implanted in his brain. as it turns out there is a lot of thing that can be done. >> get the latest on all the stories from aljazeera.com. plenty of news it's all there for you. i'm ali velshi, on target, killed by police in america. who is keeping track. broken promises in baltimore, how a 100 million neighbourhood fix turned into a failure. more than 900,000 law enforcement rick their lives to protect those in cities, towns and state.

every year scores pay the ultimate price, last year 117 police and other officers died in the line of duty, that is according to the national law enforce. officer's memorial fund. it's a nonprofit group whose records go back to 1791. the fbi keeps an eye on officers killed by felony or accidentment there's no shortage much information of police officers who die on the job. here is what some consider a different crime. it's impossible to get complete data on the total number of people who die in encounters with police. this is one of many troubling facts to emerge in the aftermath of the deaths of michael brown in ferguson, missouri, ashraf ghani in new york. there's no database. the department of justice compiles data but admits that it misses half of all the homicides caused by police. that is because police

departments are not required to report to the federal government when someone dies in their custody or is shot by police. a recent wall street journal analysis found that in 105 of the largest police departments in the country, about 45% of the killings by officers went unreported to the fbi between 2006 and 2012. and one reason is records from three large states - florida, new york and illinois are not in the federal bureau of investigation's database. it's a growing source of frustration as the nation debates lethal force and the role that race plays in police shootings. informed debates rely on solid data telling the whole story, and not just a shot in the dark. to get the full story, people that care about the issue are hands. >> reporter: every weekend journalism students meet here in

brian's dining room to crunch data drawn from police reports around the country. bern hart is the founder of fatalencounters.org and uses old-school journalism to figure out how many are killed by police. there's no government agency tracking the number of people dying in police custody. >> okay. so these are the records that came from our public records request in texas. >> the federal government tracks anything that matters, the numbers of shoes sold, you know, rain fall in death valley. the fact that they weren't collecting this information suggests that it didn't matter. >> reporter: zooek edwards of the american civil liberties union believes the lack of information is unsettling. >> we need to have this data to know what the police are doing, what are they doing this year,

last year, the year before. are they shooting more people, are they disproportionatery going. >> reporter: it was not supposed to be like this. congress passed a death in custody act in 2010. the law expired in 2006, and had no teeth, and 16 states and the distrulent of columbia popted not to participate. >> our knowledge on use of force is patchy. and dependents on dets collecting and sharing the data. reliable. >> reporter: the department of justice is only able to identify half of arrest-related homicides. the d.o.j. believes it could be as high as 928. brian burke hart's fatal encounter organization has

positively identified 1,192 lives lost at the hands of police in 2014. estimates. >> in a perfect world police departments would report this and be transparent about it. i don't have faith that that will happen. >> this person is a 25-year-old graduate creating a website called mapping police violence. he analysed the data and other websites like killed by police. drawing from his background in statistical analysis he broke down data by race, gender, age, location. conclusions. >> we found protesters are correct. black folks are more like lac to be killed, even if unarmed, compared to white forks. more black people unarmed from killed by police, despite the fact that white people are

greater in terms of population in the country. >> his analysis uncovers other disturbing friends, and he found that your odds of being killed by police depends on where you live. if you are black and live in st. louis. you are five times forlikely to be killed by police than if you live in new york city. a black person is 10 times more likely to be killed in oklahoma than virgin. despite nearly twice as many african-americans, an african-american is less likely to be killed by police. a new death in custody reporting act was passed by congress and signed into law in 2014. experts say it's not enough. >> the reason it's insufficient, it's voluntary. we are relying on the goodwill of police departments to be transparent and accountable. which history showed doesn't come naturally. >> failure to report the death of a prisoner in police custody. >> really. >> reporter: for now brian plans

