Right to bring you indepth
analysis on the trial of Austin
police Officer Christopher Tayl.
He's on trial this week for the murder
of Michael Ramos in April 2020.
Officer Christopher Taylor was called to
an apartment complex for reports of a man
with a gun involved in a possible drug deal.
No gun was ever found,
but officers confronted Michael
Ramos in the parking lot.
Those officers first use a
beanbag shotgun to stun Ramos,
but then he jumped in a car and
started driving as he pulls out.
That's when Officers Taylor
and only Officer Taylor fired,
killing Ramos.
All throughout this week will
be bringing in attorneys from
our community to recap each day.
And provide indepth analysis.
Tonight we have Austin defense attorney
Amber Vasquez and also Rick Hof,
whose career spans both sides
of the criminal docket,
both prosecution and defense experience.
And tonight we thought we were going to be
talking about perhaps opening statements.
That is not where we are, of co.
Generally,
jury selection is very rarely newsworthy,
but it's becoming newsworthy.
And in this case,
we are now on the third day of jury selection
with with no jury sworn in at this point.
So I just wanted to start by asg
both of you and Amber.
I'll start with you.
We talked about how important
jury selection is,
but it usually does not or often
does not at least span three da.
It's true.
Everything stems around jury selection.
It is wildly important.
But in this case, they have gone
through three different jury pa.
And So what that means is they've called in.
80 people from the community ony
and gone through the entire selection
process and then something went wrong.
They've done it again and
now this is the third group.
And so it is very unique to have gone
through this many complete jury panels
and still have not sworn in a j.
So Rick, let's just break it
down very simply for people.
So the clerk's office here in
Travis County sends out jury
summons to a number of people.
The clerk's office chooses
the number of people.
Is that correct?
That's right. And that's decisin
that's taken with input from the
judge will be presiding over the case.
So for example, in this instanc,
you would expect that the distrt
clerk was directed to bring
up larger panel than normal.
This isn't just a routine trial.
And Amber, once those people come to court,
then of course each side gets to
interview that person and decide whether
or not they would would want tot
that person or strike them, rig?
Can you just walk us through that problem?
Well, so how it works is say
we have 80 people, both sides,
the state and the defense make a
presentation and they ask fundamental
questions of can you follow the?
Like do you have a?
A bias towards or against
police officers, for instance,
would be something that could
disqualify somebody from a jury.
So have
you been keeping up with
this case is another one.
Exactly. Do you know things?
Do you know parties in it?
That would be another disqualif,
things like that.
Or somebody that just says I
can't follow the punishment ran,
I can't follow the jury instruc,
I don't agree with it.
So those would all be reasons.
And after all of those reasons,
both sides get 10 strikes for any reason.
Other than race,
but any other reason they can strike and
so it's more a process of deselection.
So it's the 1st 12 who's
left after all of that.
That's how they get the jury.
So it's a little bit complicated
Rick is a painstaking
process on any given trial,
but in this case the stakes are
really high and the attention.
On the jury itself is
going to be really high.
That's right. It's a stressful trial if
you're a juror who ends up making the box,
if you're one of the people
who makes the decision,
it's a significant sacrifice of time.
Could even potentially end
up with some scrutiny.
We saw in the Daniel Perry trial
that they were accusations of jr
misconduct and juror tampering
that resulted in many of those
jurors being brought back after
a verdict to be interviewed.
So the stakes are high,
not just for the litigants in this case,
but for all the participants,
including members of the jury. I
mean, essentially it's a job, r?
You're getting hired for a job that may
last one week, 2 weeks, 3 weeks.
And that's why it's hard to geta
real diverse panel because a lot
of people can't step away from
their work or life for a week,
two weeks, maybe even 3 weeks.
You know, a lot of folks,
especially in a town like Austi,
live paycheck to paycheck and.
That's just not a reality.
And to that end,
Tony Miss Vasquez makes a really good point.
Travis County jurors tend to be unique.
They tend to be highly educated.
They tend to have very technical backgrounds.
In some ways they tend to be dee
oriented, depending on the type of case.
I've tried cases in 30 odd
different jurisdictions.
I've tried cases in a jurisdiction where
I've asked just by looking at my client,
who here thinks she's guilty
and half the hands go up.
Right. Well, that doesn't work,
and that doesn't happen in Travis County.
But the the secret that
lawyers really don't say.
But it's true.
Lawyers don't want a fair jury.
Lawyers want to identify jurors
who have preconceived biases and
prejudices that work in their f.
And I can assure you that if yoe
the District Attorney right now,
you generally want jurors to her
this case who are pro law enforcement.
And if you're the defense,
you may have a different view.
