#RolandMartinUnfiltered - George Floyd Justice in Policing Act; No charges in Daniel Prude case; Louisiana cop chokes 13yr-old

Episode Date: February 25, 2021

2.24.21 #RolandMartinUnfiltered: George Floyd Justice in Policing Act; No charges in Daniel Prude case; Louisiana cop chokes 13yr-old; Illinois eliminates cash bail; Republicans in Georgia continue to introduce bills aimed at disenfranchising Black voters; House and Senate leaders hold moment of silence for the 500k lost to COVID; Crazy a$$ woman and man have a wild exchange over the use of the N word.Support #RolandMartinUnfiltered via the Cash App ☛ https://cash.app/$rmunfiltered or via PayPal ☛https://www.paypal.me/rmartinunfiltered #RolandMartinUnfiltered is a news reporting platform covered under Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Learn more about your ad-choices at https://www.iheartpodcastnetwork.comSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This is an iHeart Podcast. Never lick your thumb to clean their face. And you'd never let them leave the house looking like less than their best. You say you'd never put a pacifier in your mouth to clean it. Never let them stay up too late. And never let them run wild through the grocery store. So when have one aisle six. And aisle three. So when you say you'd never let them get into a car without you there, no, it can happen. One in four hot car

deaths happen when a kid gets into an unlocked car and can't get out. Never happens. Before you leave the car, always stop. Look. Lock. Brought to you by NHTSA and the Ad Council. I know a lot of cops, and they get asked all the time, have you everought to you by NHTSA and the Ad Council. I know a lot of cops. They get asked all the time,

have you ever had to shoot your gun? Sometimes the answer is yes. But there's a company dedicated to a future where the answer will always be no. This is Absolute Season 1. Taser Incorporated. I get right back there and it's bad. Listen to Absolute Season 1. Taser Incorporated on the iHeartRadio app, I get right back there and it's bad. I'm Clayton English.

I'm Greg Glott. And this is season two of the War on Drugs podcast. Last year, a lot of the problems of the drug war. This year, a lot of the biggest names in music and sports. This kind of star-studded a little bit, man. We met them at their homes. We met them at their recording studios. Stories matter, and it brings a face to them.

It makes it real. It really does. It makes it real. Listen to new episodes of the War on Drugs podcast season two on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. It's Wednesday, February 24th. I'm Ashley Banks, and here's what's coming up on Roland Martin Unfiltered. We'll discuss civil rights leaders calling on Congress to pass the George Floyd Justice and Policing Act. We'll also speak with Daniel Prude's family lawyer about the New York's Attorney General decision to not indict the officers involved in his death. And we'll also speak with Kim Fox, Illinois State's attorney,

about a new bill that will eliminate on time. And it's rolling. Best belief he's knowing. Putting it down from sports to news to politics. With entertainment just for kicks. He's rolling. It's Uncle Roro, y'all. It's rolling, Martin. Yeah. Rolling with Roland now.

He's funky, he's fresh, he's real, the best you know. He's Roland Martin. Now. Martin. Today, civil rights leaders called on the U.S. House of Representatives to pass the George Floyd Justice and Policing Act, a critical step to holding law enforcement accountable for unconstitutional and unethical conduct. Now, leaders from the NAACP, National Urban League, National Action Network and several other groups spoke during a media briefing earlier today. Take a look. The video of the killing of George Floyd held a mirror up to a truth about the American legal system. It showed us in the most most dark

and irrefutable way that there are deep, fundamental problems with how this country allows law enforcement to intimidate, abuse, torture, and kill unarmed Black people. We rightly focus on the pain and suffering of George Floyd when we see that video, but we must also focus on what we can see in the officer who killed George Floyd. Because Officer Derek Chauvin in that video, for most of it, is looking directly at us. He is ignoring the pleas of a black man dying, calling for help and for his mother. His hands are in his pockets. He knows he's being filmed and he looks directly at the camera because he has no fear. He has no fear that anything will happen to him, that there will be any accountability

for his actions. If Congress fails to act to pass the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act, it will prove Officer Derek Chauvin right. It will reinforce that in encounters with Black people, law enforcement officers are above the law. When Officer Chauvin looks into the camera as he kills George Floyd, he is looking at us. He is daring us to prove him wrong. And we're calling on Congress to prove him wrong and move forward the George Floyd Justice and Policing Act. For many of us, the searing pain on display in Minneapolis and across the country last summer has not gone away. George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, Rayshard Brooks, Tony McDade, and so many others who have lost their lives to state violence deserve more.

In their honor, we are here today demanding bold action. Today, we are nearing the end of Black History Month and approaching the one-year anniversaries of the police violence that led to nationwide protests last year, and still no major legislation has been signed into law to address police violence against the Black community. This year must be different. We are pleased that House leadership intends to hold a vote on the Justice and Policing Act next week

to recognize the urgency of this matter. The civil rights community urges members of the House to support passage of this bill and for Senate leadership to take it up in short order and build upon it. Congress, it's just time to act. You must understand and remember the urgency and why we need the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act passed now. Our Black Women's Roundtable and Essence 2020 poll and our Unity 2020 election poll revealed that criminal justice and policing reform were one of the top three issues that Black voters voted about,

especially Black women and our young people, that we wanted the president and this Congress to address. It's no coincidence the poll also showed the eradication of systemic racism was also a top issue, while ending COVID-19 was also there. The voters spoke in November and in Georgia in January, and it's time for the Congress to deliver what the people voted for and again pass the George Floyd Justice and Policing Act. Now more than ever, our nation is dealing with so many crises, but we can focus, we can walk, we can chew gum at the same time. And we're talking about life and death

and the need to end the unjust killings of black people. Our young people took to the streets almost longer than any other protest in history. They spoke. The world spoke. Everyone said it's time to act. So we implore the Congress to pass the Justice Floyd Policing Act. Take up your leadership and your service to the people and respond and vote for the George

— pass the George Floyd Justice and vote for the George, pass the George Floyd Justice and Policing Act now? No entity, no individual, no person sworn to protect and uphold the law should operate above the law that they are being sworn to protect. For many law enforcement officers across the country, they serve us well. They provide the necessary protections. But for African Americans, we have far too many individuals who take their oath of duty for granted because they know they have a special privilege under our law that they can operate above, and it has caused harm in our communities for far too long. Passage of this act will level the playing field of

expectations so that our young people is they're walking home from work will not be harassed that our young people driving while black would not have a level of concern that currently exists in our community. Support for the provisions of the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act range from 74% who favor the banning of chokeholds to 91% who favor a requiring of body cameras for all civilian interactions. Every provision of the act when tested has super majority support amongst the American people. It is not in doubt and it could not be any clearer that the people of this nation want the George Floyd Justice and Policing Act. Americans voted for it,

and Americans are demanding this kind of change. It should not have taken this long to achieve, and it's taken a long time, but we are appreciative of the members of the House who led this effort, Karen Bass and others, as well as the members of the House who stood up and voted for this bill as it passed the House of Representatives last year. It is time for action in 2021, and we demand such action. This bill, in our judgment, is as important as the legislation that came out of the 60th Civil Rights

Movement. We've demonstrated all last summer, all over the country, culminating in the march on Washington August 28, where over 200,000 people peacefully marched. No arrests, no incidents. And we explicitly said with the family of George Floyd there, the family of Breonna Taylor, the family of Ahmaud Arbery, all of the families there with us to lead the march with Martin Luther King III and I, that we wanted two things done, the George Floyd bill and the John Lewis voting bill.

Of course, we also support H.R. 1. The Senate and Congress must stand and meet this moment like the Senate and Congress met the moment in the 60s. The Civil Rights Act resulted after a summer like last summer. The Voting Rights Act resulted after a summer like last summer. The Voting Rights Act resulted after Selma. For the Senate and the Congress to miss this time to really deal with the issue of policing and deal with the issue of accountability. It is not anti-police any more than the Civil Rights Act was anti-white. It was about correcting those that acted wrongly and that behaved wrongly.

The Voting Rights Act was not anti-Southerners. It was anti-those that would deny the people the right to vote. The George Floyd bill is not an anti-police bill. It's an anti-bad policing, criminal policing bill. And this is the time and this is the place to do it. In a couple of weeks, we'll be going to Minneapolis for the jury selection of the police officer that lynched George Floyd with his knee.

The family will have to sit there and relive this. I would hope that they would be able to sit there knowing that the laws have changed and that George was not lynched in vain and that the Senate of 2021 has the same backbone and integrity that the Senate had in 1964. The times call for demonstration and legislation. This is the legislation that we need to see passed. Joining me now with more on this is Melanie Campbell. She's the executive director and chief executive officer of the National Coalition on Black Civic Participation. Thank you so much for joining me, Melanie. Now, let's start first with why is it consequential that this bill be passed?

Melanie, I'm going to have you stop for a second. We can't hear you. Melanie, you can start up again. OK, thank you so much. I apologize for that. I was I think I was on mute. No worries. COVID life, COVID life. But the reality is that that's what our people voted for.

