[0:00][Music]
[0:10]and welcome to law and crime now everybody i'm jesse weber and thanks for joining us we have a full show for you we're going to start right now with a police involved shooting out of wisconsin this is from a video that went absolutely viral
[0:22]it appears to show an officer shooting 29 year old jacob blake in the back multiple times as he enters into an suv and the man's children were reportedly in the car as well
[0:33]now blake has survived and he is in stable condition i want to start with the video itself
[0:39]take a look oh
[0:58]wow okay now that shooting has led to massive protests some of which have been violent uh the officers have been put on administrative leave
[1:09]the state doj is currently investigating the matter and they're going to prepare a report for the state prosecutor blake's family has retained renowned civil rights attorney benjamin crump so there's a lot to get
[1:21]into and i want to bring on my guests immediately to get into this i'm joined now by long crime network's terry austin forensic death investigator from jacksonville state university joseph scott morgan
[1:30]and long crime legal analyst gene rossi great to have everybody here terry let me start with you so the doj is investigating they're going to prepare a report for the prosecutor could the officer
[1:42]or officers face charges and what could they face they absolutely could face charges jesse this is a horrendous crime they could face attempted murder charges they could face
[1:53]assault which would be less than that but clearly the officer who shot the gun and if he shot seven times he was trying to
[2:03]at least assault the individual or kill the individual you could certainly argue that so i think this is one of those cases where there will be an investigation and
[2:14]the investigation will show that there was some intent here jacob blake was shot in the back and he's fortunate that he survived and the other issue jesse is that the children were in the car what were these
[2:26]individuals thinking when they shot these fires that's a good point what was anybody thinking here because gene i want to turn it to you and there's a lot of details we don't know yet and
[2:37]obviously there's more to the story but when you think about george floyd brianna taylor rachard brooks we're living in a climate right now where you would imagine police would use more restraint that they wouldn't immediately get into
[2:49]this so what exactly were they thinking here i mean we are living in a very different world here gene what's going on i'm going to put on my defense attorney's hat i'm not saying it's a
[3:00]great argument the only possible argument i can think of for those officers to rely on is that when he went
[3:09]mr blake went into the car he was trying to get a firearm that's the only possible way they can defend this case only possible
[3:20]way self-defense but uh terry brought up a good point the kids are in the car he's not going into a car to get a gun he's probably going in a car to calm the
[3:32]kids down and the seven shots occurred almost after he opened the door to the car there was no attempt to get him out of the car
[3:42]i think these officers panicked but but panic is not going to be a defense if those are the facts yeah you mentioned seven shots joseph
[3:54]how on earth is he alive it's a miracle that this man is alive so we have covered multiple uh shooting related incidents on this program before seven shots what can we make of that
[4:05]joseph yeah you know again we're saying that there are seven shots and i've heard other people say that he was shot seven times i don't have any confirmation of that yet
[4:16]i don't know you would think at that range that there's a high likelihood that they would have been on target but that remains to be seen and also we're at a disadvantage because the video that we're watching starts in one
[4:27]spot i don't know what happened prior to that but i can tell you some of the questions that are going to come up they're going to talk about things like the force continuum they're going to talk about
[4:37]you know lethal versus non-lethal force i've heard a lot of chatter about people why weren't tasers deployed at this point this thing
[4:47]happened very quickly council mentioned just a moment ago that there may be panic involved i don't know but i know that this officer
[4:57]did fire obviously his weapon multiple times the other officer is essentially backing off and not joining in of course he's not going to at that point in time because
[5:07]there's a weapon being discharged you know you kind of that's off the table at that point you know you can't put your hands on him at that point yeah if you've drawn down on it so i don't know i'll be very anxious to see
[5:18]these reports when they come out terry let me ask you this unlike other cases obviously there's body cam footage that hasn't been released yet but
[5:26]you have clearly some video eyewitnesses and the victim of this shooting is alive so in terms of a defense which