Did he just give away a trade secret?
No. You know, I I disagree slightly in that,
you know, trying cases all over the place.
It's more kind of under people that are
able to embrace your theory of the case,
of understanding the mechanics of how it
works, that this is a case about, you know,
police violence gone rampant or, you know,
mistaken identity or whatever i.
And I think that people that
can really understand that and
I think Rick's right in that.
It's nice to have a jury like wt
in Travis County that are genery
more educated and more technical
because you may be looking for people
with a little more nuance that ,
you know, really dig into some f
the science or maybe some of the
studies that you want to presen.
So I want to go back in
time a couple of days, so.
Often times again,
everything is heightened.
In this case, this is the firste
that we've had an Austin police
officer go on trial on a murder charge
and the on duty shooting of of a person.
So jury selection does not often
draw a lot of public interest or
even a lot of media attention.
But on Monday we had members of the public.
Including, as I understand it,
Michael Ramos's mother, who went down to
the courthouse to watch jury selection.
We had journalists who went dowo
the courthouse to watch jury selection.
And there was an issue that has
not been fully untangled yet,
as I understand it,
at least with regard to the the court,
the courtroom not being open.
I want to talk about why.
It is so important and where is
it rooted in the law that the
public have access.
And Rick,
I'll start with you to jury selection.
It's a fundamental
foundation of the rule of law.
We don't have secret trials in e
United States of America and ths
a right that accrues to the acc.
Christopher Taylor has a right
to an open and public process.
There are very narrow circumstances in which,
upon the motion of a party,
a judge can limit only for articulated
reasons and really good reasons,
a person or some people from
publicly viewing a trial.
What's been related in the media
and and I wasn't physically
present and I can't speak to it,
is concerning.
It appears that what happened on
Monday when the courtroom doorse
locked was likely an inadvertent error.
So it's been described by,
by, by the defense and and
others involved in the case.
That's right, and much to the
credit of the presiding judge,
that does represent fundamental error
and there is a good case law tht
that would be sufficient groundo
reverse a conviction in the event this
trial resulted in a guilty verd.
And So what the judge did basically was
basically declare mistrial on Monday,
throw out everything that happened on Monday,
start over on Tuesday.
They got through one panel on
Tuesday of about 80 potential js
and then came back today to work
through another 50 potential ju.
And so that's cost time too,
in terms of jury selection. All
of it. And you know,
accountability is everything.
And this, I've done this almost0
years and tried all kinds of ca,
had whole ones on on TV.
And I will tell you, it matters.
It matters for our community
to be able to see the process.
This is how we hold people
in power accountable.
There is no other way that this is it,
this is the show.
So it is important.
Crucially important, every mome,
every moment is is accessible to not only,
you know, the people that the public,
the press.
There is no other way.
And I think one of the things we
seeing in Travis County is we ha
system that just shut down for two years,
left people in jail,
no jury trials.
I mean, it's not how our countrs
built and it's not what the Constitution,
it's not how it was supposed to function.
There was never a mechanism.
To shut down the jury system in
the United States of America.
So we should not be surprised
that to revive it is is a
bit harder than anticipated.
And I think all of the clunky
mechanics and inadvertent errors
are are all a part of the system
that quite frankly is just gettg
back on track in Travis County.
So for the sake of our discussi,
let's let's presume that a jury is fully
sworn in, fully in panel tomorr.
Since we are still in jury selection,
I want to just talk about what r
life may look like over the next several
weeks for people who have never,
sat on a jury, Are they sequestd
for example do they have securi?
What is their own kind of risk
of exposure going going forward?
Rick, can you can you just speak to that?
Well, it's not
going to be a lot of fun and hopefully
none of them had summer travel s
to Europe or anywhere else becae
unless they somehow get excused.
This process starts over.
Everyone that gets put on that
jury should expect to be tied up
basically the entire month of J.
I can tell you if I was either
defending Daniel Perry or part
of this prosecution team,
I would not be happy about
starting evidence potentially oa
Thursday or maybe even a Friday.
That is not how you like to try cases.
It puts the jury in a bad posit.
It puts the litigants in a bad position.
So sequestration is optional
and you have to request it.
Usually in advance because what they have
to do is they have to go into a hotel,
they have to take out phones,
they have to take out media.
I mean, it is a process and when you're
talking about doing it for 14 people,
you know, if there's alternates,
that's that's a huge thing.
So personally, in a case like t,
I would absolutely want a jury
sequester because there's just.
I mean, as we see, there's,
there's a lot of media attentio.
So who has to ask for how
does that literally happen?
Either party, either party.
But the defense would be the
ones usually that would want it.
