Fabricated facts so there were multiple references to that, that we were shading the truth, right . I mean, again, so multiple objections. This is essentially governed by state versus mcdaniel, the final argument of a prosecutor is governed by a unique set of rules which differs from those governing counsel in civil suit and even those governing Defense Counsel in a very same criminal trial. The special rules follow directly from the prosecutors inherent hue nuclear role in the criminal Justice System which mandates that the prosecutor not act as a zealous advocate for criminal punishment but as a representative of the people in an effort to seek justice. For example, that when a prosecutor argues that a defense is meritless, you can not belittle the defense even in the abstract or subjecting that the defense was raised because thats the only defense. Theres lots of law on this, your honor and essentially these comments, the repeated comments constitute Prosecutorial Misconduct. Ill note for the record that i overruled the first objection when mr. Blackwell used the word story because it was isolate and in its context did not seem to me to be belittle. However, the continued use of it i did sustain the ultimate objection that counsel made to the use of the word stories and instructed the jury to disregard. It also on shading the truth, that i sustained the objection and instructed the jury to disregard it. Im not making any findings as to whether it was the type of Prosecutorial Misconduct that would result in a mistry. I think it was adequately addressed by the courts instruct to disregard. With regard to other matters we have. I think there are some Bench Conferences that you want to that are fairly historical that you wanted to memorialize but new motion based on events this weekend. Mr. Nelson . Your honor, as the court is aware prior to coming into court this morning for Closing Arguments we had an inchambers discussion about events of this weekend, specifically referencing that an elected official, United States Congress Person was making what i interpreted to be and what i think are reasonably interpreted to be threats against the sanctity of the jury process, threatening and intimidating a jury demanding that if theres not a guilty verdict that there would be further further further problems, your honor, and given the fact that this jury has not been sequestered, it has been my position all along throughout the course of this case that this jury should have been sequestered at the outset. The jury has not been continually has not been continually told to stay away from media, only media about this case. The theres a high probability that members of this jury have seen these comments, are familiar with these comments and things that have happened throughout the course of this trial. I mean, its unfortunate that there was another situation that occurred during the course of this trial, but obviously, your honor, we also, as i mentioned, preefr previously, too, one of them does live in Brooklyn Center, as i recall. Though thats the alternate we just dismissed. I thought it was. Go ahead. Id have to go back and double check my notes. Your honor, i just think that the sum total of this trial happening in such a public context, number one, number two, while this all of this the Media Attention is profound, ive admittedly stayed away from 99 of it, but that has required me to stay away from all media. I mean, is this case has made made found its way to even fictional televicious your honor. There were two i was individuals of two Television Shows in the course of the past few days that specifically involved references to this particular case, and the reactions of the characters of these stories to this particular case. This jury has despite all best efforts has been bombarded with information relevant to this case. It is impossible to stay away from it unless you literally shut off your phone our shut off your tv, you shut off your computer and no such instructions have been given during the course of this trial. Well, to be fair, the last few times ive individuals them i told them dont watch the news, pure and simple, right. But if you cant even watch your thursday Night Television show and it comes up, i mean, this is this is the problem, right, and why i have felt that this jury should have been sequestered from the very beginning. Understood. I want to make that clear, so i had moved based on that, again, for a mistrial. The idea is that its a public try. I think the court has accomplished that, but the Media Attention is so profound, i mean, it is such a modern comparison such a modern problem to have where literally i walk from this courtroom into the courtroom where i have been permitted to to stay. During the course of this trial ive received literally thousand and thousands and thousands of emails, so much so that i dont even look at that particular email anymore. So but my phone gives me alerts on things that just happened. I mean, you cant avoid it, and it is so pervasive that it is i just dont know how this jury can really be said to be that they are free from the taint of this, and now that we have u. S. Representatives threatening acts of violence in relation to this specific case, its its mindboggling to me, judge. Well, ill give you that Congresswoman Waters may have given you something on appeal that may result in this whole trial being overturned, but whats the states position . Your honor, the states position first and foremost, and this is a concern that i raised at the beginning of the proceedings, while its a Jury Selection, is that we cant allow statements like this, vague statements to be considered a part of the record on appeal. The if theres a specific statement that a specific u. S. Representative made, then there needs to be some sort of formal offer of proof with the exact quotes and the exact statement or some kind of a declaration, and im sure mr. Nelson can do that if he thinks that thats something thats appropriate. The i dont know that this particular representative made made a specified threat of violence. I dont know what the context of the statement is. I also doesnt know what Television Shows mr. Nelson is referring to in terms of any of this, and so i just dont think that we can mid the record with vague allegations as to things that have happened without very specific evidence thats being offered before the court. As a practical matter, through the Jury Selection process, the court has provided instructions, has determined whether or not there are any outside influences. The law