[5:37]gene and i went into a little bit it seems that the officer or officers uh will have a different kind of battle than any other case that we've covered here
[5:48]i think they're going to have a very difficult battle jesse because to your point we have some video and we do have some eyewitnesses involved and i think just looking at the video
[5:58]and we know that benjamin crump is an excellent attorney and if he has that video i do think that he is going to pursue criminal charges or have the state pursue criminal charges against the police
[6:09]officer who shot the gun and maybe even some civil charges as far as that's concerned so there can be some monetary reward here for what occurred but yeah i think that the fact that
[6:21]there were seven shots they could have disabled blake before shooting so many times even if there was a gun involved and the police investigation is
[6:31]going to show whether or not that's the case they could have stopped him and i do think there was a taser joseph mentioned that they could have done that based on one of the reports i saw
[6:41]i think they did at least take out their taser so lots of questions jessie and it remains to be seen what the real facts are so laquisha booker is jacob blake's
[6:53]fiancee here's what she told the local media outlet about what happened with the shooting you overused it that's what you did you shot him numerous times for no reason it
[7:05]didn't take all that disregard that my kids was in the car at all and you knew they was in there because i kept screaming that before y'all even made it to the other side of the driver's side to get him in the car i've been yelling
[7:15]at the whole time let me get my kid yeah gene we're trying to make sense of what happened here and you said put your defense cap on now again more details need to come out but
[7:26]if officers were responding to a domestic violence incident and i believe there are reports out there of you know blake's possible criminal past
[7:38]do officers keep that in mind when they respond and does that somehow affect their defense and saying look we we went into this domestic violence
[7:48]incident with an idea of who blake is and perhaps that's what led the officer to open fire not justifying it because every take every situation as it is but could that change the story at all
[7:59]or help them in any way pray and criminal tent of course are key elements of any criminal charge so what the officers
[8:09]or officer had in his brain before he approached this car it could have been he has a long criminal record there's a gun involved there's an
[8:19]allegation of violence if that was all in his head before he approached then that would help him in any defense but the fiance provides very good evidence
[8:31]that counters that she's kind of saying the kids are in the car we got to think about them that that kind of supports the argument that mr blake was going into the car
[8:41]to pro probably try to calm the kids the other fact and this is sort of the monday morning quarterback the other fact that will hurt the officers if there's no gun
[8:53]or knife or weapon in the car that's gonna hurt their defense because uh he was probably going into the car mr blake was
[9:04]to calm his kids and that will that will hurt the officers they can say you know what there was no gun but in my head i thought he was reaching
[9:14]for a gun but looking at that video right he did not look like a guy going into his car to get the gun so joseph what goes into processing this
[9:27]crime scene now uh thankfully the medical examiner the coroner doesn't have to get involved i mean again miraculously he survived this but what goes into processing that crime scene
[9:37]to understand what happened here uh well you know obviously we have the video record from across the street but also what's going to be key are going to be
[9:48]the cams uh that the police officers hopefully had running at the time and also prior to that i don't know if this was affected by a traffic stop initially and they'd run this guy through ncic or
[9:59]what had happened i have none of the history to kind of back this up but as far as the physical evidence at the scene um that officer's weapon uh would have been taken
[10:10]yesterday at that moment tom he would have had to surrender his weapon at the scene they'll collect all of the spent casings the ejected rounds that are coming out and then the recovered projectiles that
[10:22]pass through uh mr blake's body or any shots that went wild into the car those will be collected trajectories will be drawn to show kind of the attitude
[10:33]between the police officer at the end of the muzzle and where the round wound up and all of that's going to be kind of formed into a picture a forensic picture of what exactly went down they'll talk about things like range of
[10:45]fire and and all those sorts of things the physical evidence i think that part is going to be kind of elementary i'm going to be very interested to see what the videography says prior to and look at this point based upon what
[10:59]we do know people are outraged by this there is a ton of public support for the blake family and it'll be curious and interesting to see all elements of what happened because