But I believe the state could ask to. Yeah,
this is a strange trial where
whether I'm the government or
I'm representing Daniel Perry,
I can see benefit in media
attention or sorry, Chris.
Yeah. Yeah. Got Perry on the mi.
Yeah. Yeah, yeah. We closely
followed that case as well.
We'll talk about something else.
So the judge will give instructs
to the members of the jury as well as
prior instructions that were gin
to all the members of the panel,
the prospective jurors that say don't
go out and do your own research,
don't go on to Twitter,
don't go search kview.com for
all of their wonderful coverage
of the Christopher Taylor trial.
Don't do that.
Which in some ways is like telling an 8
year old boy don't kick the red ball.
You're just reminding them that
there is this wealth of informan
out there and just like we saw n
the Daniel Perry trial on these
high profile cases,
there's a serious risk that jurs
are going to go out and do thein
types of investigation and that's not
how the process is supposed to .
Just to add to that, I think in
addition to what Rick's saying,
the other huge risk for for me n
I have a high profile case thats
that those jurors are going to go home
and their loved ones are going to go.
I know this case. You better put
that guy down or whatever it is.
That's another real risk.
Even if you don't know anything
else about it,
you're still going home to your
loved ones and family and friens
who know you're in this trial. n
if you're following the rules
yourself and not consuming newsr
not discussing the case, someone else
may say something like that to .
Well, or ask about it is somethg
that they heard about on the ne.
It is. It is a landmine of things that
could go wrong on the trial that lasts
especially prolonged period of .
Let me give an example of that, Tony.
So in this case, the District Attorney
filed what's called a 404 B not.
That's a notice of other bad acts that
the government intends to introe
at some other phase of the tria.
That's a public document.
That's document in this case has
been reported on and it contains
very specific allegations.
That Christopher Taylor was not truthful.
Now, it's unlikely that any of
that information is going to coe
into evidence during the guilt,
innocence phase of the trial.
But if, you know,
juror #2 goes home and it's
talking with their spouse,
and the spouse hears the story ,
oh golly,
did you hear that Christopher Tr
wasn't honest about such and su?
That can result in a type of bis
and result in a process that's
not a fair trial for both sides.
Again, I just want to come backa
point that that we talked about earlier
and I've asked others about this as well.
And just in closing,
want to get your thoughts on it as well.
Of course we it's unclear if opg
statements may begin tomorrow afternoon,
but as this case goes forward,
I just want to hear both of your
thoughts on the significance of
this not only for our community,
both of you know both of you hae
lived in Austin and worked in Austin.
For many years,
I want to just ask as residents
but also as practitioners in
the criminal justice system,
how significant and monumental
is this case to our community
and the justice community?
I
think it's, I think it could
be a watershed moment.
You know, I've sat on the police
Accountability committee for the
City of Austin side by side with
APD officers and there has been.
One of the strongest pushes in y
city to push back against real
transparency and data collection that
would be helpful in officers. I mean,
we have some of the least transparent,
one of the least transparent contracts
with police officers in the cou.
And I think that this is
going to be a problem.
I think our community, you know,
has has repeatedly made it clear
that they want accountability.
That we as Austinites want a safe community,
but we don't want it at the expe
of people of color and civil ris
and fairness and everything els.
And so I think a lot of people
are looking at this trial took.
They want Christopher Taylor
to have a fair trial,
of course.
But they also,
I think in the past have seen hw
different rules apply to police
officers when they go through a
trial then say your average cit.
And so I think in light of
what has gone on nationally,
we are looking at this through
a different lens now.
And this could be,
how about you, Rick?
In a murder case, no one really wins and.
And no one loses, right,
because it's a tragedy all the way around.
Christopher Taylor's life
is in alterably changed.
The same with Michael Ramos's family's loss.
That being said, this case has
unique features as you said, To.
First time in Travis County his,
then officers being prosecuted for murder
for an act committed in the line of duty.
Just like the Daniel Perry trias
ultimately about the conflict between
self-defense and stand your gro,
this trial is basically a conflt
between what are the expectatios
of law enforcement officers vers
their right either to self-defee
to defend a third party,
or potentially to use deadly fo.
To stop someone fleeing arrest the The
question will end up being for s
jury whether or not they feel tt
this was a justified killing right Very
important case with a lot of cox
but but critically important is.
Thank you both for joining us
tonight to to walk through it.
We appreciate and we hope you wl
continue to tune in throughout s
trial for our daily recaps and analysis.
And if you miss any,
you can always get caught up
to speed on kv.com and on KV.
Plus, we'll be back here
tomorrow night at 7:00 PM.