to keep his dining room table stacked with bombs of police reports. >> most people think human life matters more than anything you can be concerned with. for our government not to track who it is killing, why it's incomprehensible. next, failed promises in the baltimore neighbourhood home to freddie gray. a look at why millions investment couldn't turn around the poverty stricken city. >> monday. >> we're going to the bottom of the sea. >> deep submergence vehicles. >> three zero three six. >> ocean experts have made some miraculous discoveries. >> octopus everywhere. >> but are the most important discoveries yet to come. >> implications for energy and also for climate change. >> techknow's team of experts show you how the miracles of science... >> this is my selfie, what can you tell me about my future? >> can affect and surprise us. >> don't try this at home. >> "techknow", where technology meets humanity. monday, 6:30 eastern. only on al jazeera america.

>> trafficked labor on the front lines? >> they're things, they're commodities... >> we go undercover... >> it isn't easy to talk at this base >> what's happing on u.s. bases? >> the tax payer directly pays the human trafficker >> fault lines al jazeera america's hard hitting... >> today they will be arrested... >> ground breaking... they're firing canisters of gas at us... emmy award winning investigative series... fault lines america's war workers only on al jazeera america the death of freddie gray in baltimore became a symbol of what protestors say is a pattern of police brutality, thursday, all six officers were indicted. regardless of what happens in the

case, the area in which violence erupted still has problems. at one point san town, city and developers attempted a turn around, pumping billions into the area. del walters went to sandtown to find out what happened to the promise and the money. >> reporter: what happened in riots? >> five or six killed and a good 16 shot at. >> reporter: this is what is looks like when a family is caught in the crossfire of a political system. bullets flew when the broadcasters left, and bodies piled up outside front doors. >> it's in this neighbourhood. like last night. you could hear the shots. it was "there they go again." it's ridiculous. >> reporter: tiffany and tayvon are trying to raise their twin sons. she had no job, neither does he.

it is not for lack of trying. >> i can pop my trunk and show you uniforms that i had from autogas and electric jobs, i have resumes in my car, in my pocket on a disc. who wants to sit around and be broke with no money and can't take care of children. >> i don't know why i can't find a job. qualifications. >> reporter: like many, they want to know what happened to all the political promises and money. in 1990 politicians and developer james rouse announced a plan to spend 130 million to fix sandtown - schools, infrastructure, the people. >> we look at the dollars. wasn't enough. enough. >> reporter: diane remembers all that money as part of a project to

transform sandtown, saying it reality. >> we'll look at everything we did to destabilize a >> reporter: here is why it didn't work. according to the breakdown of the sandtown reece winchester project there was a plan to build thousands of new homes. 900 were added. a success? no. this is what that success story looks like. we have houses next to houses boarded up. there was also money set aside for job training, but too few jobs once the training was over. in one programme, jobs plus, of 244 eligible households. 180 received job place. training. of that many only 50 were placed in full-time jobs. >> reporter: right now there's a politician screaming saying "why

can't the people get the jobs?" >> if it's a politician screaming ot me it's probably a white politician, if it's a black politician, it's someone not in touch with the world. i don't have bootstraps. >> reporter: also including money to fix schools forced to close because more moved out than moving in. even today no one seals to know where all of that money went. how do you spend $100 million and wind up with what you have? >> it's not enough money. business development. >> reporter: how can it not be enough? >> all you do is the maths. when you drill it down to how much it costs in terms of to get someone moving into training or remove barriers, when you talk about moving a house, when you have an infrastructure old and falling down, and businesses starting to invest in them, when you take every one and add it up, $100 million is not enough.

>> in the middle of it all, crack. it destroyed any chance of anything succeeding in sandtown. the mayor and others demanded that the bad guys be locked up. morgues filled. sandtown became a war zone. >> for you this is personal. >> it is very personal. >> one of them is the grand son of diane. >> he was incarcerated, drugs - not using, but selling them. he was found shot in the head. >> reporter: you still miss him? >> i do, i do. >> reporter: that is why the death of freddie gray was so personal to so many. many fom lis here had -- families here had a freddie gray, and a dream. the explosion that followed was not about fixing sandtown, it was the straw that broke the camel's back.