[11:10]just looking at it from face value none of it makes sense but it is a case that we will continue to follow here as it progresses on long crime now when we come back huge
[11:20]update in the scott peterson case we'll be right back right after this
[11:28][Music]
[11:38]welcome back everybody major development in a case that helped to define the true crime era we have just learned the california supreme court has officially overturned
[11:49]the death sentence for convicted murderer scott peterson you go back to 2004 peterson was found guilty and sentenced to death for killing his pregnant wife lacey and their unborn child connor we
[12:00]covered his appeal hearing on law and crime and one of the main arguments from the defense that the trial judge improperly excluded jurors from the case we saw how that unfolded
[12:11]in real time take a look let me go then to the next jury sure 83 40. this drawer this drawer was strongly
[12:22]opposed the death penalty as opposed to simply as opposed to simply opposed uh in the prior juror and this juror also said however that her views would not preclude her
[12:33]from imposing death and the trial court discharged this juror because quote the juror is excused because the jurors opposed to the death penalty on religious grounds
[12:44]and that's true she did state the source of her opposition was religious grounds and in fact that's the primary reason the state defends this uh defends this discharge there are two reasons but the primary reason is that
[12:55]the source of her opposition was religious and the second point the state makes is that she preferred life without parole she said she preferred in her questionnaire and i want to make an additional comment
[13:06]on each of these the state's focus on the source of this juror's opposition to the death penalty completely misapprehends witherspoon and they do this and one of the reasons this juror is
[13:17]useful is because the state focuses on source with a number of the 13 jurors i've identified witherspoon does not say you can discharge depending on the source regardless of the source the
[13:28]witherspoon inquiry focuses on whether the juror can set aside the views whether the views are religious based philosophically based morally based financially based but witherspoon inquiry is about setting
[13:39]those views aside not the source uh and we we don't have to look any further than i believe this court's decisions in woodruff and gwen maestro
[13:49]and zaragoza to know that the fact that a juror has a religious basis for their opposition is not in and of itself sufficient to discharge them based solely on the juror
[14:00]questionnaire that leaves the state with one other additional factor about this juror they say that justify the discharge and that is that she preferred life without parole
[14:11]and let me be frank with the court and concede this that every juror who is opposed to the death penalty will prefer life without parole it is the flip side
[14:22]of the same coin after all if you're opposed to the death penalty and you're asked what your views are of the death penalty you're like without parole you're going to prefer life without parole that's what being against the
[14:33]death penalty is all about it's the flip side of the same coin saying that you cannot discharge someone for opposition to the death penalty but you can discharge them because they
[14:43]prefer life without parole is it's a shell game now gene it seems that the supreme court here sided with this argument and felt that
[14:54]the trial judge didn't do a good thing by getting rid of these jurors right i mean how did they come to this landmark decision i got to tell you clint gardner is
[15:04]brilliant he he he's brilliant um here's how they they came to the conclusion there are two types of striking of jurors one is the
[15:15]preemptory strike i i is a defense attorney a prosecutor especially in a death penalty case i can strike a juror for any reason
[15:24]other than race and gender okay as long as i have some reasonable independent basis all right what the judge did which caused this
[15:36]reversal is that for a boatload of jurors he mentioned 13 i'm sure there were more i think for a boatload of jurors the judge said i'm going to strike these jurors
[15:48]for cause not even peremptory for cause this is when the judge based on information says that juror can't be fair
[15:58]and mr gardner brought up a brilliant point so what if you're catholic the pope says the death penalty's wrong just because you're
[16:08]catholic and you believe in the pope and the infallibility of the pope does that mean you can never serve on a jury or the death penalty case
[16:16]that's absurd so what the judge did is he took that religious belief or the position and said that by itself
[16:27]is a reason you can't serve on this jury i think it's a i think it's a an excellent decision frankly yeah it makes sense but now terry the question is
