POLICE ESCALATED THE SITUATION.
A KILLING CAUGHT ON A DISTURBING
VIDEO.
>> YOURE GOING TO KILL ME.
>> HEY, TONY, WHATd YOU TAKE?
>> YEAH, HE TOOK SOMETHING.
>> I WAS MAKING SURE HE WAS
STILL BREATHING.
>> I THINK HES ASLEEP.
>> TONY, TONY BACK TO SCHOOL,
WAKE UP.
>> I DONT WANT TO GO TO SCHOOL.
>> WE BOUGHT YOU NEW SHOES FOR
SCHOOL.
COME ON.
>> MADE BREAKFAST.
>> HE DIDNT JUST DIE ON YOU,
DID HE?
I HOPE I DIDNT KILL HIM.
>> AT LOVE LAUGHING BEFORE THEY
KILLED HIM.
DOOR NUMBER ONE WAS CLOSED WHEN
PROSECUTORS DISMISSED MINOR
CHARGES AGAINST THE OFFICERS.
DOOR NUMBER TWO IN THAT CASE
SLAMMED SHUT.
IT WAS THE SAME FOR DAVID WHO
WAS WALKING AWAY FROM TEXAS
POLICE WHEN THEY SHOT HIM AND
THE INCIDENT CAUGHT ON CASH CAM
VIDEO.
THE CASE NEVER GOT TO TRIAL
EITHER BECAUSE THE JUDGE GRANTED
POLICE IMMUNITY.
HE SAYS ITS UNFAIR THAT THE
SYSTEM DIDNT EVEN LET HIM MAKE
HIS CASE TO A JURY CONSIDERING
HE IS INNOCENT AND THE POLICE
PUT HIM IN, QUOTE, A NURSING
HOME RUINING EVERYTHING,
SADDLING HIM WITH PAIN AND COSTS
HE CANT AFFORD WHEN THEY WONT
EVEN ADMIT THE MISTAKE.
>> WHAT KEEPS ME MOVING FORWARD
IS THE FACT IM STILL ALIVE.
THEY PAINT A DIRTY PICTURE.
AND THATS NOT THE TRUTH.
FOR ME I CAN MOVE FORWARD.
I CAN ACCEPT IT.
>> THESE INCIDENTS OF POLICE
CAUSING LIFELONG INJURIES DO
MAKE A VERY STRONG CASE FOR
LEGAL COMPENSATION.
THE COURTS APPLY THAT IMMUNITY
SHIELD JUST THE SAME.
TEXAS POLICE PARALYZED A MAN
THEY SHOT.
JUDGES BLOCKING HIS DAY IN COURT
THE SAME WAY.
NOW, HE APPEALED ALL THE WAY TO
THE SUPREME COURT, WHICH REFUSED
TO EVEN ORDER A BASIC TRIAL TO
FIND THE FACTS.
INSTEAD, WRITING AN OPINION THAT
DEFENDED THIS BROAD AUTOMATIC
POLICE IMMUNITY THAT IM TELLING
YOU ABOUT YOU.
JUSTICE SOTO PLAYER AND RBG DID
QUESTION HOW IT HAS BECOME AN
ABSOLUTE SHIELD FOR OFFICERS
THAT ELIMINATES ACCOUNTABILITY.
SOTO NOTED THAT THE GOVERNMENT
TAKES THE WORD OF ONE PARTY OVER
ANOTHER.
SHE CALLS IT A,QUOTE,
DISTURBING TREND WHERE COURTS
SIDE WITH OFFICERS BEFORE
GETTING THE FACTS.
SHE NOTES IT FOSTERS A CLIMATE
OF NO CONSEQUENCES WITH OFFICERS
SHOOT FIRST AND THINK LATER.
THAT DOES CAPTURE THE APPROACH
OF SOME OFFICERS WHO ATTEND
TRAININGS THAT OFTEN ENCOURAGE A
WARRIOR MENTALITY WITH NO LEGAL
CONSEQUENCES.
LET ME SHOW YOU A WORKING POLICE
TRAINER WHO TELLS TRAINEES,
QUOTE, KILLING IS NOT A BIG
DEAL.