That's what we were in the streets for. Our young people are on the streets. It's not the only solution, but it is a very tangible bill that was passed last year and should have been passed by the Senate. But it was one of those bills that sat in former leader Mitch McConnell's office in the Senate. And so election happened. Folks voted. Elected people who said they supported it. The Congress changed power.

Black people showed up. Black women, black men, young people showed up. And so what we're saying is it's time to act on the things that people voted for. And when it comes to policing, criminal justice reform, it was the number for our the research that we did as well. We know from our Black Women's Roundtable Essence poll that that issue has been the issue of criminal justice and policing reform has been top top three issue for the last three years. In Election Day, we did a poll. 4,600 Black people, young, old, everything in between. And that was still number two

issue. So we know, and so what we're doing, and what we're elevating and supporting, is that it's time to start. They've gotten past some of these things that were blocking. It's time to legislate, as Reverend Sharpton said. And that's one of those key issues that we need to move on because it is a life or death issue. People are still getting killed out here unjustly, not by all police. We know that. But it's too many that are.

And we need to put the protections in place to protect our people from having, and especially our young people and our even children, from dying at some of those police who are bad actors and that know that they will have a day in court if they're not doing the right thing. Melanie, like you're saying, this is life or death. But even if Congress were to pass this bill, do you really believe that it would prevent unjustified killings of unarmed African-Americans, like in the case of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor. Well, Breonna Taylor was a no-knock warrant, right?

So if you didn't have a no-knock warrant, if that's something that comes off as something that law enforcement cannot do from a federal sense, yes, right? And so the whole idea of accountability, police being held accountable. But to have the ability to say that you don't you have immunity because you're a police officer, of course, gives people the notion that no matter what, I'll be OK because I have this protection. And no one should be. Nobody's above the law, including people who are sworn to protect. And so anything we can, it's not going to solve all the problems. But surely we need more than something that depending on what state you are in or depending on what city you may be better protected than others, because it's happening in rural America, urban America. And it's been historic anyhow, right?

When it comes to why even, I don't want to go that far back, the history is what it is. Policing was started to make sure that we stay enslaved, you know, and the like. And so there's always been a challenge in the first place. When we were out here in this, well, our predecessors in the 60s,

marching in the 60s, they sent the police and the police dogs at us. And so here we are in 2021. It is so past time and to deal with. And so this is one of those things that was put on the books and we just need to get it passed. Other things that need to be done, but there's no need and reason to wait. Melanie, like you're saying, a lot of people would agree with you, right? It's 2021. We shouldn't still be having these conversations. We shouldn't still be talking about these issues. But yet here we are. So let's say that or what do you think is the likelihood that Congress

will pass this bill? Well, I'm cautiously optimistic that we will. The first thing that has to happen is to get it out of the House again, and then, of course, it moves to the Senate. And then we'll cross that bridge, even though they're two different bodies. But I think the first order of business is to get it out there. The Congressional Black Caucus under Karen Bass, who had been leading that, along with Congresswoman Joyce Beatty, who's now the new chair of the CBC. They are moving that forward, the CBC members and other progressives who support it, and get it out of the House again,

so it can move over to the Senate, so it can end up on now-President Biden's desk for signature. All right, Melanie, for those who may not be as hopeful as you are, are there talks or next steps that would take place if Congress were not to pass this act? I think we need to be laser-focused on getting this bill passed. I am not of the mindset to sit here and say, well, what if we don't? We've jumped so many hoops. Just the fact that we were able to vote in 2020. So

if we know that's what we want, we have to go after it. Collectively, individually, speak up. I don't care if you're in a red state or a blue state or a purple state. We have to make the demands to make sure that things pass. I believe, and this

is something that our organization believes, and that's that they need to be looking at how this whole idea of how they pass the bills and get rid of the filibuster, in my opinion. That's Melody's opinion. And the reason is that the whole idea that you have to have a 60-vote threshold on so many things, and we need action. The things that are impacting our communities, Black communities, brown communities, poor communities, those less fortunate in this country, there is need for bold changes to take place with George Floyd justice and policing, with voting rights reform, with this COVID-19. So much is impacting people's lives, and it is life or death issues that we're talking about, that we need the ability for things to take place and happen so that our communities can not just

survive, but we can thrive. And Melanie, as you've been saying, police officers also need to be held accountable in order for the George Floyds and Breonna Taylors, for these things to not occur in the future. Now, if anything, what have congressional members been saying about this bill? Well, so the congressional back caucus members have been speaking up and I believe they're about to move to actually put the bill back in motion. And so those are the conversations we've had. I've not heard any conversation myself about anybody not supporting it at this point. But do you know when that would happen, just to give us some perspective or timeline? I think it's happening this week, I believe, you know, but very soon. Okay, we'll leave it right there. Thank you so much, Melanie Campbell.

Thank you. Thank you for the opportunity. All righty. Moving forward, New York's attorney general announced Tuesday that a grand jury has declined to indict the officers responsible for Daniel Prude's death. Now, on March 23rd, 2020, Rochester officers were responding to a call of a man acting erratically when they encountered Prude. Prude was having a mental breakdown and was walking through the streets naked. When officers approached him, officers then detained him and placed a mesh bag over his head in order to stop him from spitting. An officer then pushed Prude's face against the ground and another officer pushed his knee into Prude's back. These two officers held Prude down for two minutes.

As a result, Prude fell unconscious and needed to be on life support. He died a week later. Attorney General Letitia James, who took over the investigation into Prude's death, says she and her team were not able to persuade the grand jury that the officers involved committed a crime. Joining me now to continue this discussion is Daniel Prude, family's attorney, Elliot Dobie Shields. Elliot, thank you so much for joining me today. I wish you were joining me for something better, you know, under better circumstances. But many people, including the Rochester community, are wondering how there

wasn't enough evidence to prove that these officers used excessive force against Daniel Prude and should thus be held accountable. There are a lot of things that we can look to to understand what happened, however. Now, Attorney General Tish James came out yesterday and said she was very disappointed with the grand jury's decision not to indict the RPD officers. However, if you take a close look at the subject matter experts that she presented to the grand jury it's no wonder why they didn't secure an indictment

her office hired gary tilky and he's a well-known please defense expert in cases in federal court uh... attorneys like me who bring civil rights cases against officers that kill unarmed people, Gary Vilke is one of said, no, no, no, his death was actually a result of excited delirium is not a medical term. It's a made-up term. It's not a real medical condition.

It's a made-up term that's only been around for about 10 years. Basically, it's used as a wastebasket as law enforcement, meaning that everybody that creates any problems or struggles with the police and that ends up hurt or dead is thrown into this wastebasket. So, you know, it's very disappointing. Honestly, after reading the report that she released, it doesn't seem like her office actually tried to secure an indictment in this case. And honestly, I'm outraged at what her report says. Well, Elliot, with what you're saying, though, if they use this guy who has a history of defending police, do you believe that this was just a setup for them to lose the case, essentially?

That is essentially what I believe after reading her report. Now, to the Attorney General's credit, she did get the judge in the Daniel Pruitt case to agree to unseal the grand jury minutes. So soon, I guess we'll get a better sense of exactly what evidence they presented to the grand jury. But based on the public report that they released, it honestly does not seem like her office even attempted to secure an indictment against these officers. Elliot, this isn't— And you know what that— Go ahead. I'll let you finish your statement. Go ahead, Elliot. You know, what I was going to say is this shows that what we need is a change in the system.

What we need is to get a truly independent prosecutor in cases where police kill unarmed citizens. Because over and over again, this is the result that we get. And while the attorney general is independent of local law enforcement, she's still the top law enforcement official in the state of New York. What we need is a truly independent person to be appointed in these cases, somebody that has no connection to the government at all, like an independent attorney or somebody from a different state. Because if this is the system that was supposed to be set up to fix what happened after the Staten Island district attorney failed to secure an indictment of

Daniel Pantaleo following the death of Eric Garner. It's obviously still not working. And Elliot, like you're saying, we see this time and time again, right, where officers are caught on tape using excessive force, killing victims who aren't armed, like in the case of Daniel Pruitt here. And you're basically saying that if they were to use independent prosecutors, maybe the outcome would be different. And obviously, Elliot, you are not the first person to think this, but in your opinion, why do you think that's not something that's being pursued? You know, honestly, what happened was there was a push following what happened, the failure to secure an indictment of Daniel Pantaleo for a truly independent prosecutor.

And Governor Cuomo, to his credit, tried to jump in and make this process occur more quickly by passing an executive order, Executive Order 147 in New York, at the time, there was a split in the state legislature, and we would not have been able to get a law passed to appoint an independent prosecutor. And so Governor Cuomo did the next best thing, passed this executive order, which was signed into law last summer, along with a series of other reform efforts in New York. But if you can't secure an indictment in this case, then it's obviously not working. And now is the time to push for these reforms. As we see this happening over and over again around the country, as there's more and more body camera video showing unarmed black people killed by law enforcement officers, now is the time to push for this change.