[16:39]what does the state do because let's not forget his convictions stay where they are court upheld those convictions the trial guilt phase that's done the question is does the state now
[16:50]retry the penalty phase and and the there was a spokes there was a statement from the um county district attorney that says we're going to review the decision we'll discuss with the victims family
[17:00]on what to do next but your best guess terry do they now retry the penalty phase to get the death penalty again and what would that even look like i think that is what will occur and what
[17:11]it'll look like is this time gene really said it perfectly those four cause strikes are unlimited and if the judge in fact said because of your religious beliefs
[17:23]all of you are stricken from the jury that really does deny the defendant his constitutional right and i do think the judge made the right decision
[17:33]in keeping the conviction the guilt portion but making sure that they overturned the penalty portion and yes i think the state should retry that portion and make sure
[17:44]that jurors who are on can see both sides the fact is if a juror says i will apply the law it doesn't matter what their beliefs are
[17:54]if they say they will apply the law then you have to take them for their word so i do think we're going to see a retrieve the penalty phase because in other words the peterson uh
[18:05]jury at that time was just all in favor of the death penalty that was the defense's argument now joseph i want to turn it to you because this is a case that you and i had discussed what do you make of it you knew about
[18:15]this from back in the day and now with this massive development people have followed this case from when it first began in 2002 what do you make of this uh as tom as time has gone by for me i've covered
[18:26]this case for so long you know it's i'm sick to the back teeth of it personally i'm no attorney obviously but i have participated in cases where
[18:37]the death penalty was at stake and actually interestingly enough a little factoid i've assisted in the autopsy of uh two individuals that were executed in the state of georgia and i remember
[18:49]you know back then thinking what a waste uh what a waste of time this is for everybody at this point these guys had languished on death row you know when it comes to scott peterson
[18:59]for me personally and again this is only my personal uh uh view uh i wish that we just never had to say his name again he stuck into a deep dark hole there if
[19:11]it says no possibility of parole then there's no possibility of parole he's never resurfaced again and so for me i just i want the thing to be over with well look he has been sitting on death
[19:24]row uh in california gavin newsom governor gavin newsom has put a halt on the death penalty while he's in office so this is we're just going to see which way this plays out but what a decision that i got to tell you
[19:36]probably surprised a lot of people who are following this now i want to turn to another defendant a defendant whose trial we covered here on law and crime and that's markeith lloyd he was convicted of murdering his
[19:48]pregnant ex-girlfriend sade dixon and he's supposed to have an upcoming trial for the killing of orlando police officer deborah clayton authorities say that he gunned her down while he was on the run from law
[19:59]enforcement in regards to the dixon killing but now his attorney thomas lenemen is saying that this trial this and second one should be thrown out because of something called
[20:10]collateral estoppel now before we get into that let's actually play a little bit of something here because this was the defense's closing argument from uh mr lennon where he basically
[20:22]says you know jury you're not gonna you're gonna hear very limited information about the debra clayton incident so just look at it in a specific way this was important take a look
[20:34]so now we get to the walmart and why is the walmart important the walmart is important because there is a limited instruction that the judge gave you
[20:44]on what's called consciousness of guilt or identity so in other words there is evidence that was presented to
[20:55]you that mr lloyd went to walmart and he discharged the firearm and sergeant clayton was involved in the discharge of the firearm
[21:06]and they recovered the casings from the same firearm that he used
[21:15]in the dixon case in chade's case and ron's case at the actual scene of the walmart and so they compare
[21:25]those two and the law allows them to present to you that you can consider because he was
[21:35]fleeing or acting in a way to get away from sergeant clayton that you can use that to show number one that he's the same person
[21:46]that was involved in the dixon shooting or number two that he did so because of a consciousness of guilt that that's the reason he flees and he
[21:58]shoots in that particular case that's the only limited purpose that you can use that and for those of you who said that you knew about
[22:08]the clayton shooting you were instructed by the judge numerous times you can't consider this you can't consider that you can't consider it and you can't that case