AND IM SHOWING THIS TO YOU
RIGHT NOW BECAUSE IT IS ACTUALLY
TRUE THAT WITH THIS POLICE
IMMUNITY MANY JUDGES DO TREAT IT
LIKE ITS NOT A BIG DEAL.
>> KILLING IS JUST NOT THAT BIG
A DEAL.
FOR A MATURE WARRIOR WHO IS
KILLING SOMEBODY REPRESENTS A
CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER TO
OTHERS, ITS JUST NOT THAT BIG A
DEAL.
ARE YOU EMOTIONALLY, SPIRIT
ACTUALLY, PSYCHOLOGICALLY
PREPARED TO SNUFF OUT A HUMAN
LIFE IN DEFENSE OF INNOCENT
LIVES?
IF YOU CANT MAKE THAT DECISION,
YOU NEED TO FIND ANOTHER JOB.
>> THE OFFICER WHO SHOT KAS TEAL
TO DEATH ATTENDED TRAININGS BY
THAT INSTRUCTOR.
THAT OFFICER WAS ACQUITTED AT
ONE OF THOSE RARE CRIMINAL
TRIALS I MENTIONED.
SO THATS HOW THIS WORKS.
WHERE DID IT COME FROM?
THIS IS ALSO IMPORTANT.
POLICE IMMUNITY IS MADE UP.
LET ME REPEAT THAT TONIGHT.
POLICE IMMUNITY IN AMERICAN
CIVIL COURTROOMS IS MADE UP.
THIS IS NOT IN THE CONSTITUTION.
ITS NOT IN A WRITTEN FEDERAL
LAW.
IT GREW OUT OF A SERIES OF CASES
WHERE COURTS WERE TRYING TO
LIMIT DOOR NUMBER TWO TO SUE
GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS.
IT BEGAN WITH THE 1960s LAWSUIT
BY CIVIL RIGHTS ADVOCATES AND
PRIESTS CHALLENGING SEGREGATION.
THEY WERE ARRESTED FOR BREACHING
THE PEACE.
CHARGES WERE THROWN OUT, SO THEY
SUED THE POLICE.
IT WENT ALL THE WAY TO THE
SUPREME COURT WHAT FOUND THAT
EVEN THOUGH THE ARREST WAS
WRONG, THAT ALL THOSE PRIESTS
SHOULDNT HAVE BEEN CHARGED, THE
SUIT WOULD STILL BE TOSSED
WITHOUT A TRIAL.
LATER CASES INVOLVING NIXON AIDS
AND POLICE FORTIFIED THIS
IMMUNITY TO SHIELD OFFICIALS
FROM LIABILITY IN MOST CASES.
SO UNELECTED JUDGES MADE UP THIS
RULE.
AND THE SUPREME COURT HAS BEEN
DOUBLING DOWN ON IT IN THE
MAJORITY OF OPINIONS, SHIELDING
POLICE FROM THAT DAY IN COURT I
TOLD YOU ABOUT THAT SO MANY
AMERICANS IMAGINE FROM THIS SIDE
OF THE SYSTEM THAT YOU FACE
JUDGMENT OR VINDICATION BY A
JURY OF YOUR PEERS.
SO WHEN YOU TAKE SOME OF THE
REAL PEOPLE HURT OR KILLED IN
EACH STORY THAT I REPORTED
TONIGHT, CONSIDER HOW THIS
WORKS.
IM NOT HERE TELLING YOU THAT WE
KNOW THEY WERE ALL CORRECT OR
THE POLICE WHO HURT THEM WERE
ALL WRONG OR THAT WE HAVE THE
WHOLE STORY.
THATS WHAT FACT FINDING IN A
TRIAL IS FOR.
WHAT IM TELLING YOU, WHAT IM
URGING YOU THROUGH THE TV SCREEN
TO UNDERSTAND IS THAT THIS
POLICE IMMUNITY RULE MEANS WE
NEVER GET THOSE FACTS ABOUT WHAT
HAPPENED.
WE NEVER GET THE PUBLIC TRIAL
ABOUT WHAT THEY DID, PARALYZE OR
DEAD, BECAUSE UNELECTED JUDGES
PREVENT THOSE TRIALS BECAUSE
THEY TOSS THESE CASES BEFORE THE
FACT FINDING THAT HAPPENS IN
VIRTUALLY EVERY OTHER NON-POLICE
TYPE OF CASE.