Elliot, I want to know from you, how is the family responding to the grand jury's decision? They're heartbroken. They're devastated. It's hard for them to understand all this anger that I'm feeling and I'm trying to express on their behalf is because I've spent hours on the phone with them over the last couple days. You know, Joe Prude is absolutely torn up. He's just been crying. He can't sleep. He can't understand why he met with Letitia James and she told him, look, there was nothing we could do.

It was excited delirium. That's unacceptable to the family. That's unacceptable to me. And that should be unacceptable to everyone in the Rochester community and around the country. Because it's a made-up junk science term that has no basis in fact. It's got no basis in any peer-reviewed medical literature, and it's literally just an excuse used by law enforcement when they kill unarmed people. So we need to debunk this unscientific excuse once and for all.

Is the family planning to take next steps in order to see justice? Well, so there is a lawsuit seeking damages in federal court that was already filed. The attorneys for some of the children are spearheading that effort at this moment. And there's additional litigation that's moving forwards in state court related to some records requests that we did where we requested the original video of the incident along with communications so we can really understand the cover-up that happened from the city's perspective. Because it took months and months. We first requested the video and all of the paperwork related to the incident on April 3rd, just days after Dan and Prude died. And the city just ignored our open records request. They ignored it for months. And then when they did

finally fulfill our request, they certified that they had no communications related to what happened to Mr. Prude. Come to find out, after we released the video, they've got hundreds and hundreds of pages of communications related to the cover-up, where internally within the Rochester Police Department, they're saying things like, it would be a misrepresentation to conflate this incident with what happened to other unarmed black people around the country. And it could lead to violent blowback in our community. And that's all that they were

concerned about. They weren't concerned about transparency. All that they were concerned about was how it would look to the community and covering it up and not releasing the video so that they wouldn't face the protests that eventually occurred as a result of them covering up the incident. So it's absolutely outrageous. We're still moving forwards with that because they falsely certified that they didn't have any of these communications. And then they admitted after we released the video that, hey, actually, we have several hundred pages of these communications.

So we're moving forwards with that. And then there were hundreds and hundreds of people that were injured at these protests. And my office personally represents over 100 people that were seriously injured by law enforcement. All of these people came out to try to seek justice for Daniel Prude, to tell the police what you did isn't right and the system needs to change. And how did the law enforcement in the Rochester community respond? They shot him in the face with pepper balls. They tear gassed people. They violently arrested them, threw them to the ground.

They brought dogs out to these protests. They corralled people on bridges, told them to the ground. They brought dogs out to these protests. They corralled people on bridges, told them to disperse when there was nowhere to go. And then they shot them, they threw them on the ground, and they beat them up. And that's how the police respond when people demand change. It's honestly hard to comprehend how in this day and age we're allowing this to happen, but we're not going to allow it to happen. We're going to hold them accountable in court. And that's what you're doing, Elliot. You're trying to hold them accountable in court. And the people in Rochester started taking to the streets yesterday demanding that the police still be held accountable despite the grand jury's decision.

But we're going to leave it right there. Thank you so much, Elliot. Greatly appreciate you coming on today. Thank you for having me. You're welcome. All right, I'm going to open it up to my panel now. We have a Scott Bolden, former chair of the National Bar Association, Robert Petillo, executive director of the Rainbow Push Coalition,

Peachtree Street Project, and Monique Presley, legal analyst and crisis manager. Thank you guys for joining me today. Now, I want to start with you, Robert. What are your thoughts on the grand jury's decision to not indict the officers involved in Daniel Prude's death? Well, you know, it's interesting. I've been doing a lot of international press lately. So earlier this week, I was on Iranian TV talking about the genocide going on in the Democratic Republic of Congo, nearly three million people displaced, child soldiers, so on and so forth. Today, I was on Egyptian TV talking about the abuses of the regime there since the U.S. intervention 10 years ago, removing the Mubarak regime, putting in Morsi. Morsi, who was thereafter deposed, and their

current crackdowns on the press and on human rights. And over 100 organizations sent letters to the United Nations regarding the Egyptian regime cracking down on human rights violations. We're going to have to do the same thing here in America. We're going to have to treat our government the same way that the Egyptians are treating their government, the same way that the Congolese are treating their government. One thing that happened during the 1960s was that our fight was put into the larger fight of decolonization internationally, so that at the same time we were marching in Selma and Montgomery, you have the wars going on in Angola, Vietnam, and Laos. Across the colonized world, people were fighting back against oppressive

regimes. The reason that George Floyd was such a iconoclastic figure last year was that people facing oppression all around the world felt that knee on their neck. This is why people in Hong Kong were marching in solidarity with George Floyd. This is why Iranians had to go on lockdown because people were marching in solidarity with George Floyd. This is why Iranians had to go on lockdown because people were marching in solidarity with George Floyd. This is why wherever a person was faced around the world, people were marching in solidarity with George Floyd. And so when we see these things continue to happen here in America, not in a vacuum, not geographically boxed off as this is just in the deep south or in one region, is a nationwide intergenerational

issue that goes back to the foundational aspects of this country. And until we go before the United Nations and have international inspectors and international condemnation of the way that policing is done in black and brown communities in America, we will not have relief. As we said in the first block with Ms. Campbell, we have issues with our Congress right now, despite months and months of protests and activism and turning out to the polls. We'll get the George Floyd policing bill through the House of Representatives, and then in the Senate, it's a crapshoot. So we're going to have to take it to a higher authority and appeal to the better angels of the world to condemn America for their treatment

of African Americans and the unceremonious extrajudicial killings of black and brown people, men and women at the hands of policing and hold us accountable in the international court until we change our ways. Because quite frankly, America has shown that they love racism more than they love money, because they're more than happy to pay out these settlements to families of tens of millions of dollars at a time. They love racism more than they love elections. They'll be fine with losing elections if it means they can keep racism. So until we appeal to a higher authority to crack down on America, I don't think we're going to see changes anytime soon, but we do have to build that coalition and not see ourselves in a vacuum. Build with our brothers

in the Congo. Build with those being oppressed in Egypt. Build with those being oppressed across the Middle East and in China, the genocide which is going on against Muslims there. Act in solidarity and work towards a common goal, just as we did in previous generations. All right, Monique, what are your thoughts? So about Daniel Prude, I do have some thoughts. Attorney General James released a statement regarding this case and her disappointment and the disappointment of her office and the fact that the grand jury made the decision to not bring charges here. She stated in there what we know to be true, that Mr. Prude was in the throes of a mental breakdown, mental distress at the time that this happened, and that the officers and the law system actually is what failed Mr. Prude, and that we see over and over these laws that fail people who are in mental crisis, that fail people who are black and brown.

And so what we have to do is understand that now our system of laws needs to be changed. And the first step in that is the bill that's before Congress right now. That's what has to happen. And I understand the frustration of the family's attorney, but I don't think Attorney General James really is where you drop that frustration in that her office saw fit to bring charges to take it to the grand jury. They didn't have to. And they presented a comprehensive case. And now everything about that case is going to be released. So I think we'll see. We'll see whether there was a failing in her office or not. But what we know for sure is that the legal system is what needs to be changed. Now, Monique, you said that the attorney, his frustration

was on the wrong person. Where do you think his frustration should have been? It's on the law itself. I mean, we've had these conversations over and over, Ashley. The laws, as they are set up right now, have been failing Black folks, brown folks too, but disproportionately Black folks. So when we are looking at qualified immunity, when we are looking at a lack of laws surrounding the way people should be treated, when we are looking at a lack of laws surrounding the way people should be treated, when there is mental illness and mental breakdown present, when we're looking at the way people are treated in impoverished communities, when we're looking at, frankly, the racism and the implicit biases, not just of police officers, but of juries,

which may have been what was at play here. We have to have steps in place that fix that. And the George Floyd Act is one of those very important steps in that process, but there are so many more that need to be done. Scott? Yeah, I agree with my colleagues. Letitia James is committed to the community. She and I were classmates, section mates, at Howard Law School from 1984 to 1987. And so I would disagree. I understand the frustration of the defense counsel. But this justice system worked in this case. She didn't present the case to the grand jury and present charges.