[22:19]will have 12 jurors on another day consider that okay so gene explain it to non-lawyers out there this idea
[22:30]of collateral estoppel that's what his attorney's saying he's saying that this new trial about debra clayton first jury heard things about it and that's kind of why they can't have the second trial what does he say what
[22:42]is he arguing here well what it's it based on a supreme court case i think that was decided around 1993 where if the government uses the same
[22:54]facts to convict an individual on crime a you can't use those same facts again to convict on crime b
[23:03]hear crime a is the girlfriend miss dixon being murdered and of course the second one is the uh the female officer
[23:12]lieutenant clayton that argument is that those same facts in the first trial can't be used collaterally again in the second
[23:22]the problem with that argument is it doesn't violate double jeopardy there's a supreme court case called felix of 1994
[23:31]that says each crime is element-based it's not fact based so you can use the same facts in crime a and you can use them in the same trial
[23:43]as crime b and that's okay if the elements are different there are two elements that are different here different victims different murders so their argument
[23:53]doesn't hold water under the supreme court you know joseph from your perspective killings of law enforcement we could argue day and night about the
[24:04]legal aspect of it but it almost seems from a political aspect that it's important to have this trial and i'm curious from your perspective from your career
[24:14]you know this case is just is is very important to get into a courtroom yeah it is uh you know my heart broke over the death of this lieutenant uh
[24:24]mother uh and she i you know it's like she just walked right into a buzzsaw she i don't know that she really could have predicted what happened this guy was very violent do you remember i don't
[24:36]know if you recall this but you know you and i were actually covering i think the day that he made his initial appearance when he started screaming in court and whatnot and you know i remember both of us raised an
[24:47]eyebrow at that particular time jesse uh thinking wow what does the future hold you know at the time with the the death of his uh of his girlfriend at that time we
[24:59]covered that but you know i remember us talking about what the lieutenant's trial was going to be like uh and uh yeah i think that it it does this is something that does need to be
[25:09]open to the public we need to cover it from gavel to gavel like we always do and it needs to be presented so so everything can be out in the open and there's going to be interesting forensics in this case right are there
[25:20]going to be tie backs with weapons i'm going to be very curious absolutely especially from what happened at that walmart so that jury heard a little bit of it and kind of even from the flavor flavor of it you heard the defense saying
[25:31]i wonder if the same result is going to happen this time around we're going to follow the markeith lloyd case but when we come back an update for you in gelane maxwell we'll be back
[25:42][Music] i'm not going to comment on anyone's
[25:54]status in this investigation but i will say that we would welcome prince andrew coming in to talk with us we would like to have the benefit
[26:03]of his statement yeah i have no further comment beyond what i just said with which is that our
[26:14]doors remain open and we as we've previously said and we would welcome him coming in and giving us an opportunity to hear his statement
[26:24]ah do you remember when audrey strauss said that upon the arrest of gelane maxwell jeffrey epstein's associate who's in jail on charges of recruiting minors into a sex trafficking ring and ultimately lying
[26:35]under oath about it well apparently prosecutors have acknowledged that the investigation into co-conspirators is ongoing and they don't want to
[26:44]jeopardize anything so terry this is big because we have learned that there is some sort of grand jury investigation underway uh we don't know more details about it
[26:55]there have been those who have speculated does this mean more charges are following and possibly soon what do you make of that jesse this
[27:05]is the case that just keeps on giving i do think there might be additional charges i don't know if those charges will be against prince andrew i mean we have other people
[27:16]who have been involved with this entire scheme obviously we could have some additional charges as far as maxwell's concerned she already has six counts of trafficking we could add some additional counts there
[27:26]she has perjury charges i'm not sure if we get additional charges there but i do think that the authorities are continuing to investigate this because there have been so many people
[27:37]who have been damaged by what occurred with this whole sex ring so yes i do think we will see more in this case gene let's read the through the tea