presumes that the jury follows the judges instructions and the court has instructed the jury and instructed the jury today that they are not to let any outside influences or Public Opinion sway their deliberation, and the law presumes that they will be capable of doing that. So without any sort of specific offer of proof of information in the record, without any specific evidence that this particular juror, jury was influenced in any particular way, i believe that the defendants motion should be denied. Your honor, i make my comments in the context of this is all such an evolving situation. Obviously i spend my weekend preparing for Closing Remarks and i certainly can supplement the record with news articles. I can supplement the record, you know, the story lines of the particular shows that were brought to my attention so theres im making it to note the record at this particular point, and i can certainly supplement. Yeah, you can supplement the record with whatever media reports. Im aware of the media reports. Im aware that Congresswoman Waters was talking specifically about this trial and about the up be acceptability of anything less than had a Murder Conviction and talking about being confrontation al, but can you submit the press articles about that. This goes back to what ive been saying from the beginning. I wish ielectled officials would stop talking about this kals, especially in a manner thats disrespectful to the rule of law and to the Judicial Branch and our function. I think if they want to give their opinions, they should do so in a respectful and in a manner that is consistent with their oath to the constitution, to respect a coequal branch of government. Their failure to do so i think is abhorrent, but i dont think its prejudiced us with additional material that would prejudice this jury. They have been told not to watch the news. I trust they are following those instructions and that there is not in any way a prejudice beyond the articles that were talking specifically about the facts of this case. The a congresswomans opinion really doesnt matter had a whole lot. Anyway, so motion for mistrial is denied. With regard to there was a report that counsel were made aware of a few days ago that a juror may have been talking to a major media outlet. We talked it appeared right from the beginning that it was thirdhand here say telephone game. That media outlet in fact took it very seriously. Did a nationwide contact of all of its reporters and staff to check out any voracity and apparently there is none whatsoever. Nobody from this major media outlet made any contact, and i find that credible and so just for the record i pass that along. Know think we still have the memorialization but we also have to talk about a Blakely Waiver. Yes, your honor. So a couple of things. In terms of the memorialization of sidebars and the objections, we had previously provided and we had suggested that we would that we provided our memorandum of the objections that the defense had made at sidebars. I am going to propose, rather than just simply reading through and taking an hours time that we submit those objections in writing now that that happened. Wait. And in consultation with the state and they can include their objections that we did not include. It would be nice to include just essentially a stipulated pleading that sets out what the objection was and what the courts ruling there. Hes no read to repeat what the arguments were. Only thing you need to preserve for appeal is what the objection was and what the courts ruling was soy would encourage both parties to get together and figure that out and file it reasonably quickly. I mean, it doesnt have to be today, tomorrow or even the next day, but just get at it while our memories are fresh. And if theres a discrepancy between the memories, your honor, im expecting that were going to be able to come up a stipulated document, but if theres anything that needs to be set out we can just indicate our contrary memories that have and should be absolutely. I think that that would be the best way to memorialize that in any case. All right. Any other blakely, do we have any other issues . No, your honor. I think we need some administrative discussions about questions, timing. We can do that in a chambers discussion. The. All right. With regard to blakely. Sure. I have not yet had mr. Chauvin execute the written waiver. Again, i do have it. We can print it and get that taken care of, but i can do an oral waiver now. If you would. Mr. Chauvin, take your mask off. Mr. Chauvin, youre aware that during the course of these proceedings the state has filed whats called a blakely notice or a notice to seek an aggravated sentence, correct . Yes. I have explained to you the base ease on which the state is seeking to have an aggravated sentence imposed in the event of a conviction on any one of the counts here, correct . Correct. Weve discussed those, and i have i have specifically advised you that you have a right to have a jury decide whether or not the state has proven those grounds for an aggravated sentence Beyond A Reasonable Doubt. You have a right to have a jury decide if you violate it had, right . Correct. And ive advised you that the state has to prove those grounds Beyond A Reasonable Doubt . Correct. And we can waive that right and allow if youre convict the are, we can waive your right to a trial and allow the judge to make those determinations. Ive advised you about that, right . Yes, you have. Now, do you want a jury to make a decision about the proof required for the aggravated factors if theres a conviction, or are you willing to waive your right to a trial on those matters and allow judge cahill to make the decisions . Im waive that and allow judge cahill to address that. This is another one of the decisions that you have to make for yourself. This is a waiver of your jury trial right when it comes to aggravating factors. Normally we would submit a verdict form within interrogatories with a question and yes or no options and thats what generally the jury would consider. In order to say yes, the jury would have to be convinced Beyond A Reasonable Doubt. The burden of proof does not change, its only that ill be one answering those yes or no questions. It was always true that based on whatever the answers are to those that i would be the one deciding if they constitute legally substantial and compelling say,s, and we would expect briefs from both sides on that. Do you understand that . Yes, i do. So basically i will be answering those verdict form questions instead of the