She did an investigatory grand jury. And this is what the grand jury came back with, a grand jurors of her peers, and they were contributing factors in his death. I mean, if you put the video back up, you see four or five officers, they put the spit bag on him, right? But who's missing from that picture, right? A mental health expert, because this was a mental health incident. It was not a criminal incident. It was not a police incident. There was no crime being committed other than by the police, of course. But that missing component was a mental health expert that could stand between

this young man and the police. And so the George Floyd Act will answer all of these questions. I'm not worried about it passing in the House. George Floyd Act is going to run into some real serious issues on the Senate side, because the Senate, when the Republicans were in control, had a bill that was a micro, that was a fraction of what this House bill calls for right now. And we need every aspect of this House bill. Secondly, the hardest case to ever convict in this country is to convict a police officer, because they're the last line of defense between chaos and community, and Black people and white people who sit as jurors find it difficult to do it, despite the overwhelming evidence and the video. And then let's not forget about the criminal justice system. I'm sorry, the civil justice system. The imperfections of the criminal justice system

are going to take some time to prepare. And even if you repair, even if that legislation passes, we've got to look at who we're giving guns and badges to, because it's their conduct and the complicity of their colleagues who know that they are bad actors or have bad judgment and won't report them, if you will, is what we're going to have to manage and deal with until we figure out a way to put guns and badges in the hands of responsible people. But there's a civil justice system. You know, if you criminally prosecute a bad acting police officer, you cannot bring that

person back, that loved one back. But in the civil justice system, you can certainly get paid, you certainly get discovery, you certainly get depositions. And it's really the only true mechanism to, in search of the truth, to find the truth and present a case to 12 jurors in most jurisdictions and have them pass on the judgment of these officers or these municipalities civilly and to award damages to these families. It won't bring the loved one back who was the victim of police brutality and a police killing,

but a criminal prosecution certainly doesn't bring the victim back either. And so I think we need to not forget and focus on there is a pathway forward and always has been, and that's the civil justice system. You heard the defense attorney talk about that. Keep an eye on that because whether they settle or they get a verdict, that verdict or settlement should be in the millions of dollars. It won't bring the victim back, but we'll certainly provide compensation for them.

For sure, Scott. But just by way for just the slightest amount of pushback on this, I've never had a case where a prosecutor couldn't get an indictment on it. When they can't get an indictment, they'll go back and they'll just pick another day to come back and cure the errors in the indictment.

And quite frankly, I think in police shooting cases, we had a similar issue here in Georgia about 15 years ago with a man named Kenneth Walker, where they could not get an indictment. I don't understand why these things aren't presented in open court in a preliminary hearing, where you can have a judge rule on the record whether or not there's enough evidence going forward, and the community is apprised of what happens behind those closed doors and knows exactly what's going on going forward. I think also that we wait for the federal George Floyd act. But remember, we have state and local governments.

You can address issues of police shooting and police killings on the state and local level. Those take a whole lot less time than getting Mitch McConnell and Ted Cruz to come around. These are your city council people, your state representatives, your state senators, people who live in your community, and you can hold their feet to the fire just as much. Because guess what happens normally when mayors or other officials want to crack down on police? You see police slowdowns, as we saw nationwide after the killing of Ahmaud Arbery. And then you see spikes in crime commensurate with the police slowdowns, which puts politicians in danger. And their immediate response is to try to do another crackdown on crime with Red Dog units and other things. So we have to start attacking this on the state and local level.

Let's not take the civil judgment as simply being enough, because as we've seen in places like Chicago, they will pay billions of dollars out in civil judgments as long as they can keep being racist. And in large parts of this country, it is more important to them to be able to kill black folks without consequence than any amount of money that they can pay out. So we have to start attacking on the state and local level while we wait for what happens in Washington.

Monique, Scott, you want to respond? The power of the police union at the local level is just as strong. And that's why you're going to have to be or go to the federal level. I agree with you, but I also think the police unions at the state legislatures and the city council are super strong at the local level and even harder to get local elected officials to act appropriately. We'll go to Monique, then we have to move on. Oh, no, I'm good. You know, we we've said everything that needs to act appropriately. We'll go to Monique, then we have to move on. Oh, no, I'm good. You know, we've said everything that needs to be said, I think. We have the power to make... Monique agrees with everything I said. We have the power. We've said everything that

needs to be said, whether I agree with it or not. We have the power to make the changes that need to be made, and we have it on the local, state and federal level. And it's up to us to effectuate this change. We have to demand it in order for it to happen. All right. Let's go to Georgia now, where Republicans continue to introduce bills aimed at disenfranchising Black voters after they showed up in record numbers to elect two Democratic senators in January's runoffs. Now, today, the Georgia State Senate passed legislation that would require voters to submit a driver's license number, state identification card number, or a photocopy of an approved

form of identification in order to vote absentee in the state. This comes after Georgia House Republicans presented a 48-page bill calling for several changes that would limit the time frame for early voting in the state. Joining me now to discuss this further is Senator Michael Doc Rett of the Georgia Legislative Black Caucus. Thank you so much for joining me today, Senator. Now, let's see here. Are these bills that are being introduced here in Georgia, is this simply because Republicans lost the presidential election and the Senate race in Georgia? Is this some way retaliation?

Well, I'd like to thank you for having me on the phone. Right now, I'm in between a committee meeting, and we may have an important vote. So if I have to go you know please excuse me but to answer your question you know basically things didn't work out for them and now they're trying to change things to try and make it better for them just like for for instance the absentee voter vote they used that for many years and it worked well for them but last year when we used it and it was successful for us, now they want to add added requirements in order for you to absentee vote. So, yes, you have a point there.

Can we talk to Senator how much of a threat that these bills pose to minorities in Georgia? Because some people I don't think get the bigger picture here. But can you just talk to how much of a threat it is for voters in the future? Well, it creates an extra hoop that they have to jump through, and particularly for elderly people who might have to try and find a way to get a copy of their ID or get a photo ID. So it creates an extra hoop in some cases that makes it a little more challenging for them to get out and vote. So let's say that all of these bills that have been presented are passed. Are there, I guess, plan B's in place for the black community to be well equipped to be able to get out and vote in the next election? Oh, yes. We got plans. We work with Fair Fight and other organizations. So we're

ready to go. And I have to go in and take a vote. I'm sorry. That's all right, Senator. You're busy. We thank you so much for coming on today. Greatly appreciate it. All right. I want to throw it back to my panel now. So, guys, I want to talk to Scott first. Scott, what are your thoughts on all these bills that are being presented in Georgia to suppress minority votes, essentially? Well, they present them under what they call race-neutral terms, but they're not race-neutral because they have a disparate impact and are narrowly tailored to discriminate and force Black people to vote in lesser numbers. We know that early voting, either by mail or drop box or absenteeism, made up 30 to 35, maybe more,

percent of the vote and made the difference. Those ballots were counted last. They weren't counted like the day of voting. We know that the Republicans had three different votes, and those three different votes, I'm sorry, three different audits of those results of the presidential election all came back fair and no fraud. And so these concerns by Republican legislatures are concerns not only raised by the president, but raised by them because they lost. They've told their constituents that, and now their constituents, now that they've created that doubt in their mind, are allegedly have these Republican legislators reacting to what they told their constituents, which was part of the big Trump lie, if you will.

And so as a result, we need to be vigilant. They haven't passed both houses yet. It hasn't been signed by the governor, but as soon as it's signed by the governor, our civil rights organizations, our legal groups have got to begin challenging these laws if they become law, challenging this legislation now. The courts in North Carolina, South Carolina, Texas, Wisconsin, and even Georgia have been

leery and weary of these types of bills and legislation that have become law and have denounced them and reversed them and struck them down. But we've got to keep the pressure on, not only on the lobbying front, but on the litigation front, if it ever gets signed, if these laws ever get signed by the governors of these states. Monique? This is why we can't, as the Bible says, afford to be, you know, at ease in Zion, because Georgia gets this really great, impressive victory. They literally snatched

this country from the depths of despair. But I mean, the devil is always busy. And so are these GOP legislators, frankly. So what has to happen is the same energy that it took, not just from the states like Georgia, from the individual cities and regions in Georgia, but nationally, all the energy that it took in order for us to get two senators that gave us the advantage that we need in the U.S. Senate. We have to put that same backing behind what is happening now. And people, voting matters. We got to show up every time, vote from the top of the ticket all the way down to the bottom because these things that are happening now aren't happening because of this

past federal election and people who just went into office. These are state and local legislators doing what they do best. And that is a system of oppression that has been around since slavery ended. So we have to do our part nationally. We can support organizations like Black Voters Matter that are bringing the lawsuits when there are issues like this that suppress and oppress the vote. We can do our part to turn out the vote and to get elected officials out of office who desire to have their own system of control in place and don't want to acknowledge the will of the people. So those are action steps that I think we can start on right now. Robert?

Look, I've got to apologize for Georgia and my people down here. Every time you hear about us, there's something crazy going on, whether it's Vernon Jones crowd surfing or Marjorie Taylor Green and her QAnon conspiracy. We always got something going on down here, and I'm not quite sure why. Florida used to be the craziest state, but Georgia just kind of filtered its way up. Also, shout out to some of my pastors down in Lakeland, Florida, Eddie and Paula Lake and Reverend Boss down there, because we might be coming to visit because there's too much crazy going on here. But let's understand one thing. The Republicans are not going to stop. And the reason goes far

deeper than Trump or Trumpism or the 2020 election is the question of demographics. And that's what they are afraid of. They've been working for 20 years to outrun demographics. People who are not from Georgia will do not know we used to be a blue state. We had Democratic governors like Zell Miller and Roy Barnes. In 2006, Thurber Baker and Michael Thurman won statewide. Thurber Baker got 60 percent of the vote nearly. In 2006, he ran for re-election. What happened? 2010, Republicans won a majority in the House and the Senate, and they controlled reapportionment. And then they gerrymandered their way into a constitutional majority in the House and the Senate and all

constitutional officers. Until Warnock and Ossoff, we had not had a Democrat elected statewide since 2006 in the state, 14 years between those elections. And that's because gerrymandering. We're a state that is 35 percent African-American, 15 percent Latino, 6 percent Asian, 52 percent women. We're one of the largest LGBTQIAPK plus populations in the country. In addition to the number of transplants from around the country that come to Atlanta for the music industry and the film industry, we are a blue state masquerading as a purple state. And Republicans and Tea Partiers and Magas and Trumpites understand that the only way to win the fight

is to change the rules. Reverend Jackson says often that when the score is public, the rules are fair, that we win. But it's only when they have a slanted playing field that they're able to take over. And George is on a microcosm of what goes on nationally. Remember, Republicans have won the popular vote in presidential elections one time in the last 30 years. George W. Bush in 2004 won the popular vote.