THATS UNFAIR TO THE PEOPLE HURT
OR KILLED.
IT ALSO RISKS MORE VIOLENCE AND
MORE POLICE MISCONDUCT IN THIS
PROBLEM THAT WE HAVE AS A NATION
THAT WERE TRYING TO DEAL WITH
BECAUSE AS ANY OFFICER WILL TELL
YOU REAL CONSEQUENCES CREATE
DETERRENCE.
AND WHEN THERE ARE NO
CONSEQUENCES, SOME PEOPLE, NOT
ALL, NOT ALL OFFICERS, BUT SOME
PEOPLE IN AN ENVIRONMENT WHERE
ZERO CONSEQUENCES, WELL, SOME
PEOPLE WILL DO THE RIGHT THING.
OTHERS, NOT ALL, BUT OTHERS THEY
WILL SEE IT AS A BLANK CHECK.
NOW SINCE THIS RULE WAS MADE UP,
IT CAN BE UNMADE.
CONGRESS CAN LITERALLY JUST
ELIMINATE IT AS CIVIL RIGHTS
LEADERS HAVE ADVOCATED.
>> THE HOUSE PASSED THE GEORGE
FLOYD JUSTICE IN POLICING ACT,
WHICH WOULD END QUALIFIED
IMMUNITY.
>> BLACK LIVES MATTER, THAT MUST
BE REFLECTED IN OUR POLICIES,
WHICH IS WHY WE NEED TO END
QUALIFIED IMMUNITY.
>> END QUALIFIED IMMUNITY.
IT IS A BROKEN LEGAL DOCTRINE
THAT NEVER SHOULD HAVE BEEN
CREATED IN 1967 AND ITS TIME TO
ABOLISH IT NOW.
>> ALL THOSE REFERENCES ARE TO
THIS IMMUNITY THAT IM TELLING
YOU ABOUT.
TECHNICALLY CALLED A QUALIFIED
IMMUNITY.
NOW, THERE ARE BILLS IN CONGRESS
AND ALL KINDS OF ISSUES THAT
THEY CLAIM TO DO SOMETHING IN
THE TITLE AND THEY DILUTE IT IN
THE FINE PRINT.
HOUSE OFFICIALS DID APOLBOLISH T
IMMUNITY.
IT IS ONE OF THE MOST SWEEPING
PROPOSED REFORMS TO POLICING IN
A GENERATION.
IT WILL BECOME FEDERAL LAW IF
THE SENATE PASSES IT.
THE REPUBLICANS, THEY WANT TO
STRIP THAT IMMUNITY REFORM OUT
OF THIS BILL.
>> WE CANNOT BE SO EAGER TO MAKE
MAJOR POLICING REFORMS ON THE
FEDERAL LEVEL THAT WE
OVERCORRECT AND PREVENT GOOD
OFFICERS ON THE STREET FROM
BEING ABLE TO DO THEIR JOB.
>> QUALIFIED IMMUNITY IS
EXTREMELY IMPORTANT.
IMAGINE YOU WERE THINKING ABOUT
BECOMING A POLICE OFFICER AND
YOU THINK YOURE GOING TO BE
PERSONALLY LIABLE FOR EVERY
FIGHT YOU TRY TO BREAK UP.
>> QUALIFIED IMMUNITY IS OFF THE
TABLE.
THEY SEE THAT AS A POISON PILL
ON OUR SIDE.
>> REPUBLICANS SAY ITS OFF THE
TABLE, WHICH IS ANOTHER SIGN
THAT IT IS A MAJOR CHANGE.
REPUBLICANS MORE FOCUSSED ON
STOPPING IMMUNITY REFORM THAN
ANY OTHER PART OF THE BILL.
ONE SO-CALLED COMPROMISE WOULD
STILL BASICALLY PROTECT
OFFICERS INDIVIDUAL IMMUNITY.
BUT WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF THIS
IMMUNITY ENDED AND DOOR NUMBER
TWO WAS CRACKED OPEN?
WE ACTUALLY HAVE PART OF THE
ANSWER FOR YOU.
TAKE THE RECENT CONTROVERSIAL
COLORADO POLICE INCIDENT WHERE
AN UNARMED WOMAN AND CHILDREN
WERE HANDCUFFED, HELD AT ONE
POINT, PUT ON THE FLOOR IN A BROAD DAYLIGHT PARKING LOT.