jury, applying the standard of proof Beyond A Reasonable Doubt. Is that what you want to have happen . Yes, sir. I would ask that you file a written Blakely Waiver in addition. We will, your honor. All right. I just have a question on the norm that was provided, and we can, again, its an administrative. Its an administrative memorialization so you can do that off the record. All right. Counsel, im going to talk with the basically give instructions to the alternates. Give me 20 minutes, and then why dont you come on back. Sflrt other wise, we are in recess until we hear from the jury. What a day. Im wolf blitzer here in the the situation room. I want to immediately get to our reporters and our analysts to watch what has happened. The jury is now getting ready to begin deliberations. Is sara sidner is with us. Shes been watching this from day one. The sara, its now in the hands of the jurors. What is happening right now . Were told from the court that the jurors actually already had it in their hands when you were listening to the arguments made outside of the presence of the jury in court today, so the jury has been looking that the for a few minutes now. The what we saw in court today in front of judge but outside of the presence of the jury is a lastditch effort by the defense to try and get the judge to order a mistrial. He made a couple of comments as to what that would mean. The mistrial would be because some of the words the prosecution used. He said it was Prosecutorial Misconduct, the judge sustained the objection and told the jury to disregard some of the language used like the word story when they were talking about the defenses case and he also talked about what happened this weekend. Chauvins Defense Attorney eric nelson talked about there being a Congress Person who was here, an elected official who basically in his in his mind threatened the process and in so doing threatened the jury, the jury trial and basically he was speaking, although he didnt name her, about californias own Maxine Waters. The judge actually named Maxine Waters, and here is what she said, by the way, over the weekend when she came down into minneapolis. She was there in Brooklyn Center where people were protesting the death of another black man at the hands of police. She said i hope were going to get a verdict that will say guilty, guilty, guilty, and if we dont, we cannot go away, and so the she also talked about just being out there and demonstrating, and so in eric nelsons view chauvins Defense Attorney, he felt that that was a direct threat against the jury and what they are charged with doing which is deliberate and making a decision and he felt that that was inappropriate and was inappropriate enough for the judge to call a mistry. The judge disagreed because he had instructed the jury not to watch any news, not to read any news, not to discuss the case, and he said he trusted that the jury had done that. Wolf. Its important because the whole statement that representative Maxine Waters of california made has caused a lot of concern out there. Let me play the clip, and then well discuss why the defense in this particular case thinks that statement may have tainted this entire trial. Weve got to stay on the street and weve got to get more active. Weve got get more confrontation a. Weve got make sure that they know that we mean business. So sara, i want to move on and get our analysts to assess that, but her statement is obviously riveting within this within the trial. The. Yeah. It is, and the judge admonished her. He named her and he said i wish that elected officials that are here to, you know, go ahead and serve the constitution and abide by the constitution would not make comments on this case that could possibly be inflammatory or could be disrespectful to the process, to the Judicial Branch and to the jury. He was very strong in his statements, and i am sure that this is not the last weve heard of Maxine Waters. She tends to speak her mind as well, but he was very, very serious about hearing from Public Officials and wanting them not to inflame tensions and he said so on the bench. Wolf . Let me bring in Elliott Williams who is watching this, our legal analyst, former federal prosecutor. Weve got to stay on the streets, she said. Weve got to get more active. Weve got to get more confrontational. Weve got to make sure that they know we mean business. What did you make of how that came up at the very end after the jury already began deliberations . Look, wolf, come on. This story has been front page news for the greater part of a year. Movie stars, members of congress, president s of the United States have commented on this trial. The idea that one member of congresss statement a few days before the jury starts deliberating is somehow going to prejudice the jury is nonsense. The law presumes that jurors can take in and internalize the instructions from the court and the court is instructed the jurors i guess twice at the beginning and at the end number one not to watch the news and number two anything they see to set aside and they were picked on account of their ability to do so so some of this i think to be candid is about Maxine Waters, but at the end of the day one famous person making a comment thats incompatible with the trial just doesnt throw the verdict how the. Now he has to the Defense Attorney has to make that objection now in order to be able to make it again on appeal if chauvin is convicted, so some of that is just basically lawyering, but this this is not grounds for a mistrial. Elie, what did you make of the close arguments we heard from the prosecution and the defense . Yeah. So, you know, its i think they both did what showed do. You know, the prosecutions goal was to appeal to common sense. One of the things he started off was i think you heard, i dont remember the number. The 45 witnesses. The 6th witness is xwlour common sense. Yes, youve heard about Carbon Monoxide but theres a 9 minute and 20second video. The yes, you heard about fentanyl but theres a nineplus minute video, and all of these things the defense did everything that they could to throw up bits of doubt but they just didnt address the nine minot video. Thats their obligation. They dont have to, but the common sense plea that the prosecution went to is that big piece of evidence. Now jurors are weird when they get back in that room and who knows how they come down, but as a matter of straight presentation the prosecution just had just a more air tight case. Shan wu is with us as well. Shan, youre a legal analyst. The jurors, they got the instructions