Before that, it was his daddy, Daddy Bush, in 1988 was the last time Republicans won the popular vote. Right now, Republican senators represent about 41 million fewer people than Democratic senators do right now. And in fact, 15 Republican senators represent about 38 million people, which is less than the two Democratic senators that represent the state of California. So they're not trying to win on appealing to the masses in this country. They're not trying to win on being the party of the future, the party of ideas, the party moving people forward. They are trying to win on white resentment. They're trying to win on white fear. And the best way to do this is to suppress and reduce the number of people who are able to vote. Now, on the bright side with this legislation, my friend James Woodall, president

of the state of NAACP, testified on it earlier today, is more than likely unconstitutional and will be struck down. However, this is part of a suite of legislation introduced here in this state, including trying to make the secretary of state no longer in an elected position, but rather appointed by the legislature, attempts to change any changes in the rules for elections, taking that power away from the state and local election boards, investing that in the state legislature, anything that can be done to reduce the power and the strength of the black vote in this state is what is being done. So this is why that federal oversight is so necessary, because all of this has happened since the Shelby v. Holder decision in 2014. Now that we don't have preclearance with the

Justice Department, none of this would even be legal prior to that Shelby decision. So it's important for us to fight for this on the federal level. I don't give a damn what they have to do in the Senate. I don't care if you have to bribe, beg, and steal to get that John Lewis voting rights act passed. It has to get passed. It is imperative for the future of the democracy because we had a nice inauguration. It was wonderful. It was fun. We beat the Bushes and walked all over the 159 counties to win those two Senate races. That whole time, Republicans were plotting and scheming on how to return to power. And because of that, we cannot rest.

And you can't be tired yet. It's time to continue to fight and push it through to the end. We're already on the right side of history. We're already on the right side of the issues. We're already on the right side of history. We're already on the right side of the issues. We're already on the right side of the poll numbers. What we have to do is now get on the right side of the law to ensure that it cannot rig the game against us. All right. Any final comments for Monique or Scott before we move forward? I had one. I just wanted to echo. I thank you, Robert, for bringing up just the history of Georgia, because sometimes I think

people don't know their state's history. My home state, Texas, has a similar history in that we were blue, blue, blue, blue, blue. We are a blue state that has had a really bad 25 years. But before that, you know, you look at the history of governors, you look at the Senate, we're the home state of Barbara Jordan. We're the home state of Lyndon B. Johnson. We're the home state of Ann Richards. And people who are either young or ignorant or both don't know the true character of their own state or territory or region. when we are not, when we right now actually are going against type, we're going against culture, we're going against our own kind of mores and have to return to them. And I think sometimes when you do, as Robert just did, remind us of who we are, then we feel more empowered to come back to our center and stand up for ourselves. Scott.

Georgia, nothing much to add other than let's not forget about Senator Nunn, a great defense hawk and a Democrat from the state of Georgia, Democratic senator as well. All right, we're going to be a nation that's majority people of color. I've really focused on this a lot on television, on radio, in my speeches. That my focus is trying to prepare us to have demographic power while also having educational economic power at the same time. Because there's nothing worse than having demographic numbers, but then you still don't have that economic power, that political power, and education power.

Well, you know, you and I, and I think most people know and understand that education is what we've got to impress on all of our people. We've got to help people to understand that if you want a decent quality of life, if you want the kind of quality of life where you're not having to worry about your food and your nutrition and, you know, being able to pay your bills or buy a house, then you've got to become educated. The more education you have, the larger the paycheck is. And, of course, we've got to be involved in entrepreneurship, taking the talent that we have to create businesses. And there's a lot of opportunity for that. I'm Shantae Moore. Hi, I'm B.B. Winans. Hey, I'm Dolly Simpson. What's up? I'm Lance Gross, and you're watching Roland Martin Unfiltered.

A disturbing new video has hit the internet showing yet another unarmed black teen being abused by law enforcement. Now, the Baton Rouge Police Department is investigating the arrest of a 13 lying on top of the boy with his arm firmly locked around his neck. Two teenagers were arrested after the escapade and one was charged with battery of a police officer. Members of the community are requesting for the body cam footage to be made public while Baton Rouge's mayor called the incident concerning. Take a look at this video. At this time, no disciplinary actions have been put forward for these officers. I want to bring my panel back in. And Robert, I feel like once again, we have these conversations time and time again where we see an officer, whether it be a resource officer or an officer from the city's department doing something to minority kids. Why do we continue to have these conversations? Well, a few reasons. And as any longtime viewer of our Wednesday panel knows, I have a fictional young girl that I like to bring out in situations like this named Lily White. So imagine that instead of being a 13-year-old black boy, that was a 13-year-old blonde-haired, blue-eyed white girl in a cheerleading or a Girl Scout outfit when a headlocked by a police officer.

What would be America's response to that? Would we just be talking about that on Roland Martin Unfiltered or would that be on the front page of the New York Times? Would that be on leading every cable news broadcast? Would Nancy Grace and Laura Ingraham be broadcasting live from the scene? Oh, and let it have been a big black police officer choking out Lily White on the street. I'm pretty sure they would have helicoptered in everybody to make sure that she was well taken care of, because I think they're still looking for Natalie Halliwell till this day. We have to understand that in this country, you have a couple concepts working concurrently.

You have the concept of age overestimation. That is a sociological construct where white people, when they see a black child, do not see a black child. It's been shown in study after study. You know, we all know the Dahl test done by sociologists. The overestimation test, they'll show white people pictures of black children, you know, ages 8 to 15 years old. And then generally the responses will come back. They'll ask them, how old is this child or this person?

They'll say 20, 25, 30 sometimes, depending on the child, particularly the darker the child, the older they think that they are. So often when police officers are interceding with our children, just as we saw in the Tamir Rice case, they're not interceding with a child. They don't view them with the same way that they would see Lily White. They see them as a large, aggressive black man who needs to be subdued, the same way those first Dutchmen who got off that boat in West Africa saw the Mandinka tribe and figured out they need to fight these dudes off. That's what they're seeing when they see our young black boys and they feel they need to choke them and fight them. Also, we have to deal with the concept of over-criminalization. White kids can just have a fight and just go home to their parents and then they talk about the fight. And that's all

that happens. And guess what? If the cops come, they'll say, hey, don't be out here fighting. And they'll send them home to their parents. Black kids get put in chokeholds. They get put into the back of police cars. They get handcuffs put on them. They get into the criminal justice system. They get put into alternative schools and then get fed into the school-to-prison pipeline going forward. So something like a shoplifting case or a schoolyard fight now turns into a Class C felony on their record, which prevents them from applying to law school in 15 years. So we have to overall look at the way the system looks at young African-Americans and

then normalize being black in this country so that your blackness itself is not seen as an imprimatur of evil in some kind of way. You might as well have a Hydra logo or an Al-Qaeda sticker on sometimes to these officers when they see your black skin. So until we can address this implicit bias within policing, we'll continue to have these issues. It's going to take training. It's going to take a recognition of the problem. Because while you hear whenever you talk about these things, even if you talk to the officers, they'll be sincere and say, well, I'm not racist. I don't have a racist bone in my body. I got a black dog at home. So how can I be racist? In reality, what you have to understand is breaking down implicit bias in the system is the only way to prevent these things from

happening going forward. And like you're saying, Robert, normalizing blackness, which is something that should be a given, but it's something that needs to happen. And of course, you mentioned the case of Tamir Rice and those officers simply said they thought he was an adult. They thought that Tamir Rice, a 12 year old boy, was a man. But we see this time and time again where young African-Americans in school or outside of school are being targeted by officers. And after what took place with George Floyd and Breonna Taylor, the protests here in this nation around the world, authorities in schools here in the nation have decided to try to

remove officers from school. But this wouldn't have mattered for this case with this young man. So, Scott, what do you have to say to what Robert said there? Well, I agree with Robert, but it's deeper than that. They don't see us. They don't see us as human beings. They treat dogs, laws, dogs better than they treat young black men and women. They don't see us. Because if you saw me as a young black man or a young black woman, nine years old, 13 years old, you wouldn't... You saw me as a child.