>> i saw a lot of things as a child early. i knew what cocaine was, weed was, dope was. i seen needles, alcohol, all that stuff. i knew that. i knew what junkies was, it felt normal to me. >> so in sandtown there's no winners, losers, just survivors. tiffany makes ends meet one stitch at a time, quilts for friends, selling them online. tayvon is working towards a commercial driver's licence. they pray their two sons see a better life. like many, they know there are no guarantees. it's been like that for decades. >> next - high 401k fees can cost you thousands in retirement. now the supreme court is ordering employers to protect your savings. i'll tell you what they have to do in 2 minutes.

chalk one up for the workers. the supreme court ruled unanimously that employers must do more to protect the nest eggs of employees. that includes roughly 52 million americans investing in 401k retirement savings plans, and if you are one of them you may be paying more than you should. that could change now that the high court has weighed in. mary snow has more. >> reporter: at the heart of the case, high fees eating into retirement savings. employees at edison international argued the energy company invested in funds with excessive fees. the high court ruled that the employers have a duty to monitor the fees, and economist monique morrissey says it sheds light on

a large problem. >> the employer chooses investment options and sets up the fan, but the fees are paid by employees, that creates tension or conflict of interest. >> reporter: the fees can make a dent. let's say you have a $100,000 investment, with a 0.25 investment fee it grows to $2010,000 over 20 years. but with a 1% annual fee, that investment would be 30,000 less over the same time span. >> all services have costs. even those related to investments through your retirement plan. >> the department of labour made a push to educate consumers following a 2012 rule requiring financial institutions to disclose fees and expenses in requirement plans. nine in 10 americans underestimate the 401k fees, according to a survey. if they did know about the fees, employees don't have the pour to

change their -- power to change their companies. and the supreme court's ruling, some say can force employers to pay more attention. >> they are not getting a nudge, they are happy to leave things alone. up till now the fiduciary sponsor is loosely termed. >> it can open the door to more lawsuits, potentially encouraging smaller companies to stop offering 401 qs. >> mary snow joins us now. we are not done with people shoeing about 401ks. >> no, and this case only made it to the supreme court because there was a statute of limitations questions kicked around. now that the ruling came about, it has wider complications, there are major companies, but lawyers say that this will open the door to lawsuits and is likely that companies may be

likely to settle. >> offering a 401k retirement is not an obligation, is there a danger that a lot of companies interested. >> for smaller companies that could be the risk. some argue that the smaller companies may pay higher costs. if they face the risk of getting sued for that, there's the potential that they may say we are not offering that any more. >> thank you. it's a story that didn't get as much coverage as it should have. you can't talk about mutual fund fees or the concept of active versus passive management of the funds. active managers select specific stocks, monitor them in an attempt to beat the market. passive managers basically make sure that the stocks match whatever the index is, it's more automated. having an active manager comes at a price. according to 'morning star' the average expense for actively

managed stock funds is 1.2%, meek you give that up before you make anything. compared to passively managed funds, charging 0.7. some index funds like vanguard, snp can be as low as 0.2. why invest in actively managed funds at all. someone that runs actively managed funds. michael is the president and chief executive officer joining us from san francisco. good to see you. you and i have been talking for 15 years about actively managed funds. actively traded funds, beat the mash, was only a third of the time. this is one of those years that the funds are doing better. given the odds, why would it make sense for someone to pay you to manage a mutual fund. >> good to see you.

inherent in the question is a third of active managers are beating the index, and that makes it worthwhile. i think when you have the debate, and we hear it all the time. it's not a bipry discussion -- bipry discussion where one or the other is the right answer. it depends on a lot of factors. the needs of the investor in terms of liquidity. the comfort in taking risks, the market dynamics that we are in. this year is a better year an thast years, some years -- than past years. there's a number of factors. it's not an evener question. it's a deeper question than that. you put your finger on the pulse. you expect if you pay a higher fee than an average index fund fee to get a manager to outperform the index. it's a legitimate cost benefit make.

