caroline: from bloomberg world headquarters in new york and right here in london, i'm caroline hyde. in a few minutes, we will learn the fate of derek chauvin, the former minneapolis police officer who knelt on george floyd's neck for more than nine minutes after the jury have

apparently reached a verdict after less than 11 hours of deliberation. floyd was a 46-year-old black man accused of passing counterfeit $20 bill. it started a global discussion about racism across countries, across companies. the country, of course, now braces for the jury's decision. romaine: let's bring in our bloomberg executive legal editor who has been covering the trial for us. there's a lot that we have seen with our very own eyes, but we always know the law does not necessarily work on that same plane here. give us a sense of what the jury has to consider in making a decision today. >> it is interesting you use that phrase all he. that is a must exactly what the -- almost exactly what the prosecution said in their closing arguments yesterday.

they said "believe what you see ," referring to the video seen around the world. the defense on the other hand sought to put that nine minutes into the broader context of everything that happened leading up to that point and ask them essentially to consider other factors and to consider if all of the events leading up to those nine minutes would constitute reasonable action in the case of derek chauvin. what we heard during the trial was very unusual in that the chief of police from minneapolis came and testified against one of his own officers. i cannot emphasize enough how unusual that is to see dissent like that, and certainly with the chief of police speaking at a trial and going against what one of his officers did during the course of his duties, but that was meant to signal that derek chauvin, according to it that you testified, was not

following the procedures of the minneapolis police, and therefore, what he was doing did not constitute reasonable force. that is what the jury has been asked to consider. they have, as you mentioned, three charges in front of them. second-degree murder, which is the most serious of the charges, meaning someone is killed because of your actions, not necessarily that you intended to kill them. under minnesota law, that carries a maximum penalty of 40 years in prison. third degree murder is that someone was killed because of your actions, not necessarily that you were behaving in a dangerous way. joe: how surprising is that the

speed with which the jury has returned a verdict? tina: everyone is playing a guessing game. getting 12 people to agree to anything quickly signals that there were strong feelings even going into the room, so probably was not a hell of a lot of discussion. seven hours of closing statements yesterday began -- they began deliberating yesterday evening and began this morning at 9:00 new york time and are already done. you can play the guessing game. i hate to do it, but obviously, there was not a lot of discussion or dissent amongst the 12 people if they were able to reach agreement this quickly. caroline: you mentioned people giving evidence, one of them the chief of police, and the extraordinary nature of that, but we also had emotional testimony, graphic testimony, but also from medical experts, from family members.

what sort of process has this been for them? >> i think it's fair to say it has been an emotional roller coaster. you did hear from people who work weeping on the stands as i talked about what it was like to be at the event, to witness the event, in some cases to record the event. prosecution came back again and again to a nine-year-old girl who while this was going on at one point screamed, "get off of him." if a nine-year-old girl can tell you what she was witnessing was wrong, for derek chauvin to not recognize that his actions were excessive, that he should have released george floyd earlier or brought in medical help much earlier than he did, that is their argument. again, you want the jury to feel like they are emotionally invested in george floyd and who he is and who he was. romaine: obviously, this trial

is for derek chauvin. there were three other officers at the scene. i believe those officers have been charged. what is the status of those cases? >> their lawyers very quickly moved to separate their cases from his. they are still facing trial, so they are not part of the proceeding today. there will be separate trials, and the charges they face are nowhere near as serious as what derek chauvin is facing. in all cases, it's likely these men will never be police officers again. joe: as you pointed out, the prosecution's case boils down to "believe what you saw," what you saw with the officer's knee on george floyd's neck, a straightforward and. how has the defense tried to create ambiguity?