[27:49]leaves if we can a little bit we don't know this but is she cooperating right now is that what's going on is maxwell giving up names is she working on a deal is that's
[28:00]what's happening behind the scenes or is she not at that point yet based upon how this generally looks and based upon the communications that have been
[28:10]coming forward from the prosecution do you think that there's some sense of cooperation at this point with her or is that premature to think i think it's premature i don't get the feeling
[28:20]at this point she's cooperating but i can tell you about the southern district of new york and and other u.s attorney's offices right now they're going to probably set
[28:30]a trial for uh miss maxwell and i won't i would be surprised if the government is totally prepared for that trial and the best way
[28:42]to get a new trial date is to supersede and add conspirators to mix miss maxwell and i predict that you're going to see a
[28:52]superseding indictment probably within the next three months of maybe two to three more individuals and this is based on their continuing
[29:03]investigation in grand jury and this is the thing about the grand jury they can investigate new conspirators and new crimes
[29:13]but they can't build a case against miss maxwell so that's what they're doing now to using that grand jury to find more conspirators and also maybe additional crimes
[29:24]not just against maxwell but other people so i don't think she's cooperating yet but in the next month or two after discovery
[29:35]is informally exchanged by the government with the defense or formally when the defense attorney sees some of the evidence then at that point when they can really
[29:46]collate the information i think she may cross that rubicon and start cooperating gene let me just follow up with that
[29:56]real quick if that's the case wouldn't these individuals have to be high profile enough i mean if you're thinking if it's a low level fish or someone doesn't she doesn't have a lot of
[30:07]information about that it has to be bigger than her right i what i always say is if you're going to supersede you're not going to go after minnows
[30:17]you're going to go after someone who is you know whoever they whomever they charge is probably going to be high profile or significant you're going to try to charge somebody on the same
[30:28]managerial plane as mix as allegedly mix maxwell was and it'll be somebody who'd probably be on the same plane or right below her
[30:39]on the hierarchy chart it may not be mr and prince andrew it could be somebody we've never heard of it could be somebody we've never heard of but it's based on discovery that they
[30:51]are gathering through the grand jury process so you mentioned prince andrew there's a new documentary on the crime investigation
[31:01]uk channel and it's called a surviving jeffrey epstein and one of the people to speak is a legit victim virginia giuffray uh who's accused very high profile people
[31:12]of being sexual abusers including prince andrew let's just play a quick snippet of that and then we're gonna get into something that she alleged that's a pretty pretty out there we'll be back
[31:22]the massage seems legitimate at first but you said take off your clothes these were rich and powerfully persuasive people at 16 what happens if i
[31:33]say no so i stripped down turned into it turned very sexual and it was
[31:40]abused right away [Music] so terry one of the things that she
[31:56]alleges is that maxwell would play this kind of guessing game with the the other person including prince andrew and he would guess
[32:05]what age roberts was i should say virginia over true frey now but what age she was and he guessed correctly that she was 17 and according to her she said
[32:16]according to her she said that uh prince andrew said oh my daughters are a few years younger than you if that is true terry what do you make
[32:27]of that jesse if that is true that is horrible the fact that first of all they're playing a gang these are people's lives these women these young
[32:38]girls at the time were deeply affected by what occurred and the fact that they're playing games the fact that he's talking about his daughters being
[32:48]same age or younger is just horrible and if in fact prince andrew or anyone else involved in these conversations are brought and are indicted and are tried
[33:00]that will be evidence that will really hurt their chances because it does show that they have a depraved mind and that they are seeking to have sex with young girls who
[33:11]are underage and it's really just hard to even think about joseph i'll give you the final word from an investigative point of view how complicated
[33:22]is this because we're trying to read between the lines about what's happening yeah we're not just talking about something that has occurred within the us jurisdiction that the feds are looking at we're looking at international uh you know i got to
[33:34]tell you i watched the 60 minutes piece out of australia with virginia and one of the things that if i remember correctly and it might have been from the vanity fair piece i can't recall they've run together after a while