You wouldn't be putting me in a chokehold and making out like, uh, I've got a gun and I'm a threat to your life as a police officer. Who are we giving guns and badges to? How come we're not doing psychological evaluations at the training level, at the cadet level to see whether you are racist or whether you escalate versus de-escalate, whether you want to be a police officer for the wrong reason. And then do that on an annual basis. Find money to do that. Because as long as you don't see me as human,

as long as you don't see me as a law-abiding citizen, as long as you don't see me as having a mental health episode, right, you're just going to keep applying force because you've got to choose police officers who aren't like that. Because Tennessee v. Garner says you can't use deadly force on a nonviolent fleeing felon, and we continue to see these videos. It's not the laws. You can pass whatever law you want. and who you hire, and who has a gun in a bag, and has judgment on whether to use deadly force or de-escalation measures, you're going to continue to see black men and women killed and abused and brutalized by police officers.

It's just a fact. I guarantee you. Next month, maybe next week, we're going to be talking about more videos of more police officers abusing more Black people, not just in the South. It'll be in the North, the East, the West. And we're talking about passing laws, and I guess that gets you accountability. But until you fix who you're putting on these police forces,

right, until you fix the police unions, they won't see us. And Scott. And as long as they don't see us, they're going to kill us and abuse us. And I agree with you, Scott. I mean, to your point, they'd have to get out an entire system, right? A system, as we know, is extremely corrupt. And there have been people who have said the same thing as you said, where there needs to be a vetting process.

Let's see how racist these people really are or what their intentions are when it comes to being on the force. But I've heard authorities say that if they were to do that, they'd have nobody on the force. So essentially, they're afraid of losing the officers that they do have at the expense of people who look like you and me. Go ahead, Scott. Well, that sounds like a personal problem and a cop out, because if you're not going to do that, then you must have accountability. If you use deadly force inappropriately, if you don't turn on your camera as a police officer, you ought to be disciplined. You ought to be your paycheck ought to be docked. Your pension ought to be at risk. You ought to be, your paycheck ought to be docked. Your pension ought to be at risk.

You ought to be in danger of losing your job. If these police officers are very serious about cleaning up their ranks, and I'm not just talking about the bad actors, because I don't want to hear about bad actors. Because if you know you work with a bad actor and you don't report them, you're complicit in their bad acting. And so until we decide that we're going to clean up these police forces, then it's just going to continue. You watch, next month we're going to be talking about another situation. Unfortunately, you're probably right there. Now, Monique, we have you back. Is there anything you want to say in regards to this story? I'm sick of it. I don't have anything content-wise that can be added that hasn't already been said, except maybe this. dehumanization of the Black body. I think I am concerned about now the role

that all this footage and all of these videos that turn millions of people at a time into eyewitnesses. I am concerned about the role that that is having in further dehumanization because they fear and are threatened by our presence to begin with. But now people are used to seeing us choked. They're used to seeing us shot in the back. They're used to seeing us drowned. They're used to seeing us body slammed. And while I understand the necessity, because it's not enough to have eyewitnesses when it's Black folks, you have to have a million witnesses who march on Congress

and march down Main Street in order for anything to be done. But I am bothered by the other effects of this constant loop that we now have of violence against us. Robert, before we move on, is there anything you want to say? I think, Scott, you were trying to sneak in there. Well, one thing, just piggybacking on what Scott says, and this is what I never understand with the police officers and the unions in particular, they always say, well, it's just a couple of bad apples. But play that saying out all the way. Nobody says one bad apple, don't worry about it, things will be fine, it's just one. They say one bad apple will spoil the bunch. So if you're not rooting out that one bad apple, it spreads, it metastasizes, it becomes entrenched in your department, entrenched in the police

unions, entrenched in the way that we teach policing in this country. So much so, there wasn't, but a couple years ago, President Trump was saying, rough them up a little bit. We put them in the car. Don't cradle their heads. That's the way that many people see themselves. If you go into many of these police chat groups, and we've had to do so in discovery for police violence cases here in Georgia before, they all are obsessed with superheroes and comic book characters and the Punisher. They see themselves as being the thin blue line to subjugate and keep these Black communities down because if you don't, then they'll start spilling over and interrupting

the white communities. We're going through that right here in Atlanta where people are losing their minds because, oh no, the black people are starting to rob folks in Lenox and in Buckhead and in Sandy Springs. Been robbing folks in the Bluff for 30 years. Been robbing folks down in the squats for 30 years. They don't care about that there because they see their

job as a thin blue line to separate the wild poor people from the rich folks and their domestic tranquility, that until you root those bad apples out of the bunch is going to poison the entire basket. Scott, final words. And you see that nine-year-old, if you run back to that video, you could hardly see this little nine-year-old.

He wasn't a big kid. And this cop is on top of him, choking him. You could hardly see the kid. He couldn't have weighed more than 70 pounds, maybe. And when they don't see you, they do things like that to you. Oh, it looks like we lost Scott there. All right, we're going to move on. We're going to go to Illinois now, where the governor has signed a new criminal justice reform bill that will eliminate the cash bail system by 2023,

making the state the first ever to abolish the discriminatory practice in the country. Now, this new law, which was pushed by the Illinois Legislative Black Caucus, also mandates that every police officer in the state wear a body camera by 2025. So joining me now to discuss this further is Kim Fox, Cook County State's attorney. Kim, thanks so much for joining me. Thank you for having me. Glad to be here. Awesome. Awesome. Now, this cash bill, we know it disproportionately impacts minorities and the lower class. So instead of having suspects post money to be freed from jail, judges will use a risk assessment to determine whether a suspect should be released or not.

So can you just walk us through, if you're familiar with what that risk assessment system could possibly look like? So we have a version of that here in Cook County, which encompasses Chicago, where our pretrial services will look at the defendant's background, any prior convictions, any prior warrants that he had not shown up or she has not shown up to court as, is this person working, going to school? What is, what is, what is the totality of who they are? And based on their risk, then they will be released without condition. Or if they have an elevated risk, there may be some additional conditions that they have to meet, like meeting with a pretrial officer more regularly, maybe some type of preventative treatment. But in essence,

it is not a determination just based on how much money you can post to get out of jail. So it's geared to be a more holistic approach of looking at defendants and not the overly simplified approach of assessing a monetary value. Now, in your opinion, why do you believe that the governor made this move to eliminate cash bail now? You know, the governor made a commitment last year that he was going to look at eliminating cash bail. There was a groundswell of support for this by activists and advocates for years. The In Money Bond Coalition has been pushing for this. My office, the state's attorney's office, have been pushing for this. And in the wake of what happened with George Floyd and the fact that we have people like Kyle Rittenhouse, who is an exemplification of what's wrong with the cash bail system.

Here is a boy who crosses the border with a long arm, shoots and kills two people and is walking the streets today because someone was able to pay his bail. While at the same time, there are people in jails across the country, across the state who were charged with with nonviolent offenses and can't pose something as little as $500 to get out. And so I think the governor, recognizing those forces at play and really having a true commitment to justice, said, if not now, then when? And the Legislative Black Caucus should be applauded for saying that now is the time. So it's going to take about two years before this is implemented. And also in the bill, the governor is saying that police are mandated to wear their body cameras, but that won't happen until about 2025. So we're in 2021. Why is it going to take so long for that to be a thing?

You know, in Chicago, which is our largest police department in the state, they already have body cameras. But Illinois is a vast state. It's pretty rural. And so I think the legislation was recognizing that there are some portions of the state that accessibility and the funding for police cameras may be more difficult than some of our larger municipalities. And so I think there was enough runway in there so that we can make sure that people have the equipment,

can afford the equipment, are trained on the equipment, and the equipment is up. But here in Chicago and Cook County, they have a body camera. And this legislation also is not even just having body camera, that there are penalties attached when you don't turn it on. There are assumptions that are made when people

who are wearing body cameras aren't turning them on in instances of police accountability or misconduct. So what are the consequences if an officer weren't to turn on their body camera? You know, one of the things that they could be subject to is prosecution, a felony prosecution, if it is determined that their camera was not turned on because they did not want to show what was happening in that instance. And so the penalties are pretty swift or stiff, which is why we saw so much opposition from law enforcement groups. So as you're saying, yes, there's a lot of opposition that's coming from law enforcement. There's a lot of opposition that's coming from lawmakers. And they're basically saying that this bill will hurt

law enforcement and it will force officers to essentially leave the force. They're saying it's just not fair to officers to have to do these things. What do you say to that? I say that's absolutely ridiculous. It's fear mongering. You know, one of the things that has been heartening about this is the collective effort from community organizers, legislators, and the governor to put this bill on the governor's desk. What has been disheartening is the fear-mongering, oftentimes soaked in racial tropes, that has happened from some of those who have opposed this. This is about simple police accountability. These are things that should be common sense, that you don't turn off your