from the judge on the three specific charges face the Derek Chauvin. The what are the deliberations look like at this point . Well, usually, wolf, the first thing they will do when they go back there is they will choose a foreperson. I think of note will be, you know, well learn later who is it, you but, you know, theres a nurse i think on there and people with that type of medical opinion could exert a Strong Influence ton it, and then typically they will start to go through the evidence. Hopefully they dont immediately take the vote. Usually the judge will tell them dont do that right away. Work through the evidence in a very organized manner, you know. I agree welloff. I think the defense has put on a strong case. I think the defense did a good job. That was him at his best. He picked the pieces from his record that he needed to pick and there are some issues with regard to Prosecutorial Misconduct that could be fodder on appeal as well so im nervous about it, but certainly the weight of the evidence is in favor of the prosecution and hopefully the jury will take their time and work through it. I mean, pretty soon well be wondering is a short amount of time to deliberate a good sign or a bad time or a long time and generally when youre the prosecutor you want a longer deliberation. It takes a lot for people to decide that someone is guilty so you want them to take their time. Did you think the defense in this particular case went on and on and on and threw everything at the jury . It was a little bit he opened really weak today with his Closing Argument, but it was a smart move for him to try to move the time focus away from that nine minutes. He could have done a better job with it. He was trying to show that chauvin didnt know everything that we know signature here commonly looking at it. There was stress. He understood what he was arriving at in the scene. He kind of put the pieces in motion. It was the right idea but didnt really tie it together so i also felt when the judge broke when he did probably the jurors had been listening for too long and needed that break and that was probably a help to the defense. The other thing he could have done is to really point out the fact its a tragedy. I think he mentioned that one time and he really needs say this is a tragedy, its a horrible thing but lets talk about if theres enough evidence to convict chauvin. I dont think he did a good job that have sara the prosecution told the jurors to, quote, use your common sense, believe your eyes, what you saw, what you saw. The just how important was that nine and a half minute video of george floyd on the ground there with Derek Chauvins knee on his neck . Yeah. I mean, they saw a lot more than nine minutes and 29 seconds of chauvins knee on George Floyds neck. They saw all of the video of all of the officers who were there and involved and then on top of that they saw, of course, the bystander video, but the reason why the prosecution changed that number is because at first it was eight minutes and 46 seconds is what they initially charged. Later they reduce that had to 7 minutes and 46 seconds, but when they saw all of that police video which the jury saw they upped that number. The long time to have your knee on someones neck and they kept making that point over and over and over again. Ive got to tell you, seeing that video again over and over and over again today was hard to watch just like it always has been. I think the jury is certainly going to have a hard time as they have to go back two it because they can they can certainly look at that video if they want to to try as they are deliberating this case, but i want to say, you know, what we also saw rebuttal after the defense went who talked a lot about the medical condition that george floyd was in, the drugs that george floyd took. The rebuttal and the words from Prosecutor Blackwell was pretty strong. He ended today with the jury saying the truth is george floyd is dead because Derek Chauvins heart was too small, and youll remember that there was an argument about the slight enlargement of the heart of george floyd as a potential reason. I think the prosecution very much jumped on that and left jury with something to really think about. Thats an important point. Elliott, the prosecution said and im quoting now. This wasnt politician. This was murder. How effective was that Closing Argument . Yeah, so i think that it was sort goldilocks trying something that appealed to everybody. Remember, this is Hennepin County minnesota. Once you get out of minneapolis, you know, its not the same demographics that youre going to find in minneapolis and the jury pool, and the jury pool is drawing from all of that. They had to speak to both people who might be inclined to think about the reform of policing and sort of, you know, the base ease for the protest over the last year but also people who might be inclined to to buy some of the arguments that the defense is putting forward, more sort of traditionally quote, unquote propolice folks, and if you Jerry Blackwell and Steve Scliker earlier in the day made clear and talked about policing what the badge means. Policing is a noble profession, and i think that was incredibly deliberate language meant to tug at the strings at a certain type of juror. Just because you dont know whats going to resonate with the group of 12 that has to rule unanimously. Let me play this clip. This is the prosecutor making his point. Watch this. Only you have the power to convict the defendant of these crimes and in so doing and in so doing declare that this use of force was unreasonable. It was excessive. It was grossly disproportionate. It is not an excuse for the shocking abuse that you saw with your own eyes, and you can believe your own eyes. This case is exactly what you thought when you saw it first, what you saw that video. It is exactly that. You can believe your eyes. Its exactly what you believed. Its exactly what you saw with your eyes. Its exactly what you knew. Its what you felt in your gut. Its what you now know in your heart. This wasnt policing. This was murder. The defendant is guilty of all three counts, all of them. And theres no excuse. Thats how he summed it up. Shan, let me get your reaction. Well, wolf, my heart is with them completely on that, but i have to say as a former prosecutor and Defense Attorney, hes walking right up to the line there legally. Hes got to be careful with that on appeal, that its very strongly an appeal to emotion. I think that part is effective, but youve got to be careful with that when youre on the prosecution