[33:46]she had mentioned being present at a sex party uh on on this island uh in the caribbean and something that has haunted me from this from from that moment she talked about that
[33:57]there were multiple young girls in that room engaged in sex with epstein and another person uh and these girls were speaking
[34:09]what she thought sounded like slavic or eastern european uh languages and my thought and i'll leave it with this how did those girls get from eastern europe to the caribbean
[34:20]how did they get to new mexico all these other places and what happened to them these are just the girls we know about kids from eastern europe they're trafficked all the time this is a big big story jesse and i i'd
[34:32]like to have answers from an investigative perspective you've got interpol involved in this thing as well as the fbi the justice department and scotland yard well we well we have about a year until her trial starts
[34:43]there's a lot that can happen between now and then as gene was saying and perhaps we'll get more answers but as every day goes on we just hear more disturbing allegations in this whole sordid affair
[34:53]now speaking of sex crimes when we come back we have to focus on harvey weinstein and kellen winslow updates in both of their cases stay tuned
[35:03][Music] this case is not a he said she said
[35:14]reject that theory too how could this case possibly be he said she said this case is a she said and she said and she said and she said and she said
[35:25]five separate women five separate victims all of whom have been confirmed and corroborated by each other this man is a sexual predator who acted
[35:36]and victimized against every single one of these women you as jurors have a duty to reject the defense theories because they're unreasonable you have
[35:47]the duty to render true and just burdens based upon the reasonable assessment of the evidence
[35:58]the court told you that direct evidence can prove a fact by itself and we're talking about kellen winslow the former nfl tight end who was
[36:10]convicted and ultimately pled guilty to multiple sex crimes involving five women now his sentencing was supposed to happen many months ago but guess what happened the coronavirus pandemic no big shocker
[36:21]there it's put a wrench on a lot of legal issues so far now the defense and the state just can't seem to agree on when that hearing is going to happen so terry i'll start with you
[36:33]the defense is saying push it to 2021 the state has asked for november a status conference status conference has been set for
[36:42]october how's this going to play out i think the state has a good argument that they should proceed in either october or november we can't wait until next year or until
[36:54]there is no covet 19. you've seen across the country that many other cases are having preliminary hearings they are having trials they are doing it behind
[37:05]either closed doors or on zoom and i do think obviously the defendant has a right to be there in person but this is the sentencing it's not even the trial
[37:15]and i think that the court will make adjustments and should make adjustments and i don't think that under these certain circumstances that the defendant has the right to wait
[37:27]until the virus is gone that could not mean we're all hoping that that will be soon but we don't know so i think that they're going to have to make adjustments and proceed let me just hit you with a follow-up
[37:40]question terry you know does time affect his sentence at all he's expecting 12 to 18 years in prison does this affect the prosecution or the defense in the sentencing hearing at all or
[37:51]what the judgment ultimately will be you know it's interesting you should ask that i re-watched the plea deal that winslow took and i don't think it will affect the sentencing but i do
[38:03]think there is a small chance that winslow might actually try to get out of the plea it took him forever to say yes i waive my rights yes i understand what's going on
[38:15]and i'm thinking in the back of my mind that he might try to pull a trick one and and do something to undo that plea and you know i don't know but it it seems interesting that they're
[38:26]stalling and delaying at this point i'll tell you what let's go back to that moment in court when he started pleading guilty to these crimes watch the testimony you're about to give will
[38:40]be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth will help you god yes ma'am thank you all right you can have a seat uh at this time uh mr owens i think you are moving to amend the information out of count nine is
[38:51]that correct that's correct all right the uh admission of guilt as to the felony sexual battery related to jane doe one okay see at this time you move the court to allow the amendment of
[39:02]the information to add a count nine which is violation of penal code section 243.4 sexual battery with an offense date of march
[39:11]17 2018. with the victim being jane doe number one a 54 year old woman is that correct that is correct and it would be the penal code section 243.4