body-worn camera when you have one assigned to you, that you don't use chokeholds, that you don't charge people with resisting arrest when there's no underlying offense. These are not things that are meant to undermine the credibility of law enforcement. In fact, it's supposed to bolster it. Because if people don't have faith and trust in the credibility of our institutions, then they will resort to street justice. That's when we are less safe. When people don't trust the system, we are less safe. This is built to have credibility rebuilt into that system. And as you know, a lot of minority communities just don't trust law enforcement, and they do have good reason for that. Now, we know that in Washington, D.C., New York, and New Jersey, they've adopted some form of cash bail and kind of like eliminating

it or limiting its use in these regions. But do you think that this is something that other states are going to follow suit with? You know, we certainly followed the New Jersey model. And the time that we're putting into eliminating cash bail starts in 2023. The time that we're putting into it now, making sure that we have the resources available to these folks who will no longer be detained pretrial to make sure that their needs are met and the community safety is met is something that I'm really confident about. But we're looking at the New Jersey model. Things that have worked in New York or didn't work in places like California are things that we're very mindful of. And I'm very confident, based on those lessons learned,

that we have a very strong bill here. All right, Kim, I'm going to open this up to my panel, panel members, Scott, Monique, or Robert. If you guys have a question for Kim, go ahead and ask her. Certainly, Kim. This is Attorney Petillo. I did have this question. So I'm on the Executive Board for the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, and we've seen in some jurisdictions that have eliminated cash bond that we've seen many abuses of the risk assessment system, where it's skewed, that we've seen many abuses of the risk assessment system, where it's skewed towards individuals. You know, some of the questions you asked during the risk assessment, what are your ties to the community? Do you have a job? Do you own property? Do you have the resources to help scorn? Those sorts of things kind of skew toward people

who are more economically advantageous and often who are not part of the African-American community. What safeguards are in place to prevent abuse of risk assessments in a similar way that abuses have been made of the cash bond system? Yeah, I think one of the things is we've recognized that there's some inherent biases in these risk assessment tools that we've been able to see as these tools have been rolled out over the past several years. Here in Cook County, since 2017, we've been using the risk assessment tool and have shrunk our jail population by about 40 percent from 2015 to last year. And so it is tweaking that. It is making sure that we know that jobs or access to employment may be very different on different parts of the city. And that should not weigh more than other factors. And so we're looking at the tool we have. We've been able to tweak it and see its utilization now.

And again, in the course of the next couple of years, making sure that we have a tool that's right size. It's not perfect. You know, algorithms and science are no, you know, not the be all end all answer, but it is one piece of this. And judges having the discretion to be able to probe, I think, is one of the things that will be different than where we've seen it in the past. Scott. Yeah. Yeah. Kim, this is Scott Bolden, probably born in Joliet, Illinois, if you will. Yeah. And my dad's a retired judge in Will County,

and I get back to see him. So always been a big fan of yours. And my question is about judges, right? What have the judges been saying, or what's been their response to this legislation? Because while I have not looked deeply at the legislation, it would suggest that you're taking some of their discretion and authority away, or is that not the case? I mean, I think what we're taking away is the one tool that judges have heavily relied upon, which is assigning a monetary value and not necessarily evaluating risk. Judges here in Cook County, for example,

have been using this modified risk assessment tool since 2017. And we've seen an increase of people who've been released on recognizance bonds, signature bonds, because they recognize that not every defendant is the same. And so some of the feedback that we've gotten from people who've actually used the tool, who've been doing this, has been positive. We've not seen an uptick in crime as we've done bail reform in Cook County. They've been able to counter that narrative. But this does, you know, the risk assessment tool is just one piece. The judge's discretion, a judge will have to make

a finding on the record if he's going to hold someone in custody without bond. You know, you don't get to just make these decisions and not have to explain yourself. And so I think that affords them that ability. Yeah. Thank you. Monique? Ma'am, you know I'm a fan. So I'm fanning out a little bit. I just want to say first, before I ask my question, wow, however proud I am of you and are so many just Black and brown girls in America, especially those of us who come through the halls of law school and look at the way that you have stood up for your people, how you have done your job, how whether it has been feast or famine, whether it's been hot or cold through fire, you have stayed true to your principles.

I applaud you. I am rooting for you. Many of us are rooting for you. So my question is, what is it that people can do, whether it's your constituency or whether it's kind of the broader constituency of all of those who are rooting from afar that can make your job and the job of prosecutors in your position easier or at least less hard to do when you really are on some uphill battles pulling down all of these old ways and systems of doing things. Yeah. Thank you for that. And, you know, it's a mutual admiration society. I think it's what you do, Monique. There's so much misinformation that is put out about justice reform. You know, there are people who are entrenched to the old way of doing things,

where incarceration and not dealing with root causes of violence, with being overly punitive, engaging in wars on drugs or wars, you know, on violence in our communities has just been completely disrupted. I think what we need for people, particularly in the Black community, is to know that they have a stake in this. I'm only in this seat, you know, I won re-election because Black people showed up at the ballot box and said, we don't want to go back, that we believe in restorative justice, that we believe that the criminal justice system is overly punitive. We understand what mass incarceration means

and we're not going to fall for this. And so what has been incredibly helpful to me in some of the noise that has come, because I've been attacked, you know, the Fraternal Order of Police, I'm public enemy number one, the former president, the former attorney general, you know, called me out. It is the engagement of our communities on justice issues, not just in the wake of somebody's death. You know, we rally, you know, very, very hard in the wake of tragedy. But this has to be a sustained commitment to making sure that we have prosecutors and

defense attorneys and judges who are aligned with our values. And for so long, we've just given up on prosecutors because we haven't seen ourselves in these roles. We need more, you know, Black prosecutors, and not just Black, but those who come from the communities that are impacted by our choices. That's how we can help. We have to keep a sustained energy and effort around justice issues and local stakeholders in the race. Amen. All right, we're going to leave it right there. Thank you so much, Kim Fox, Cook County State's attorney.

We're going to take a quick break. We'll be right back right after this. I grew up wanting a lot of activities in my neighborhood that was in close proximity. You know, my mom wasn't always there, so I didn't always have a ride to places. And you know, you want to be able to walk down the street and get to something that's some food for your soul in your community. You know, I relished the days of being in Clarksdale, Mississippi, and when I had to go out there and live with my people,

they had actually black-owned corner stores. My uncle, my uncle Donald owned the cleaners in a corner store. And he a city councilman down there now. It's like, that was big for him. He was like, yo, man, you got to own something. Got to own something. His wife was named Louise. It always killed me. I used to call him George Jefferson. His was donald because his wife was named louise and that was big to see my family own and stuff and it just cultivated what my dad told me my dad he's not a lot he didn't say a lot of good stuff but the three things that he did give me play chess should be a thinker,

you don't have to work for nobody. He told me that. He said, you don't have to work for nobody. The same energy that you put into for somebody else, you can put that same energy into for yourself. And then he'd go into his field. See, they talking about black people don't want to work. Black people just don't want no jobs.

You know what I'm saying? We don't work for nobody else. We want our own stuff. Give me my own stuff, I come to work every day. You know what I'm saying? We don't work for nobody else. We want our own stuff. Give me my own stuff. I come to work every day. He goes to his own field. And I don't work for anybody. Hi, I'm Kim Burrell. Hi, I'm Carl Painting. Hey, everybody. This is Sherri Shepherd. You're watching Roland Martin Unfiltered.

To date, 503,000 people have died from COVID and 28.2 million people have contracted the virus. Last night, House and Senate leaders led a moment of silence on the steps of the U.S. Capitol to remember those Americans who have lost their lives. Take a look. All right. You know what time it is. Take a look at this exchange that happened in Maine between a white woman and a white man over the use of the N-word. Hey man, I heard your conversation in there and you might want to have an outwardly racist conversation in a more private place. Outwardly? Yeah, I heard you say the N-word multiple times. That's just not cool, dude. You don't like that word? I want to have an outwardly racist conversation in a more private place. Outwardly? Yeah, I heard you say the N-word multiple times. That's just not cool, dude.

You don't like that word? No, because it's not appropriate. It's a slur. Well, you call it a slur, but my conversation, which I'm hoping to have with you, is why would it be a slur okay for them to say, but not me? No, there's a lot of people in the black community who don't like that word either. And I appreciate that. But a lot of black people died with that name being yelled at them.

And a lot of people, a lot of black people enjoy using it as words of adherement. So I'm curious, what names have white people been called as they've been hauled up trees? As they've been what? Hauled up trees and lynched. Oh, I have no idea. Exactly. Why do you need to use the N-word? You're ignorant.