side, referencing your gut, dangerous. The common sense, okay, but gut and emotion, thats a little bit dangerous, and i think it was powerful, but they are taking a little bit of a risk with that, and i think they are trying, as elliott said, trying to appeal to a broad base of people there. They are trying a little bit of common sense, a little bit of the law, a little bit of emotion, and and i hope they got the mix right. Because, elliott, the you heard the Defense Attorney eric nelson make the point that he felt that there was evidence of a potential mistrial, that there was a prejudice there as a result of what the prosecutors were saying. What did you think . Again, the law presumes that the jurors can listen to what a judge instructs them in terms of argument. There was a lot of back and forth today over, you know, did the prosecutors go too far . Did the defense misstate the law and the judges ruling was that number one ill give the prosecutors a change to clean this up on their rebuttal, but more importantly i can instruct the jurors that, number one, what the law you know, i the judge state what the law is and, number two, follow the instructions and go from there, and so, again, the law and judges and courts dont want or presume that there ought not to be mistrials and you can correct ways around them. The defense had to make these arguments, put them on the record so that if in fact hes convicted they can go back and have a basis for for overturning a conviction. Because, you know, elliott, you did hear eric nelson, the Defense Attorney, make the point that the jury should have been sequestered the whole time given the enormous publicity this trial has generated. Right. Yeah, you know, judges dont like Sequestering Jurors on the account of the fact that its incredibly the law sort of urges against it because of how disruptive it is to the lives of jurors. It presumes that you can find jurors who can set all of what they know aside and you can protect them from the pretrial publicity. Now, look, this is as high profile as any trial has been i think frankly in most of our lifetime, going back to perhaps o. J. Or Something Like that, so, you know, this is a special trial, but, again, the law seems to have anticipated for that. Now who knows, this is what shan was getting into as well. He has nelson and the defense have a basis for challenging this, and they have a basis for raising it on appeal. As of today we could have all predicted that the judge was not going to grant a mistrial based on what we saw. Yeah. That was obvious. You know, sara, youve been there, as i say, every single day. Youre watching this as closely as any journalist is right now. Give us a little sense of whats going on in the community as we await now the jurys decision. So, on sunday in the daytime in George Floyd Square which is the area in which george floyd died where they have been keeping vigil for almost a year now, it was really a heartening sight. There were dozens of people out there from all different walks of life when were talking about peace, talking about trying to find justice, talking about what they were going to do going forward, and there was absolutely no violence, but you can also see around the city on a lot of street corners, you are seeing Armed National guard. They are in uniform. There are boards on more and more and more buildings and businesses. They have moved the perimeter, and its clear that they can close the perimeter if they need to the way that they have built it with concrete blocks and fencing, and, you know, razor wire and barbed wire around government buildings, especially around the court the court. We know that over time they have ratcheted up more and more Law Enforcement as well, and we understand that theres going to be more Law Enforcement coming in from other states, from ohio as we heard today in a press conference, and the police chief was also asked about what his concerns were, and they are great. They are extremely worried about what the reaction is going to be to whatever the verdict is, and so if you ask people who have been here who have been demanding justice, who have been going out into the streets every day, many of them will tell you that if they dont get the decision that they want, that and im going to put it the way they did. This place is going to blow. Wolf . Shan, lets talk about whats going on in the Jury Deliberation thats just begun. Youre a former federal prosecutor. Typically the first thing they do, is the first thing they do is pick a foreperson . Yes, wolf. Thats usually what they will do, and then the foreperson will hopefully kind of guide them a little bit through the process, and what you want them to do as a prosecutor and what the judge wants them to do is to kind of work their way through the evidence in an organized fashion. I havent seen if they gave them a verdict form, but ideally the verdict form would present them with the most serious charge first. They are working their way through that and then they will go down to the next one and then the next one. I was a little bit concerned because its complicated, the difference between those charges legally. I want to make sure if i was the prosecutor that im really spoon feeding how to do that to them, and i suspect we will expect some notes from the jury asking about that, so because its a complicated issue. To convict, elliott, you need a unanimous decision obviously, all 12 jurors to find chauvin not guilty. You need a unanimous decision, but there is a possibility of a hung jury if one or two or three of the jurors have one view and its not unanimous. Theres a hung jury, right . Yeah. Ive been there. Its not and its not a nice feeling as a prosecutor. You know, what will happen i think youll get a sense, not to predict, but, you know, you would start seeing notes coming back from the jurors that we are unable to come to a verdict on lets say count two manslaughter, right, and the judge will invariably instruct them to go back and use your best whatever i dont remember what the precise wording is do your best to come to a unanimous verdict. They will come back a day later, two days later say we cant find or cant come to a unanimous. That tends to be the sign that a mistrial is coming on a charge because they keep trying to instruct the court that they cant come to a conclusion and the court keeps instructing them well youve got to try and try to be unanimous one way or the other. Its certainly a possible outcome. Now, there are three different charges here, and the facts of chauvin having encountered or