooting death of an unarmed black man there. Both of these cases reigniting a debate about policing and race.

So let's begin our coverage with CNN's Nick Valencia. He is live in Charlotte. How did it go last night, Nick?

NICK VALENCIA, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Alisyn.

The mood on the streets here in downtown Charlotte, very different than it was 24 hours ago. It was yesterday at this hour that there were still business owners cleaning up the vandalism from the riots. Last night's protesters were, by and large, peaceful.

You mentioned that protest [SIC], it happened at midnight but really went into effect. Police say they didn't have to implement the curfew, because the protests went so smoothly.

(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 remained largely peaceful Thursday night, despite Charlotte officials enacting a midnight curfew. A small group thanking National Guard members for their service.

Others laying [SIC] 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 in 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 insist they saw no aggression in the video, issuing a statement in part, "It is impossible to discern from the videos 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 our officer fired as he perceived that imminent threat.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

VALENCIA: Part of what's complicated things here with the public is these two competing narratives. The Scott family saying Keith Scott was unarmed when he was fatally shot. The police say they recovered a gun.

For now, North Carolina Bureau of Investigation is taking over the investigation. But until that video is made public, demonstrators have expressed their frustration. We should anticipate even more protests until that video comes out -- Chris.

CUOMO: The expectation was, Nick, that showing the family the video would make things better. it does not seem to be the case.

Joining us now is the family's attorney, Justin Bamberg.

[07:05:05] Counselor, thank you for joining us. Before we get investigative here, let's remain human. This must have been so difficult for this family, not to go in there as finders of fact, but as loved ones. How did they handle this video footage?

BAMBERG: Good morning and thank you for having me here today. You know, it was difficult. It was very painful for them to watch it. But, also, see their other family members in pain as a result of what they saw.

You know, it's my understanding that his wife was actually out there at the time of the original shooting. So, this was her chance to, I guess, see the shooting, again. But it was very difficult for them.

CUOMO: So, the whole point of this is to gain clarity. What did they see in the video?

BAMBERG: Absolutely. You know, all the family wants to know is why this happened and what the -- WHAT THE accurate facts are. What we see on the video is Mr. Scott, the officers are yelling commands. He steps out of his vehicle, Doesn't appear to be acting aggressive whatsoever. Is not making any quick moves. Moving slowly. You know, he doesn't appear to arguing or yelling at law enforcement.

His hands are down by his side. It is -- you can see what appears to be some type of object in his hand. But he never raises it at any point.

Actually, when he's shot, it looks like he's stepping backwards. So, you know, a lot of this is this talk of whether he had a gun. Whether he had a book. You know, I know, and those who have been involved in these situations deeply understand the fact that, for every person that may have seen something, they're going to have their own view point.

That's why we come in and we're not, you know, throwing out accusations. We just want to know the facts. At the end of the day, if it is proven and the evidence supports that he did have a firearm. I can tell you that, based on what I saw on those two videos yesterday, I believe it's still questionable as to whether or not he should have been shot and killed.

CUOMO: And listen, there's no question that, in legal analysis, just having the weapon alone in an open carry state would not be dispositive of imminent threat.

But let's just take one step back, if we could, counselor. What started a lot of the tension here was, without judgment, that a family member said, "He was reading a book. My father doesn't have a gun."

The police then said, "We've recovered a weapon at the scene." We have seen photos that were supposedly put out by some bystander that seems to show an object on the ground that looks like a gun.

In the video, do you accept the idea from the police that he was armed at the time? That Mr. Scott was armed.

BAMBERG: Based on the two videos that we saw yesterday, you do not see a gun at any point in either one of those videos.

You know, the daughter, of course, she put that video out. She said he had a book. You know, based on his usual pattern, he does sit in that vehicle. He does read a book. His mother has confirmed that. His family has confirmed that.

But, you know, we have to be honest about these situations, is you know, every spouse doesn't know any and everything about their spouse. Every child doesn't know any and everything about their loved one.

So, again, if at the end of the day, the evidence shows that there was a gun recovered from the scene and that gun was on his person, then we have to deal with that.

But the key point here is the process. It's the transparency. It's the family deserves to know why their loved one was shot and killed, and we need to know all of the facts. And you just kind of analyze things as you move forward.

CUOMO: So, I mean, you have to see the cops showing the family the video was a step as the right direction. But after watching it, what's your best sense of what happened? Do you see the officer involved? Is he in the uniform? Is he not? You know, what is your perspective that you got to see in the video? BAMBERG: Well, my perspective when you look at the video, you've also

got to go back to the fact that they -- why were they interacting with him at all in the first place? It's our understanding and they have said that they were out in that location to serve a warrant on someone who was not him. So, I don't know why they were aggressive towards him.