Why do you need to use the N-word? I'm going to explain it to you. Why? Why do you need to use the N-word? I tried talking to you. Why do you need to use the N-word? I'm sorry. I used to think that you were half a person. Why do you need to use the n-word i tried talking to you why do you need to use the n-word i used to think that you were half why do you need to use the other way there's no use for you why do you need to use the n-word because you can because i can why are you filming me and you can do that why do

you need to use the n-word why do you need to use the n-word why do you need to use the n-word because i can there it is robert i'm gonna start with you why why does this guy or this woman essentially have to justify or even explain to this white man why it's not okay for him to use the n-word man look shout out to Tyrell or Jamal or whoever her black boyfriend from college's name was, because that woman is an ally. And like, whatever he had her in that dorm room watching Malcolm X movies, listening to J. Dilla and everything,

he probably got a kente cloth at home, got the Adinkra symbol, all that stuff. So shout out to whoever made her an ally. But let's understand, this is the only way that you start rooting these people out. Because when you as a black person say something to this white guy, they say, oh, you're playing

the race card. It takes another white person to approach them in whiteness and without all of the aggression and anger that goes with it, to approach them in whiteness. And then they can understand and have a civil conversation. So this is something for them to work out amongst themselves.

I think that if you want to be a real ally, it's not enough just to turn your Instagram or your Facebook picture to a black square every time that a black person gets shot, but actually to do things such as this to start working through the community. And that's why you start weeding it out over the course of a couple generations.

It's not going to happen in a day, in an hour, in a week. But over the course of a couple generations, we see these things reducing and eventually going away. A perfect example, if you want to look at the F word as it relates to the LGBTQIAPK plus community, you know, 20 or 30 years ago, it was in music, it was in movies, it was in comedy. Today, it is gone.

If you look at the way we talk about Jewish Americans in this country, there used to be anti-Semitic slurs and blazing saddles and all sorts of other parts of pop culture. Today, it is gone because they worked it out of the community. We have to do the exact same thing for the N-word. Scott? Yeah, you know, I'm usually cracking up at this segment, but this was a pretty serious segment and a teaching moment. I tell my colleagues at my law firm and my colleagues that don't look like me that given this racial reckoning, given this racial heightened racial consciousness, I don't want you to be anti racist. Right. Because no one's going to admit that they're racist. I want you to be anti-racist. I want you to stand up and say this is wrong and weed it out and address it in whatever way you feel comfortable addressing it so we can weed out systemic and generational racism, right? So nobody's born with a racist gene. No one believes that they're racist. And yet generational systemic racism continues to self-perpetuate in our society. But these moments,

like that woman took up the mantle and as an ally said, why do you have to use that word? And in the end, what he told her was really because white privilege says I can use it, right? And he was unapologetic about it. You see, racism rears its ugly head in a despair and impact way. It can be the proud boys, but most of the time it's rooted in white privilege, right? And I'm not letting people that don't look like me off the hook, but it manifests itself a lot in these these moments. And we need black people, white people, brown people as allies to stand up and say enough is enough, because families are teaching new races every day. Environment. For people that don't look like me that they grow up in, they're being taught racism

and to use that word. And unless someone like a white ally doesn't stand up or stands up and says, no, that's wrong, then it's going to continue to be generational and racism is going to rear its ugly head at all generations going forward.

This is the moment that we have a chance to stop it. All those white people and brown people that were out there protesting George Floyd, you know, I applaud it, because racism is not a Black issue. Let's be serious. It may affect us negatively 400 years from slavery to now, but it's not a black issue. It's America's sin. And to move past and get to the promise of America of freedom, justice, and equality, it's just not going to be up to me and Monique and Robert and you and Roland Martin. We're going to need everybody to say this is wrong. We don't need any silent partners anymore. And so now is the time. And so I applaud our white ally in that video, but I need millions of white allies to stand up,

regardless of in 2043, we're going to be a country of color. I need everyone to stand up to not that word, but to racism. And Scott, to your point, I was covering the George Floyd protests last year and there were a lot of white people who came out to protest. And a lot of them that I spoke with, they were like, we didn't know racism was this big of a deal, or we didn't know that systemic racism within the police force was this much of an issue. And instead of just protesting, they came there to learn, to educate themselves and to educate those who look like them as well. But you know what they also said? If you were out there or if you were doing political commentary

or if you were listening and reading, what they were telling you, which was even more profound and a blessing or an ally, is that this is not my America. As young white Americans will say, this is not my America. I don't want my America to be this. I want the promise to be for everyone. I want it to be for everyone. And that's the beginning. It's not the end. We got to have those courageous conversations. We got to make sure that people are tolerant, but accountable. Right. We got to listen and love and forgive and a path forward together, arm in arm. But that's where it starts. By that white woman standing up and saying no to use of that N-word. It's a great example. Definitely. Monique, what are your thoughts? Yes, she definitely showed allyship in that moment. One of the things that I post all the time on Instagram when things like this happen is get your folks, you know, get your own folks. I check my folks. I might not do it publicly, but surely if I disagree with something,

Scott is on here. He can tell you there will be a conversation and it will be good. It'll be fulsome. And that's what we have to do. Correction begins at home. But what I also want to observe is she was the most successful candidate for that conversation. Not just her whiteness, but her womanhood, which makes for white womanhood, which is the holy grail in the United States of America. Because see, that man could have been challenged by pretty much anybody else and it go a completely different way. It could have escalated to physical violence, whether it was black man, black woman, white man, brown man, or woman. But here she was saying to somebody, it was obvious she was kind of familiar with, and he said that she was a teacher and she should have been smarter. I was listening to the conversation. So maybe they

knew each other, but that's where the power is. When you stand up in your circle and you use the opportunity that you have, when you have it, claim your own power and authority over situations and circumstances and people and, and teach and correct. And I don't want to assume, like my brother Robert did, that she was under the influence of some prior black relationship. And I don't want to assume that she had some good black girlfriend. And I don't want to assume that it was, you know, she was raised on the other side of the tracks with the rest of us. She may have just been a woman who took the time to read and learn and understand her environment. And maybe she got the spirit of living God on the inside of her.

I don't know. It could be a lot of different things. But whatever she's doing, we need more of that. One of the reasons black folks get so exhausted is because we study trying to explain the same stuff over and over again to people who long since should have understood it. Well, if they don't understand it, I'm tired. Let's just step up. She's doing a good job. Amen.

Go ahead, Scott. All I was going to say, I would like to make an official motion to take Candace Owens' invite to the barbecue and give it to this white woman because she's been more of an ally to us than some of these other black folks who were in the media speaking down to us. So if she's invited to the barbecue, I'll make brisket. I love it.

All right. Any final thoughts, guys, before I let you go? I have one quick final thought. You know, it's incumbent upon us, too, as Black people. You know, I sit around and smoke cigars and drink tequila with my friends, and if they use the F word in connection to gay people, if they make a slur against our Jewish brothers and sisters, you know, it's up to us to stand up and say no to that. That's not allowed.

We're not going to use that around me because it can be just as hurtful and just as harmful. Since one of my daughters is gay, I certainly don't allow that to go on at my home or in social settings because in my mind, they're talking about one of mine, flesh and blood. So it's very personal to me. But I've got to be affirmative and assertive to them more than just want and say, don't use those terms around me,

and you shouldn't use them generally. And they say, oh, Scott, we're just talking, right? It's just us here. No, it's no longer acceptable for Black people, white people, brown people, gay people, Jewish people to traffic in those types of tropes and racially offensive language. We got to get away with it because words and language matter, especially the ones we use, given what black people have been through for 400 years. And so I'm committed to that corrective behavior. I am. And I do it quite a bit and I'm doing less of it because my friends and family know it's not to be tolerated when I'm around. Monique, any final thoughts?

Amens and amens. All righty there. Well, thank you so much, Robert, Scott, and Monique. You guys are free to go. That is it for Roland Martin Unfiltered. Roland will be back tomorrow. But before you change that channel, be sure to donate to Roland Martin Unfiltered. You can donate using Zelle, Cash App, and Venmo. And I'm Ashley Banks, so be sure to follow me on Instagram and Twitter at Ashley M. Banks. And in the words of Roland Martin, holla! Holla! You say you'd never give in to a meltdown. Never let kids' toys take over the house. And never fill your feed with kid photos.

You'd never plan your life around their schedule, never lick your thumb to clean their face, and you'd never let them leave the house looking like less than their best. You'd say you'd never put a pacifier in your mouth to clean it, never let them stay up too late. And never let them run wild through the grocery store. So when you say you'd never let them get into a car without you there, know it can happen.

One in four hot car deaths happen when a kid gets into an unlocked car and can't get out. Never happens. Before you leave the car, always stop, look, lock. Brought to you by NHTSA and the Ad Council. I know a lot of cops. They get asked all the time, have you ever had to shoot your gun? Sometimes the answer is yes. But there's a company dedicated to a future where the answer will always be no.

This is Absolute Season 1, Taser Incorporated. I get right back there and it's bad. Listen to Absolute Season 1, Taser Incorporated on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. I'm Clayton English. I'm Greg Lott. And this is Season 2 of the War on Drugs podcast. Last year, a lot of the problems of the drug war. This year, a lot of the biggest names in music and sports.

This kind of star-studded a little bit, man. We met them at their homes. We met them at their recording studios. Stories matter and it brings a face to them. It makes it real. It really does. It makes it real. Listen to new episodes of the War on Drugs podcast season two

on the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. This is an iHeart Podcast.