engaged with floyd arent in dispute. The question is, you know, what did he cause the end of his life . The jury could possibly negotiate amongst themselves as to well, we may not unanimously agree as to seconddegree murder, but we could get everybody on board with manslaughter, and that happens, and thats certainly something. Now, you know, you dont think there should be Horse Trading in the law, but what people do as a matter this is exactly what shan is talking about. They pick a leader, and its, you know, to some extent lord of the flies. You know, they as a group have to set some social order and come to an agreement, so, yeah. You know, sara, as i say, youve been watching this as closely as anyone. What do we know about how the jurors have been acting, how much attention they have been paying throughout what, about three weeks of this trial. Its three weeks, and i dont know that people know what that pressure feels like as a juror. As you are being watched by the media and by the attorneys, you are under a spotlight even though the public is not hall loud to view you. There are a lot of people in the court who are paying attention to the jury and for the journalists in there, and i was in there for a day myself. When you watch how they engage where they are writing notes, they are paying close attention. The there was only a day where there was a little bit of fidgeting going on, but for the most part they have really been engaging. When one of the medical experts of the prosecution brought in dr. Tobin, started talking about, you know, feel your neck. Let me show you what happens when this is compressioned. Let me show you where this is and that is, touch your necks, many of the jurors were doing so, so much so that the judge told them, look, you can do this, but youre not required to do what this witness is telling you, so it tells you something about how much they are paying attention, how important this is to them to get it right, and we actually heard them say those very words when they were in voir dire. When they were questioned by the defense and the prosecution as they were picking jurors, many understood how important this case was, some of them saying they wanted to be on this case because they knew its important so think knew it was important to get this right and to pay close attention, and i think they have have had a jury thats really paid close attention and been engaged the whole time. Wolf. You know, shan, if youre the prosecution or the defense for that matter, what do you do while the jury deliberates . It could go on for hours. It could go on for days. You sweat a lot, and if youre the defense youre trying to keep your client calm, but youre also thinking and trying to anticipate what questions to come out because when that note comes out and im predicting well have at least a few notes, youll have to explain to the judge how you think the court should respond to that note. Sometimes you want to say dont respond to an improper question and other times youll make suggestions a toss what further guidance should be given and the other side will disagree so a lot of that time is spent anticipating what questions will come up. There may be some Legal Research you want to shore up about particular issues. Thats what youre doing right now. I want everybody to stand by. Our Senior National correspondent Miguel Marquez is joining us from minneapolis right now. So what are you seeing, miguel . Youre there on the scene. What kind of preparations are you seeing . Reporter oh, its enormous preparations. It feels a little like minneapolis is in the path of a category 5 hurricane. Just not sure if its going to hit, where its going to hit, whether its a glancing blow or direct. The these are a lot of buildings, private buildings down here that are sort of board up. Youll see that all through the Downtown Area but through the wider city as well, even into the suburbs this, particular one has become a bit of a memorial to george floyd and then right across the street from here is the Government Center. This is where the trial is going on. You can see its a double fencing there. They have put that green material up so that people cant see into the yard of the Government Center and then ill come down here. You canny sao the National Guard is on alert here at the Government Center. Thousands of National Guard members across the entire state. Thousands of Law Enforcement from not only across minnesota but other states as well. The schools on Wednesday In Minneapolis will go to Virtual Learning at least for the foreseeable future after that, and then we see where it goes. A small crowd down here Native Americans and supporters of george floyd. The people that ive spoken to so far say, look, if it is not guilty on all three, that sends a very strong message about what is going on. They expect and hope that they will see a guilty verdict on all three charges and if they dont see that, it will be very difficult to see which way this goes, but the state seems very well prepared for whatever happens. Wolf . Its a tense situation right now in minneapolis. Stand by. The former missouri Highway Patrol captain ron johnson is joining us. Also joining us cnn Law Enforcement analyst the former chief of the u. S. Capitol police. Captain johnson, you dealt with unrest in ferguson after Michael Browns killing. How challenging is it, do you think right now, for minneapolis officials to prepare for the reaction to this verdict . Well, i think they have had a long enough time to prepare. There are a lot of things to think about, but i think they have had a long time and hopefully they have brought in all their stake holders to make sure that the community is safe and the officers and the National Guard that are there are safe, but theres a lot of concern here on what to do following the verdict that comes out. Chief gainor, cities around the country, not just in minneapolis, they are following suit including right here in washington, d. C. Where i am, the u. S. Army is weighing how many National Guard forces to deploy in the capitol. What do the preparations look like behind the scene and i know youve been involved over many years . Wolf, thank you. There is a lot of preparation going on across the United States. In the last hour i was on a phone call with representatives from several cities, kansas city, chicago, washington, d. C. , and in a lot of these places they have cancelled days off, gone to 12hour shifts. In washington, for instance, they have stood up some 26 cdu platoons. Thats nearly a thousand people trying to get into