now. >> good evening everyone i'm laura coast, and welcome to cnn tonight. there was involving the person right there with the name denied on top of his photo. the question is is the defendants of course who wanted to move their cases from georgia to federal court and the judge said no. no. to mark meadows. then of course he was trump's right hand man in his move to criminal case federal court is obviously not going to happen. what is happened right now he has already appealed. this is not just about him though. he is the first of five people who moved to to change their trials to federal court. plus am i asking, i know i'm not, where is danelo cavalcante? he crab walked out a wall and out of prison right under the nose of prison officials. remember this? >> our guys are literally in the woods going through bushes checking sheds, checking urch clear houses. we are on line with the cert and tactical teams. >> we know the guard who was on duty when cavalcante escaped he has been fired. this is a fugitive who has absolutely nothing to lose. he has, brutal murder of his ex girlfriend, she was stabbed to death over 30 times in tront of her two young children and we got breaking news tonight on the deadly earthquake in morocco that has killed nearly 300 people and the toll seems to be rising. begin with the biggest incident since the indictments, mark meadows was rejected tonight, is the ball going to remain in the court, tim parlatore, thanks for joining us tim. you and i have had these conversations for a long time now about what might happen in this case and beyond. the judge said no. you didn't meet the, well, probably a lower bar than people thought it would be to get to federal court. and you know that trump already said that he was thinking about this. and if anyone had a good chance, i think it was mark meadows, does that mean that trump you think might as well just assume that he will in the fulton county state court? >> well, i don't think that he's going to forgo making the attempt. you know, what i was really surprised at is: that mark meadows decided to go ahead and do this on his own so early before everybody else. you know, when you have these rico cases oftentimes the defendants will get their cases together, the attorneys will coordinate and make the motions at the same time. instead of dealing with one person you can instead hit the federal judge with all of the defendants at the same time. and you know when you do that you end up with a much stronger showing. but when you have one person that goes kind of of on their own and then gets knocked down, it certainly has a negative effect on everybody else. even though the judge says it doesn't affect the others, it does. >> quell, you know, there was a moment when neerch fulton county the judge scott mcafee was talking about this process, should they wait searntion to have all the rulings when it comes to what's going on in fulton county, was the federal court going to take this very case, what would it mean for the remaining 18 defendants, when one went up, would everyone go up? repercussions of what all the appellate cycle would look like. listen to this. >> no matter how he rules, let's say he says that some aspects of the case stay behind with us here in fulton county in the 11th circuit changes their mind and reverses that entirely and says no the entire case has to get removed the federal court where does that leave us in the middle of a jury trial? has double jeopardy attached? have you risked your entire prosecution because this case also now been moved to federal court and presenting evidence against all these other co-defendants. >> judge you think again for those very complex kind of fine-tune dames we may need the opportunity to brief those issues. >> it is not easy. >> no, it is not easy and they may have to brief it because there is a little bit of novelty of all going on here. as a state court have to wait for the federal progo forward you could be in trial and hear all this. had you considered that notion of a kind of double jeopardy attaching or what would happen if the federal courts see this differently? >> that is an interesting issue. if you push forward an the appellate court disagrees, you do run that risk. now if the case runs forward, really at its normal pace, and here we're talking about a court where jury selection in other rico cases take months just injure selection, that risk does mitigate a bit if you go through that normal lengthy process. but if you start a trial in october as they were asking for yeah, you do run that risk. and so i think that the judge correctly noted. this is the kind of thing where there's going to be a lot of litigation over this. it is better to sit and wait and see how that all plays out first instead of running forward and having something get reversed. >> then again though obviously there are elections coming up. you could run the risk of a talking point that this is an interference agenda by fani willis, two defendants have said i will take that risk, i want it to be in october. i want this speedy trial, it's theirs. by the way for everyone to realize if this appellate process goes, it will go to the 11th circuit, and the supreme court will likely be asked to weigh in. fun fact everyone: the supreme court justice who initially oversees this is a plan called clarence thomas. the plot thickens. the judge in fulton county recommended 31 indictments, 21 of those people were not charged. there is a lot of conversation about who was on those that list, senators, former, and current, lindsay graham is one of course. what does that say about her discretion? >> the special grand jury didn't have the power to indict those. based on that the district attorney can go to a criminal grand jury and present the case that they want to bring. so it is interesting to me, looking at the list of people that the grand jury had recommended for indictment, and of course that's what everybody's looking at is who was recommended that she declined. but also what i found interesting is, there's one name on the indictment that wasn't mentioned at all by the special grand jury. mike roman. and that was something that was very telling to me because you look and you see the grand jury voted 20 to 1 to indict boris epstein. and then go over to the criminal grand jury and which decides instead of indicting him to dieghtd mike roman the -- indict mike roman, the guy who reported to me. that is telling to me. >> a slider, the grand jury votes, that is a very important point when you are thinking about all these things, a prosecutor thinks about not