[39:22]subsection a okay all right and the court will allow that amendment is there any objection by the defense oh yeah okay with that said then the uh
[39:33]count nine has been added to the information and uh mr winslow i'm gonna ask you a series of questions all right i've gone over your change of plea form
[39:42]have you had any uh drugs or alcohol or any narcotics at all within the last 24 hours all right i have a in my hand a change of plea form it's four pages long and on this change
[39:54]of plea form there are some initials on the right hand side of the pages and a signature on the third page is this your signature and are these your initials on this change of plea form
[40:05]yes sir all right before you signed and initial this form did you have a chance to read what was on the forum yes and did you discuss the contents of this forum with your attorneys
[40:15]yes do you thoroughly understand the contents of this forum yes and we're able to thoroughly discuss the contents of this forum with your attorneys yes right and i know we've had a long
[40:26]lunch hour and you spent the last well about two and a half hours talk well that was him pleading guilty and as terry said who knows what will happen between now and then but
[40:36]whenever his sentencing hearing is we hope to cover it here on long crime now i want to turn from one high-profile figure who was uh talking about one high-profile figure
[40:47]who was ultimately convicted of sex crimes to another harvey weinstein he's facing many years behind bars for sexually abusing women and do you remember when he started this all started back in 2017 from the publication
[40:59]of that new york times article and then his former production house the weinstein company axed them threw him out well that's where it brings us to what's happening right now because even despite
[41:10]the fact that he's in prison on a 23-year sentence for his convictions in new york and he faces charges in la he is pursuing a wrongful termination claim
[41:21]through arbitration against the weinstein company or at least that's what he's trying to do so gene let me turn it to you apparently his contract had allowed for arbitration
[41:32]and he wants the bankruptcy judge because the weinstein company is in bankruptcy to allow this to allow this arbitration claim is that going to happen no
[41:44]and i'll tell you why the bankruptcy judge is gonna smell a rat and he's gonna see that this is just a an attempt by mr weinstein to squeeze
[41:55]any ounce of fat out of that bankruptcy because once it goes into bankruptcy you have administrative fees that go to the lawyers
[42:04]uh for the debtor and the estate of the bankruptcy may be diminished and he won't get anything so this is sort of to me a hail mary pass trying to enforce the
[42:15]arbitration clause of his contract which probably has now why is he doing this why is he doing this because is the idea that he wants money for his
[42:26]legal fees he wants to support his family i mean the idea of him fighting him being fired seems like the least of his worries he's doing this because he needs money and his
[42:37]his company's in bankruptcy and this is his way to squeeze any bit of money out of the bankruptcy uh but the problem is that uh he's probably there's a probably a clause in
[42:49]the contract that specifically applies to his being convicted of serious crimes a good point and you know let's say
[43:00]terry let's say this goes to arbitration let's say the judge allows it goes to arbitration wasn't the weinstein company correct to fire him i mean isn't that the real issue here
[43:11]when you think about it when you talk about wrongful termination law if this was a guy who was publicly accused of sexually abusing multiple women over decades in this
[43:22]new york times piece how would that ultimately play out i couldn't agree with you more i mean if you don't have a right to fire someone
[43:31]who has been convicted at this point of sexual crimes and at that point he certainly had been accused i think you definitely would have a right to do that and i think
[43:43]any sort of arbitration that they owe him some money because it's a wrongful discharge is going to fail and i can't even imagine i mean arbitration you think of
[43:54]when something is arbitrated that they come to some sort of agreement or consensus as to an amount i can't even see the attorneys for the weinstein company or the bankruptcy
[44:05]saying that we will pay you any sum of money and i agree also again with gene that he's doing this because he has high legal fees and he does want to squeeze
[44:15]something out of the company it's such a mess it's such a mess for him and to think about how much has changed in three years for harvey weinstein how much has changed for him
[44:27]in the last year six months nobody would have thought it well i want to thank my guests joseph scott morgan gene rossi terry austin great as always i want to thank everybody out
[44:36]there for joining us until next time
[44:39]be safe and we'll see you then
[44:53][Music] [Music]
[45:16]you