position to manage whatever outcome we have from this trial, and there are concerns about words because they do matter. As i watched the prosecutions statement saying, you know this, what is not an antipolice prosecution. It was a propolice prosecution, and that made perfect sense in trying to settle the jury down to give them some room to think positively about police, but if theres not a guilty, guilty, guilty, i think those kind of words could rub a lot of people the wrong way saying a, yeah, it was propolice, and here again police got a break if thats what happens. You know, Captain Johnson. Protesters obviously have a First Amendment right to protest peacefully, but if Police Overreact to peaceful protests, is there a risk of potentially inflaming the situation . I think there is, and i think we need to separate protesters from rioters. Protesters have a right to get out and speak, and i think in our country weve upheld that. You know, during ferguson i said that from the start, that the protesters that were out there, they had a right to be out there and speak for change, and so i think there is a balance. My hope is that theres been some of connection with the community and with those leaders where they have talked through those issues that could come about. Chief gainor, what should Law Enforcement be looking for right now in the coming days . What are they monitoring . I think they will be monitoring all the opensource information that they can go as they are all doing on a routine basis, but they are definitely going to be reaching out to the citizens at Captain Johnson just said. One of the Key Takeaways that weve all learned is to work with Community Leaders so that they understand what the police want to do and how they can actually help these lawful protests, these demonstrations and make them peaceful and theres been a lot of lessons learned. Just last week the Executive Police Forum hosted a meaning with nearly a thousand Law Enforcement officers from across the country to see whats been going on in the mast 14 months and talk about how to do this better, so i think Many Police Departments are working very hard to reach to the community, understand the situation and try to keep things peaceful, and if it does get bad not to lump all people in a protest as they are the enemy. Let me get your reaction, Captain Johnson thorks what we heard from congresswoman Maxine Waters. Her name came up in the final hour or so of this of this trial today. She said she said over the weekend weve got stay on the street. Weve got to get more active. Weve got to get more confrontational. We have to let them know that we made business. You heard the defense argue that that could potentially prejudice the jury. Well, i think, you know, words should matter. We have to be cautious on the words that we say, but i will say Congresswoman Waters has been a big proponent of change in our country for a long time and our words really matter and we have to make sure that we dont ignite something here to a greater extent than it may already be, and i say as leaders we need to make sure that the voice that we have, the impact that we, have we have to be cautious on this. This here i want everyone to be as cautious as i can in the words that we say. Because this is really a sensitive moment, chief gainer, right now, and you appreciate it as much as anyone. Right. I mean, the whole world is watching this, and certainly communities and communities of color are watching this very closely, as are Police Officers. Many officers feel beat down, low morale so they are trying to figure out how do they balance their feelings and the needs when they are so embarrassed about the misconduct of this particular officer and then meet and satisfy the expectations of crowds that may be upset or may be very jubilant about the outcome. Striking the balance is important, and the whole seaworld watching. The whole world is indeedching with a. The sara sidder . Still with us. Sara, i know youre getting some new reporting. What else are you learning . Look, you know, you guys were talking about one of the important components of the community when it comes to policing, and there are several groups like we push for peace who have been brought in to through and help calm things down, if things start to get real, really tense, and they have been in the streets for many, many weeks, going in and out of, you know, 38th and chicago where george floyd died, George Floyd Square, going down to Brooklyn Center and during the day they put on some music. They have barbecues and they bring food, and, you know, its a group of black men who have decided that, you know, they are from the community and they want to be out in the community, but they also want to try to calm down any kind of violent reaction to to police or looting or burning, and during the day they tend to to have that effect. You also have groups like agape, providing security down at 38th and chicago. They have been down there for a while, and they sort of turned the street energy, as they say, into community energy, and thats also a group of black men who are rising up and saying, look, we would like to see our communities thrive. We dont want to see them hurt, but ill tell you. Ive talked to several black Business Owners who are in and around. Area of 38th and chicago, and they are having a really hard time, some of them. They are frustrated. They feel like they have been left behind. Every time something happens it tends to happen in and around their area. It looks blighted. There are boards up. There are buildings that have been torn completely down. Some of them were burned in the last, you know, uprising here and so theres a bit of frustration. There is a bit of hopefulness because there are these groups around, but the police are going to be relying on some of these groups to try and help deal with what could be another mass protest, but you may see a mass protest that is peaceful depending on what happens with the how the jury decides this case. Whether we like it or not, that is a huge factor in how the reaction will be from the folks here in minneapolis and, frankly, from around the country and world. Wolf. It certainly is. I want to play this clip, elliot. Then well get reaction from both of you. This is eric nelson, the Defense Attorney, making his Closing Argument. The state has really focused on the 9 minutes and 29 seconds, 9 minutes and 29 seconds, 9 minutes and 29 seconds. Its not the proper analysis, because the 9 minutes and 29 seconds ignores the previous 16 minutes and 59 seconds. Hes referring