But looking that video, there are still plenty questions. You know, he was not aggressive. Again. He didn't appear to be combative. He didn't appear to be yelling anything at the officers. Quite frankly, he looked a tad bit confused, and that may have been that because, you know, in these situations you get multiple officers located in multiple positions yelling multiple commands. I don't know. I was not there with him.

[07:10:03} And again, when he was shot, it appears as though he was stepping backwards. I don't know many people who want to go on the offensive of moving in the opposite direction.

CUOMO: Did you get to see the officers in the video?

BAMBERG: You can actually see pretty -- pretty clearly two officers who were located on the opposite side of a pickup truck, I guess using that as cover, looking at the vehicle Mr. Scott was in. You can kind of see the alleged shooter in the corner of the dash-cam footage, but, you know, it's not really that clear.

CUOMO: Could you tell they were cops?

BAMBERG: And you actually don't see him again.

You know, I don't know. Hindsight is 20/20. When I look at this, I see people in plain clothes wearing a vest. I can't make out anything that may be on that vest. It's unclear as to what Mr. Scott may have been able to see from his viewpoint. So, I don't know. I don't know if they identified themselves as police.

All I know is that, when that dash cam cut on, when that body is on, Mr. Scott is in his car, and shortly therefore, he steps out.

CUOMO: Justin Bamberg, thank you very much. Appreciate you giving us the perspective of what you saw in that video and how the family is viewing all this. Appreciate you being on NEW DAY.

BAMBERG: Thank you.

CUOMO: Now, coming up in our next hour, we're going to talk with Charlotte's mayor, Jennifer Roberts. You heard her say earlier in the show, it is ambiguous. What does she mean? What does she think about the state of safety on the streets there and the curfew? That will be coming up -- Alisyn.

CAMEROTA: OK. The Tulsa, Oklahoma, police officer who shot and killed an unarmed black man last Friday now charged with felony manslaughter. Officer Betty Shelby is free on $50,000 bond this morning after being jailed briefly overnight. CNN's Ana Cabrera is live in Tulsa with more for us. Good morning,

Ana, what's the latest?

ANA CABRERA, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Alisyn.

Police and the district attorney's office here worked very quickly in this case. They conducted dozens of interviews, analyzed the video. They completed their entire investigation in just six days.

This morning, the family of Terence Crutcher is calling the outcome 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 the felony crime of manslaughter in the first degree against Tulsa Police Officer Betty Shelby is warranted.

CABRERA: The felony manslaughter charge 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 reacted 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.

DAMIANO SOLOMON-SIMMONS, ATTORNEY FOR CRUTCHER FAMILY: 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 manslaughter in the first degree is a serious one, carrying a penalty of four years up to life in prison if convicted.

We did reach out to the attorney for Officer Shelby this morning, who has not gotten back to us just yet. And I want to point out that, while video evidence may seem conclusive, experts say it is never the only evidence presented at trial -- Chris, Alisyn.

CAMEROTA: That is a great point. Ana, thank you very much for all of that reporting.

Let's discuss it. We want to bring in retired LAPD Sergeant Cheryl Dorsey; and CNN law enforcement analyst and retired NYPD detective Harry Hauck. Great to have both of you.

Harry, are you surprised that Officer Shelby has been charged with manslaughter?

HARRY HAUCK, CNN LAW ENFORCEMENT ANALYST: Well, you know, like I said yesterday, you know, we couldn't see what happened. So, apparently, after the investigation, the department finally decided to charge her.

[17;15:04] CAMEROTA: You don't think there's enough evidence to charge her, is what I'm hearing.

HAUCK: Well, no. I don't know yet. I'm not -- you know, I don't know, you know, what her statement was. The fact here that -- you know...

CAMEROTA: We know a little bit about what her statement was. Because she told -- I mean, we just heard it there in Ana's piece, where she said that she felt that she and her fellow officers were in danger of serious harm or death.

HAUCK: Right, yes. He might have made a furtive move by the window. That's definitely a possibility. I mean, it's great. We know there wasn't a gun in the car now, but did we know then? Why did he decide not to follow the commands of the police?

CAMEROTA: OK.

HAUCK: Why did he put his hands down?

CAMEROTA: So you don't think she should have been charged is what I'm hearing? HAUCK: I don't know yet, because I don't know enough evidence, you

know, regarding this case. If I do a further analysis when more comes out on the case, I'll take a look at it, and I'll make my own decision based on that. But right now we don't know enough.

CUOMO: Now, talking to prosecutors about cases like this and where their mindset is when they're reviewing things. Very often, if they see proof that an officer is not doing what they should have been doing in the situation, that winds up weighing on their analysis of that final moment of judgment. That you can't take it just in that furtive move, as they're saying. Do you agree with that?