only probable cause, but what would be their cause beyond a reasonable doubt, if you don't have unanimity among those grand jurors, tim provatore thank you for joining us this evening. >> thank you. >> i want to bring in former georgia prosecutor chris timmons. i have been thinking a lot about this case as many people have and i know you have been a prosecutor in de cobb county, and exactly where my mind has gone with all of this because when it was asked to be removed from meadows at the very least to the federal district court, when you go to federal court, you don't just have the fulton county to draw from a jury pool. you've got about ten counties to draw from. and then you have different strategies about how you want to figure your injury, what the voir dire process is going to be about, all those processes come into play but it's all about the jury. now with immediate most with the process blocked, you have also got to go through the jury process first. what strikes you as a hurdle in picking this jury? >> well i think as you know laura from having been a prosecutor, it's not whether they know about the case. it is whether their mind is so fixed and definite that they can't make a decision on the case. in other words they have already made up their mind before they have heard any evidence. and in a case like this just about everyone in the country has got an opinion about the way this case should proceed. we haven't seen any evidence at all and there are a lot of people who are talking about how great this case is or how terrible this case is. that's one piece. the second piece is we are talking about the hardships that jurors would undergo if they are selected for jury. people who are self employed, people who bill by the hours hour, doctors, lawyers, difficult time being on a jury even if it's the four months that the d. a. has said that the case would be. you probably know that from cases you have had in the past. >> other cases that have played out, you talk about oj, a very different fact pattern, the idea of the jury selection even by the way in places like fulton county there is a way to compare and contrast, there is another rico case, against the rap star young thug, still injure selection, this is not a former president, this is not when the microscope and magnifying glass is huge. the indictment in may, initially down to 28, it is whittled down to now 8, they had jury selection that began in january. it's september and they've got 2,000 plus potential jurors already in that case who have to be looked at. is this going to be any less than that in your estimates? >> i don't know. you think it would be a hard he case than the ysl case, young thug case, they are still not nearly as prominent as donald trump. so you have got an extra layer of complexity. i'm not sure why the young thug case is taking so long to get a jury. i don't know what's going on there. you would have thought they were done in two or three months like they were in other complex rico cases. i think it's something to look at. perhaps a better guide would be the atlanta rico trial, happened in 2013. >> how long did it take on? how long did that take? >> i think that was three or four months of jury selection. i remember the trial itself was around nine months to a year somewhere in that range. so i think total of this trial will probably go about a year. it will be interesting if we have two laura if we start out with chesebro and sydney powell, they go off on their own, this courtroom could be tied up for two years. which a lot of people don't think about. you know as a former prosecutor, courtrooms are active courtrooms. there are all kinds of cases going on, murders divorces, there are people sitting in jail that won't be able to get a trial because this case is taking up the room for two years. that's probably why the judge really wants to get everybody together, but he may be forced to separate it into two different trials. >> he was already very skeptical right in the prospect of being able to do it in that time. if you remember earlier in the week, he said we have to push our next motion until next thursday because we have a murder trial starting next week. another reason people want to go to federal court, it is a smaller docket and more efficient for that reason. chris timmons thank you very much. >> thank you laura, i appreciate the opportunity. >> marcus childress, i'm glad you're here tonight. it could take two, three months for jury celebration alone, people have a law and order philosophy, i don't mean like the political statement, i mean the television series, you have a crime that's committed, the person is found, there is an indictment a trial and they're walking to the trial in 45 minutes without commercial breaks. shocking to people. there is an election in about 424 days from now. you were on the january 6th investigative committee as counsel for that. looking at this right now when you heard about mark meadows who didn't go in front of your committee at all right? not being able to go to federal court are you surprised? >> i'm not surprised. we were all expecting pretrial motions of this nature, we were expecting his defense to put forth creative arguments like removal. the court made it very clear to the heart of the allegations as the customers itself to -- conspiracy itself. the creative arguments that are going to force the court to make rulings. i would expect other defendants to be putting forth the same arguments even if the court strikes it down. they are going to exhaust their options before trial. >> i'm going to focus on the fulton county grand jury report, you got to file a motion with the court to get any of the testimony in, even if you are talking about a trial. in georgia you have the identities of some of the people, you have a foreman who already went on tv for the special grand jury. including three senators who they wanted to indict and they're not a part of this indictment. one is lindsay graham i would mention. they did not have unanimous voting in terms of deciding to do so. did you encounter this same discussion point about who you wanted to question and their willingness to testify? >> so as prosecutors and even on the committee we follow the same philosophy as prosecutors. we follow the facts. these issues play out in the open. even as elected officials got involved in the election or got involved in calling the state of georgia about these votes. i think what you saw here is the fulton county d.a, getting involved in the first place, that's what i see with this grand jury report, we are talking about