Dec 12, 2013|
Tommy talks to Dane Ciolino, a Professor of Law at Loyola, about the David Warren acquital
Tommy talks to Kevin in Metairie about his wife's need for medication to cope with constant, chronic pain.
Tommy talks to WWL-TV reporter Meg Farris about a new report that New Orleans had more drug-related deaths than homicides.
Tommy talks to State Representative Cameron Henry about the current state and the future of TOPS.
Tommy talks to David Howard, Professor in the Dept. of Health Policy and Management at Emory University, about the state of Obamacare going forward.
Automatically Generated Transcript (may not be 100% accurate)
I Tommy Tucker -- WL talking about the acquittal. David Warren yesterday or crime that he was originally found guilty of committing -- -- joins us right now professor of law at Loyola. University of Brendan -- in them yet it pretty extensive. Dealings with the federal court says in the morning -- our more. -- taking the time with this on -- the immediate question and when. Now officer Warren was granted a new trial and my own opinion I don't think. When we start there -- let me backtrack. When he original jury heard about the burning of the body. And the lack of assistants did did the court you think make the right decision and did add that after Henry Glover was dad have anything to do with one officer Warren did. Circuit said that it did did the does spill over the -- over probably. The couple up. Is what painted the original verdict of guilty. And and sure enough that I yesterday's verdict showed that that. That. After the back cover -- made tremendous amount of difference in the outcome to these trial. Now each trial is an independent action -- -- heard a lot of lawyers say you know it is like politics you think you know you can't always predict. Do you think that was the difference maker that the jury didn't hear about the -- did the burning of the body in and did all the passion involved with that and just looked at it as an independent activity go to officer Warren's testimony being. More effective this time better job by -- lawyers jury composition. Might have made a difference that I mean you're right you you generally don't wanna make predictions as to what happened to trial because you never know. But this was one of the few cases where I am not surprised by the verdict and and I think I had that's that several times that I thought that the result of this trial would be different from the first. Because in this case the jury was just looking at that snapshot in time when mr. Warren pull the trigger. In an effort to determine what he was thinking was what this simply. A mistake of bad you'd hit and that was. That's not enough to make him guilty under the civil rights laws. In order to be guilty he had to willfully kill that man. I Henry -- and do it with this specific content to. Deprive him of his life. Bad -- it is not enough for conviction and the civil rights laws -- got to be. We'll apple specific intent to articulate deprived of civil rights. And I think that's an important distinction that that -- really bring -- yet and that is he was not tried in state court for manslaughter for second degree murder -- anything like that. It was a different -- federal charge of the civil rights violation and the standard is different before. And it has a family was saying he got away with murder talking about David Warren and am very emotional situation for them but the legalities. As far as that goes -- everything in this case between state court in federal court. Absolutely and the and the jury Democrats -- effort twice war. For clarification on what it means to to kill someone quote willfully. And the jury was looking at parsing the words of the jury instructions. And I'm convinced that that -- even if they've found. The shooting was a mistake then date. -- -- Terms given to them by the judge acquitted them because it wasn't willful I mean -- You know it's hard to imagine that mr. Warren woke up that morning and decide to go off to kill somebody. It was a bad cute it was a mistake probably but. That you're on the that wasn't willful. Misconduct. Arm in terms of the separating. Officer that shot from the big guys involved in the cover up as far as burning the body. Why a difference here or not when it comes at a Danziger defended -- didn't we have shooters. Tried alongside of cover -- if you will and and why would this then not set a precedent for the guys who have been convicted men. That is standard and dependents if there. Order for a new trial by judge and arts sticks on appeal. That they'll be asking for of those counts to be severed from the the civil rights violations associated with -- And if they can get the severance and and the is that that motion you know it may be meritorious particularly in light of that that circuits. Ruling in the war in case the subsequent not guilty verdict I would think that -- it's gonna have to seriously consider severing. Cover up charges from the shooting -- -- and and you know that that case. Could be seen in a different light perhaps. If the cover up its effort from -- He can the judge. Consider that that a new trial was ordered the result was different that's part of of what he takes an account. And it can certainly be able to take into account but that circuit's ruling in the war in case because that that assert it is. The higher power cord over. Federal court no Moreland and and. Get out and went and asking -- is like we started the the conversation this morning united nice and well. Did he wasn't the difference maker or was it something else involved can't predict. Verdict -- I'm just wondered if the judge judge angle articles anyway no one apparently there was a problem here because it was found not guilty yours that not appropriately. By the technical matter that -- happened yesterday in the one case shouldn't have much. Bearing on on whether judging art in the Danziger case should separate accounts that relate to the -- But the the circuit's ruling prior ruling in the lower case. Thing that it was inappropriate to try those counts independents together. It's something that I think is you know very well may be persuasive to on -- in a retrial on the Danziger case. And very quickly before relate to go -- and you busy that he did this state. Who do when he goes back to -- I guess second degree murder manslaughter whatever did they ever pursue this from. A state charge or did they think about it and no indictment how'd that happen. Well I mean it certainly was -- state charge now. That the DA that the technical matter and in Orleans parish could look at this again include prosecute. Officer. Mr. Warren on a state charge because that's equivalent federal court doesn't preclude state. State murder prosecution but I think that's not likely after all the time. Is -- subject to civil liability now the family chooses to pursue them. -- It Sudan. Civilly if they have then best -- Won't have any bearing on the civil case that they haven't seen -- already. That the time for doing so it passed so this Aaliyah and the shooting happened 78 years ago. That claimed to be brought with -- And here. Professor appreciate your time early -- enjoyed talking and you take complicated stuff and make our top.