CHERYL DORSEY, RETIRED LAPD SERGEANT: Absolutely. What we do know is that the tactics that led up to this deadly force incident were deplorable. She took herself from a position of cover and concealment. She walked up on someone that she said was scaring her more than she's ever been scared in her entire life and created a situation where now deadly force had to be used.

And she's trying to articulate that "I was in fear" without really articulating what made you fearful? What was it? Because if you were in fear, why are you running up on him? And so you just don't get to say, "I'm in fear," and now ollie, ollie oxenfree, you get to kill somebody.

Someone failing to comply does not require lethal force. Someone walking to a car, if you're telling them not to do that, does not justify deadly force.

And so, maybe he was walking to the car because she asked him to go get something out of the car, and he was trying to comply. We don't know. We don't hear the audio.

HAUCK: We don't know that yet. We don't know that quite yet. I mean, the fact, this man had his hands up and kept on walking towards his car. There's no audio. All right. There's other officers that scene.

Now, I agree with Cheryl on the first part regarding her tactics when she was alone. But the...

CAMEROTA: Should have taken cover.

HAUCK: Right, I agree with those tactics. And that is that officer's choice, though, OK, at the scene. It might have been a better tactic for her to do that.

And there's nothing wrong with a police officer being scared for their life. I've been scared many times, and that's where this thing called courage comes in. All right? And that's -- we're supposed to have courage as police officers. Right. That kicks in...

CAMEROTA: What would that look like if you had had courage in that scene, what would you have done there differently?

HAUCK: I don't know, because I wasn't right there. All I know is that that man kept on going towards the car. And I told him to stop, stop, stop. And he did not stop. And when he got around to the car, if it looked like he was reaching into the window for something or was making a furtive move, I don't know what I would have done, OK? Because I've had situations. I've taken on gunmen all by myself several times. And never had to kill them.

CAMEROTA: There you go.

HAUCK: But each situation is different.

CAMEROTA: Why didn't she just Tase him?

DORSEY: And listen, you have to act on what you know, not what you think. Right? I thought he was doing this; I thought he was doing that.

We now know for a fact she'd already cleared the car. That means she rendered it safe. That means that there was nothing in that vehicle that was going to hurt her if he even got back into the vehicle, according to what we're hearing. She rendered the car safe.

CAMEROTA: Meaning they had gone and looked in already?

DORSEY: They'd reported it. They're reported that she'd already cleared the car. That's police jargon for "I walked up to it as a police officer. I've looked in. There's nothing that's going to hurt me if you get back in that car." And so she rendered it clear. The window is up. You can't just say now "I think he might..."

CUOMO: but also, remember this.

HAUCK: But that was if there was a weapon in view. Maybe it was a weapon underneath.

CUOMO: That's true.

HAUCK: It's a possibility.

CUOMO: But, remember, it is a possibility. But remember legal analysis in these situations. You're working on probabilities. You're working on reasonableness. And I've been listening more than I've been interacting, because I'm trying to think of it as the lawyers who are doing this.

Probable cause that a crime was committed. That's what they're looking for to get this criminal complaint or an indictment. Probable cause is a low standard. When you have this video, it is not a surprise that they found it satisfied for an indictment. Would you agree with that? You don't know everything. You don't know if it's beyond a reasonable doubt.

HAUCK: You know, the video was not good enough at the point where he's in front of the window and the police officers are right there. This is the view the police officer has.

The helicopter, that officer does not have that helicopter view. All right? That officer has got this view here, right what's going on.

I'm not saying whether she should have shot or not shot. But what I want to see here is I want to see more evidence of what's going on here in this case, exactly what kind of movement this man did.

CAMEROTA: Yes.

HAUCK: And that's very important for me.

CUOMO: That's for a conviction. For probable cause for a crime to have been committed, do you think you know enough already that you're not shocked by this?

[07:20:06] DORSEY: Absolutely. Because we've heard -- we've heard varying statements from her. We've heard her say that she thought he was under the influence of PCP. We've heard her say that she thought he was reaching for something, he was trying to get back in the vehicle.

And so I believe that the prosecutors coupled her statements, varying statements, differing statements, which sounds to me like let me manufacture a reasonable use of this deadly force, and it doesn't jive with what's on the video.

CAMEROTA: Cheryl, Harry, thank you both very much for all of your experience with this and sharing it with us.

CUOMO: All right. Let's move over to what's going on in government. What's Congress going to do to address these deadly police shootings? Sure, it's not exclusively what the federal government does, but there are things that could be done. We have two makers -- lawmakers joining us next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CAMEROTA: Race and policing now, of course, major issues on the campaign trail, but what can the president or Congress, for that matter, do about racial and police tension?