winners and losersers, actually the grand jury process won today. you saw how the grand jurors were able to apply the law in not just blanket uniform, i found it to be a very positive affirmation of the process. >> we'll see, now the work really begins, right, the indictment is one thing. now the work begins to actually prove what you've got. now that it's out there, people that were not indicted, means she was more reasonable, and did not pursue, i have a lot of questions. thank you for being here. everyone coming up we've got some newly released and it is very disturbing body cam video. it contradicts the initial story we were told around a deadly shooting in philadelphia. now the officer who shot eddy irazari.that's we have the video next. stay off the freeways! onlyly pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ (janet) so much space!... that open kitchen! (tanya) oooh definitely the one! (ethan) but how can you sell your house when we're stuck on a space station for months???!!! (brian) no guys, opendoor giveyou the flexibility to sell and buy on your timeline. (janet) nice! (intercom) flightdeck, see you at the house warming. ma, ma, ma— ( clears throat ) for fast sore throat relief, try vicks vapocool drops. with two times more menthol per drop, and powerful vicks vapors to vaporize sore throat pain. vicks vapocool drops. vaporize sore throat pain. thursday night football on prime. it's on. welcome to thursday night football. al michaels along with kirk herbstreit. thursday night football returns, as the minnesota vikings take on the philadelphia eagles. stream thursday night football. only on prime. unreal! to give your teeth a dentist clean feeling. start with a round brush head. add power. and you've got oral-b. round cleans better by surrounding each tooth to remove 100% more plaque. for a superior clean. oral-b. brush like a pro. >> tonight there is chilling new body cam footage, showing 20-year-old eddie irazari being shot six times. the officer mark dial is seen surrendering to authorities today. dial turned himself in hours before the philadelphia d.a. released video showing the critical moments up to and after the shots were fired. the video directly contradicts what the police have been saying about the case initially. i have to warn you these images are disturbing but the family wants this video to be seen. [ video ] shots fired, shots fired. 100 west cullen. >> >> move the car. move the car. . [ indistinct sthvment [ >> first car rotation. >> that's horrible. i want to dig deeper now with retired captain ron johnson from the missouri state highway patrol, also legal analyst and criminal defense attorney. joe johnson. the number of times we have sat here and dissecting criminal behavior and the question we always ask is why, why this happened and the fact that it did. but also now, the initial statements about what happened, totally contradict what we actually have just now seen in this video. i want to begin with you joey because this body cam footage refutes what the philadelphia police department initially said about that. he is actually inside the vehicle, they said apparently he was not. not outside as originally told by reporters. that's a huge red flag. >> yeah, laura good evening, and ron as well. the bottom line is that it goes to the issue of consciousness of guilt. what do i mean in plain english? to the extent that you believe if you were an officer that your action he were justified, you were in immediate fear of death or serious physical injury. your are actions were in threat to those that was proposed, you would simply give that narrative with with respect to exactly what happened. the extent that you changed the narrative is problematic and you're aware that it is problematic, so yes when you look at this there are many questions to ask and i'll end on the question that you asked laura is why and why did it have to be that way and it will be up to a jury to make the determination as to whether it should have. and if they conclude that it was an intentional killing without justification that's murder. if they conclude that the action he were unreasonable of the officer under the circumstances that is voluntary manslaughter and on and on. so it is simply very troubling and disturbing to see. >> he has been charged with first degree murder captain johnson. saying quote the facts will unmistakably show that officer dial was legally justified in discharging his weapon while fearing for his life. you obviously see this statement, we see the body cam footage. what's your take? >> welt, initially -- well initially my take was when i heard the story changed, immediately after a shooting like this, administrators look at the video so how the stories change. but when i look at that video the young man is in his car. there's only five seconds. there's just not enough time to react to anything within the amount of five seconds. so reports say that he had some knives and i think he sat in his car, never got out of his car. i really didn't see the threat. of course i wasn't there. there has been reports someone reported gun. the officer acts on what he or she sees, observes and not what someone else tells them they see. >> when you look at this joey what needs to be proven obviously and how a jury can examine these aspects of it, the jury has been increasingly more sophisticated with officer involved shootings, we are not completely changed as a 180 as a society but in recent times we have seen cases where officers have not only been charged but they have been convicted as well based on their behavior which we hadn't seen for a very long time. when you look at this and think about how jurors might view this and that decision to charge him quickly, are you seeing an evolution of some kind here? >> so i really laura. i think there is evidence that is crystal clear. are we not going to believe our lying eyes, will be the prosecutors's argumentative. they are brought to the scene by virtue of the video that you see. why was it that it just took you five seconds? if you were in fear perhaps you could have tactically took cover and time is on your side to see and assess whether it was appropriate to shoot. what was the immediacy of the danger? were you absorbing the immediacy, was it a threat? was it appropriate to fire one, twice, three, four, five, six times. is that disproportional? there is a whole new world of, evaluate the reasonableness or lack thereof of the conduct laura. >> kevin johnson one thing we saw was another officer on the scene. normally you judge the conduct of an officer through another of