BROAD DAYLIGHT PARKING LOT.
>> I WANT MY MOTHER.
>> CAN I HAVE MY SISTER NEXT TO
ME?
>> POLICE ADMITTED THAT WAS
WRONG.
IT WAS A MISTAKEN IDENTITY.
IT WAS MISTREATMENT.
THEY APOLOGIZED.
DOOR NUMBER ONE STILL CRITICALLY
SHUT.
NO CHARGES.
BUT DOOR NUMBER TWO IS NOW OPEN
THIS TIME BECAUSE COLORADO IS
ONE OF JUST FOUR STATES THAT
HAVE NOW REFORMED POLICE
IMMUNITY AT THE STATE LEVEL.
SO THE MOTHER WHO YOU SAW THERE
SUED POLICE IN CIVIL COURT
ALLEGING MISTREATMENT AND
DISCRIMINATION.
IM NOT HERE TO TELL YOU HOW
THAT CASE SHOULD END.
THEY HAVE TO GATHER THE FACTS
AND THE TESTIMONY AND THE
CONTEXT.
IM HERE TO TELL YOU TONIGHT THE
ONLY REASON SHE GETS HER DAY IN
COURT IS BECAUSE SHE LIVES IN
ONE OF THE FEW CASES IN OUR
COUNTRY THATS FINALLY SLIGHTLY
CHALLENGING THIS LONG-STANDING
AUTOMATIC POLICE IMMUNITY WHERE
THERE IS NO TRIALS.
SO THERE THEY COULD GET A TRIAL.
IT IS ACTUALLY THE FIRST SUIT
FILED AGAINST POLICE SINCE
COLORADO MADE THIS REFORM.
WE REPORTED ON THAT WITH THE
LAWYER WHEN THE NEWS FIRST
BROKE.
SO THAT IS TANGIBLY IS
DIFFERENCE.
IT DOESNT HOBBLE OR KNEECAP
POLICE FROM DOING THEIR WHOLE
JOBS.
IT JUST MEANS IN THAT POLICE,
THE POLICE THAT ARE ALREADY
CLEARED AND WITH NO RISK OF
PRISON TIME WILL FACE
CONSEQUENCES FOR WHAT THEY DID
THAT DAY.
AMERICAN POLICING IS OFTEN
SIMPLIFIED INTO A PRETTY FALSE
CHOICE BETWEEN WHATS GOOD FOR
POLICE OR WHATS GOOD FOR PEOPLE
BEING POLICED.
AND YOU CAN COME UP WITH SOME
EXAMPLES THAT MIGHT FIT INTO
THAT FRAME.
BUT MANY DONT.
FAIR, ACCOUNTABLE POLICING IS
GENERALLY GOOD FOR EVERYONE.
AND IF NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW,
THATS GOT TO ESPECIALLY INCLUDE
THE POWERFUL, THE POLITICIANS
WHO WRITE THESE LAWS AND THE
POLICE WHO ENFORCE THEM WITH
GUNS.
SO I WANT TO TELL YOU THIS
BECAUSE THE JARGON AND THE TERMS
CAN INCLUDE WHAT WERE ACTUALLY
LIVING THROUGH AND WHY SOME OF
THESE THINGS ARE THINGS WE CAN
IMPROVE AND FIX AND ADDRESS IF
WE WANT TO.
THE BASIC RIGHT TO YOUR DAY IN
COURT IN TRIAL IS NOT SOME
BENEFIT TO BE GIVEN OUT BY
UNELECTED JUDGES TO AMERICANS OR
TO AMERICANS HURT BY POLICE.
OR AS YOU SAW HERE, THE DIVERSE
RANGE OF PEOPLE HURT BY POLICE.
STATISTICALLY, IT IS NOT
SOMETHING TO BE GIVEN OUT TO
BLACK AMERICANS
DISPROPORTIONATELY HURT BY
POLICE.
IT IS YOUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT.
IT IS A RIGHT EVERYONE SHOULD
HAVE.
IT IS A RIGHT THAT, AS YOU SAW
TONIGHT, WAS TAKEN AWAY BY
UNELECTED JUDGES AND WHICH CAN