>> what is the thing that makes a good active manager god. what am i paying for, if i pay 1%, 1.5% for an actively managed fund by someone like you that is actively managing. what am i paying for. >> in its simplest form, you mentioned vanguard and a number of other funds. you are getting market performance for better or worse. if you pay an active manager, we have a fund. we are running it since 1990, and it has peat ep the s&p. our expenses are higher, we have achieved a return greater than the index after expenses. in that instance maybe it was a better reward to higher the managers to do that. you are expecting that you are going to pay a higher fee, that that manager, after fees, will are trying to beat.

in simple form. >> it doesn't matter if you out perform the index by a big margin that the fact that i'm paying you the fee because i'm making more money. what are the types of things where the active manager makes a difference over an index. >> well, the biggestar would be the -- biggest area is the types of area that a manager has experience in. you may be willing to say for broad stock market exposure, s&p works. but if i want something in a merging market or something in commodities or real estate. maybe you want to pay that extra fee for someone that is an expert in the area. that would be an example. if it's a training strategy, you may be willing to pay a fee for

someone in a certain type of trading. from our perspective, we have someone paying us for outperforming the index. that's what we seek to provide investors. >> i don't know to what degree the funds you manage are available in 401ks, but do you have a -- an understanding on how had ruling will affect funds like yours. >> it's interesting. i'm a small business and we run a 401k. as a trustee of that plan, it puts a greater onus on us to make sure we have a good mix of funds at reasonable cost. that's an area. to the extent that there's higher focus, that matter. from our perspective it's pretty cost effective.

we are not worried about the funds being too expensive. i think the ruling in general will place a lot of scrutiny on planned trustees, and you also have to keep in mind that these are self-directed plans, and the onus is on the investor to focus. it's self-retirement plan, you can't expect them to have the best interests of thousands of employees at their fingertips. >> you and i are on the same side as this. someone should be looking. the investor has to take responsibility. you are a small business, you offer a 401k plan. pretend you were the administrator saying "i can invest in this one", where the management fee is 1.2%, versus this which is two-thirds of 1%. why pick yours?

>> that would be typically when you discuss performance, whether it's an index fund, you are doing it after expenses. it's pretty easy to ascertain the ultimate performance. if you are going to pay a higher fee, you are expecting to get out-performance in the fund, and cost is not the only driver in an investment decision. it's distant yes, so are taxes. you are looking for the ultimate performance. if you find a fund that had a history of outperforming, whatever objective it's trying to achieve. after cost. the cost is less important. you are getting that performance. if you are not. the cost is more. you pay someone that is underperforming. there's no value, and you have to ask yourself maybe you would be better off in a straight-up index. i think it's a situation you

have to assess on a fund by fund level at all times. >> you make a good point that we haven't talked about taxes, because i'm talking about the ruling as it applies to 401ks, where you are not worried about turn over. we'll talk about taxes another times. thank you for joining me. good to see you. michael, president and c.e.o. of pacific heights asset management. that is the show. >> being a musician, there's no demand... >> world renowned artist lang lang >> the moment you're on stage, it's timeless >> american schools falling flat... >> there are no music class in public schools... >> and his plan to bring music back... >> music makes people happier... >> every tuesday night. >> i lived that character. >> go one on one with america's movers and shakers. >> we will be able to see change. >> gripping. inspiring. entertaining. talk to al jazeera.

only on al jazeera america. as i.s.i.l. consolidates its gains tens of thousands flee. iraq's deputy prime minister calls on the international community to act. hello, you're watching al jazeera. also on the program a shootout between police and gang members in mexico leaves 40 people dead. no end in site for the problems in