Joining us now are two men who know, Democratic congressman of New York's Greg Meeks. He's the chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus and Republican congressman of Georgia Doug Collins. Thanks, gentlemen, both of you, for being here, because let's try to get some answers for the viewers today. And I think that you both are in a good position to do this.

[07:25:15] Congressman Collins, let me start with you, because you're on this House Task Force of Police-Community Relations. What is the first thing that you would do to stop the kind of tension and the shootings, frankly, that we've been covering so much of in the past year?

REP. DOUG COLLINS (R), GEORGIA: Well, I think what we're seeing is a tragedy. I think what this police working group is trying to do is come to the discussion points and say, "where can we find dialogue? Where can we bridge gaps?" What's happening is unacceptable. It's unacceptable in the police communities; it's unacceptable in the communities in which they serve.

What we're trying to do is begin to facilitate that conversation. I've made this comment many times, that what is needed right now is trust, and what is broken right now is trust. So I think one of the things this police working group is beginning to have that dialogue between the communities and the police and the issues that they're facing to say how can we have a better communication relationship so when instances like this come up there is a trust factor that can get us a positive result instead of the tension that we're seeing right now.

CAMEROTA: OK. So, communication is No. 1. But let's talk about specifically how Congress can help.

Congressman Meeks, what we have heard in the past days after shootings, more federal aid for local law enforcement. They need more money. Can that happen from Congress?

REP. GREG MEEKS (D), NEW YORK: Well, I'd hope. Let me first correct. I'm the chair of the Congressional Black Caucus's political action committee, not the Congressional Black Caucus. They're different.

CAMEROTA: Got it, thank you.

MEEKS: I want to make sure that's clear.

But there are things that we can do. No. 1, Doug is part of and I talked to Cedric Richmond from Louisiana and Hakim Jeffries from New York and chairman of ranking member John Conyers, they're working together. That dialogue and conversation is tremendously important.

But what we can do, we have the power to do in Congress to pass legislation. And there are various bills that already that have been written that we need to talk about. We need to have hearings on them and then vote them on the floor.

CAMEROTA: Yes.

MEEKS: For example...

CAMEROTA: Go ahead.

MEEKS: ... we have to fund more body cameras, because what we know is that, when you have a visual view of what's taking place, it helps transparency, because the issue in a lot of cases is just a matter of transparency.

CAMEROTA: Yes.

MEEKS: No one -- you know, so, we can do that. We can pass a piece of legislation that will require individuals, or require the attorney general to come up with the statistics clearly showing the makeup of who is being shot and who is not.

CAMEROTA: Sure.

MEEKS: We don't even do that. Pieces of legislation that's written that we can pass...

CAMEROTA: Yes.

MEEKS: ... that can make a difference and get people to believe the trust factor.

CAMEROTA: OK, so let's talk about that. Congressman Collins, one of the things that we have heard from every person who has come on here in the past few days about these shootings is that there is a need for independent investigators, independent investigation.

After one of these police shootings, you can't rely on the police department that's involved to investigate itself. Who's getting in the way of some sort of investigative body that could look into these things?

COLLINS: Well, I think what you're looking at here is, again, and Gregory and I would talk about this before and we are talking about it this this morning. There's the difference in the federal level today and the local response.

And many times, the laws on how you deal with, you know, even things such as the videotapes, which I think are very good. And the body cameras do give that perspective and allow us to look at, on each state, having different standards of how that happens.

What we need to look at is, is how then do we have the independent investigations working with the state and local and then where there is a need from a federal perspective. And I do believe the Department of Justice is looking into these. I do believe there is a proper federal role there, especially when you're seeing the incidents like we are seeing.

So I think this is something that is -- maybe something as we look forward in our working group, talking with both members of -- both Democrats and Republicans, say is there a way that we can look at an investigatory process that is fair to both sides but that involves the federal? If not, how do we encourage state and local to be more transparent in how they go about this?

CAMEROTA: OK, Congressman Meeks, do you think that could happen, a federal body, let's say, that can be the investigative body?

MEEKS: Well, I think the hope is the working group. Because it seems as though, when you listen to Doug, you talk to Doug, and I have been talking to Cedric and others that they are, in fact. So communication among both parties is tremendously important. That's the first step.

And then, so that communication is there, so you would hope that the next step is that we would agree upon, in a bipartisan way legislation that would go through the hearing process, and then we will have a vote on the floor.

And, so, I have hoped that that will happen, but it needs to happen in an expeditious manner so that we can make sure that people have faith in the criminal justice system. CAMEROTA: Yes. Congressman -- Congressman Collins, we also hear

everybody say that there has to be better training for police officers. They have to know what to do in a situation like this and not feel as scared as it seems Officer Shelby did in Tulsa.

Would you be willing to fund that?