to the resistance that george floyd had in getting in the back seat of that police vehicle. Look, wolf, if you and i get drunk and get into a bar fight, i cant then go into court and say, well, you know, i was sober all day before i went into that bar and, you know, the person that i knocked out, i shouldnt be held responsible for that because i behaved most perfectly and comported with Good Behavior earlier in the day. Thats a little bit of a misleading argument. Now, because this is about the reasonableness of police conduct, maybe theres space to say that 16 minutes gave officers cause to restrain mr. Floyd, at least initially. But what the prosecution has done throughout this trial is note that the 9plus minutes tested the bounds of reasonableness. So after ten seconds, 15 seconds, three minutes, four minutes, five minutes, three minutes after he stops breathing and doesnt have a pulse, you cant make the argument that the action is reasonable. Its quite a distraction to point to that 16 minutes in light of the fact that the crime is committed itself in the course of that 9 minutes and 29 seconds. I think nelson has to go there. He has to shift the focus away from that 9 1 2 minutes. It makes sense for him to do that, to argue that dont view chauvin in the vacuum of this horrible scene of him kneeling for 9 1 2 minutes, view him in the context of the totality of the circumstances you heard him talk about what he thinks hes walking into, maybe that affected what you, the jury, should think of as a reasonable res response. So he had to make that argument, but still that does not overcome the horror of those 9 1 2 minutes. Kate itlan collins, any reacn from the white house . Reporter they are waiting for this jury to go through these deliberations. They are preparing for either outcome, a guilty or not guilty verdict. We will hear from President Biden after a jury has come to a decision and after thats made public. They say before then they are not going to weigh in one way or another. We know that President Biden has been concerned about potential backlash from the public if they dont like this verdict and they dont find it to be sufficient. Thats also something that the white house says they are preparing for, if there is going to be unrest in the face of what this jury ends up deciding. Because of that, white house officials have been in touch with State Officials there, with other local authorities and they say they are preparing depending on how this ends up. They recognize that the white house and ive spoken with some officials who say this is a really potential tinderbox were watching unfold right now. Is that what youre hearing . Reporter yes. They want to make sure theyre navigating it carefully given how much National Attention it has gotten. This has been a conversation for about a year now given what is going on. So i think President Biden himself wants to be able to navigate this depending on what the verdict ends up being and also what the response is going to be. Because we do know that he brought up what the potential verdict could be, talking about what the response to the verdict could be during a meeting with the Congressional Black Caucus here at the white house last week. It is certainly something that has been on his mind and he has been watching in play out as have aides and really the nation. I assume they were watching this trial unfold on television, right . Reporter yes, i think they were watching it pretty closely. Its been aired constantly. Its something you cant really avoid. Everyone in the nation is watching it in that sense. President biden has often had to weigh in on this. Youve seen this overtake a lot of his early months of his st. P presidency. Other Police Shootings that have happened in the nation and not just shootings that have happened just in the last few days and weeks, but its also this greater scale of how this fits into bidens agenda. He came into office wanting to focus on the covid19 pandemic but part of being president is youve got to deal with the crises of the nation as they unfold. Thats something they recognize. They also see what the sons is going to be depending on the verdict is important. Well have more coverage right after this. Some say this is my greatest challenge ever. But ive seen centuries of this. With a companion that powers a digital world, traded with a touch. The gold standard, so to speak ; we started with computers. We didnt stop at computers. We didnt stop at storage or cloud. We kept going. Working with our customers to enable the kind of technology that can guide an astronaut back to safety. And help make a hospital come to you, instead of you going to it. So when it comes to your business, [narrator] at Southern New Hampshire university, were committed to making college more accessible by making it more affordable, thats why were keeping our tuition the same through the year 2021. I knew snhu was the place for me when i saw how affordable it was. I ran to my husband with my computer and i said, look, we can do this. [narrator] take advantage of some of the lowest online Tuition Rates in the nation. Find your degree at snhu. Edu. Youve got the looks lets make lots of money youve got the brawn ive got the brains. With allstate, drivers who switched saved over 700 click or call to switch welcome to our viewers here in the United States and around the world. Im wolf blitzer in the situation room. In minneapolis this hour, jurors have begun deliberating the fate of former Police Officer Derek Chauvin nearly a year after the death of george floyd sparked a National Reckoning about race and justice. And now the nation anxiously awaits a verdict. The minnesota governor just asked for Law Enforcement assistance from other states and major cities across the United States have increased security in anticipation of possible protests and unrest. Lets go to Cnns Omar Jimenez on the scene for us in minneapolis. Omar, jurors were sent into deliberations about an hour ago. Whats the latest . Reporter thats right, wolf. The jury is currently deliberating. This is what people have been waiting for for almost a year now, the opportunity at this process. Now, as far as we know, its expected that well get notification whenever the jury starts deliberations at the beginning and ends of each day. Could go well into the evening as well. In regard to the length of time overall, they were told by the judge to pack for a long time but hope for a short one. We understand the verdict could come even over the weekend if it comes to this. All of this is coming as each side