>> one of the things they did repeatedly yesterday during the closing arguments, and they did it through the course of when they were putting on their defense was to point out all the other problems, all the other possible contributing factors to george floyd's death that day. they pointed to a heart condition. they pointed to evidence of drugs in his system. they pointed to the fact that at one point, he had been placed in a prone position near the tailpipe of the car, so he was potentially suffering some carbon monoxide poisoning because he was basically inhaling a lot of pipe emissions. they have tried to -- as a good defense attorney would do -- tried to instill any kind of reasonable doubt that derek chauvin was the sole or most significant cost -- because -- reasonable doubt that derek chauvin was the sole or most

significant cause of the death of george floyd. caroline: you're looking at crowds near the downtown court building of minnesota. we understand it is almost like a military base at the moment. barriers, national guard, police around the building. businesses boarded up as we await the verdict. plenty more ahead. i think we can now go across to our own marion parker -- no, we are going to take a quick break. this is bloomberg. ♪

caroline: now we await the

verdict of the case against derek chauvin, the former minneapolis police officer who note on the neck of george floyd -- note on the neck of george floyd -- knelt on the neck of george floyd last may. this is a politically explosive murder trial. how is the biden administration, the white house currently thinking? >> president biden has weighed into this issue for the better part of the past year. candidate biden earlier today ahead of a meeting with congressional members, the president waited into it -- the president waded into it further saying the evidence overwhelmingly cited with one

verdict. he did not mention which, but he has been sympathetic to the floyd family. joe: in terms of the broader questions allowed police, legal defenses for police, is there a broader white house plan to address this sort of -- go from a single case to a sort of broader policy push? >> no, you're absolutely right. that is something the administration has been talking about for a while. he plans to reform police, looking at immunity, the militarization of police, etc. what is interesting is he had been under fire from activists in the left wing of his party in recent weeks for their perception that he had not been doing enough legislatively on the issue, that he is putting his political might behind covid, of course, which is

understandable, but then infrastructure, and there were questions if he should reprioritize in light of what we are seeing in the country. romaine: the president has already spoken about this publicly, and in the context of the george floyd murder and the trial of derek chauvin, there have been other incidences of killings and other assaults involving the police. has he actually addressed broader issues surrounding what led to these events, or is he specifically just focused in on the chauvin trial and george floyd? >> more recently, he has focused on the chauvin trial and george floyd. there is a caveat to that. the press secretary spoke about it in more broad terms, expressing the president's view that african-americans have been

frustrated, that they are sympathetic to the plight of african-americans in these particular instances. we saw another shooting in the minnesota area last week as well in the backdrop of this case. the press secretary has been speaking about it in broader views. a few months back, when president biden was first elected and took office, he did talk about this push to reform police and spoke about it in broader terms and how to improve relationships between community police and communities of color. caroline: i am interested in the politico and of the moment. we are still looking at what is happening in minneapolis. we understand there are a number of barriers being put up. i'm interested in what happened to maxine waters, of course, a notable california democrat who seemed to make some comments

that many found inflammatory, and some do not, of course. she was there amongst protesters. how is the white house and capitol hill digesting what maxine waters said over the weekend? >> capitol hill is divided, as you imagine it would be. you have democrats rallying around and encircling if you will maxine waters. we had representative james clyburn, the number three house democrats earlier who essentially defended waters on bloomberg television, but then, of course, republicans have looked to, you know, say this is a very dire situation and they look to characterize it as her pouring gasoline on the fire. the elephant in the room, of course, is what happened in january with the capitol

situation. both sides are kind of politicizing it for their benefit. the white house is essentially saying that waters sought to clarify her statement, so the white house is not condemning what she said. caroline: to clarify what she did say, she told protesters to get more active, get more confrontational. we are looking at what is currently occurring in minneapolis as people await this verdict. it is a crucial verdict. joe: exactly right. we remember last summer in the wake of george floyd's death, protests all around the country in the wake of that. our thanks to mario parker. joining us now, cumbersome and

who represents queens. congressman, thank you so much for joining us. we were just having this conversation. obviously, we don't know yet the verdict in this case, but in terms of the broader policy push and the broader demands of activist protesters in the wake of george floyd's death last summer, what do you see as the best opportunity for someone in your seat and in a d.c. to push that forward? >> we passed the george floyd police reform bill, and i think that deals with a lot of the problems we have with policing in america, and i would hope the bill is taken seriously, and that by the public getting behind it and telling their senators to vote for this very important bill, it is a way we can fix some of the systemic issues that the police

department has had, particularly with people of color. so i will continue to advocate to get that bill passed and to hope that while we try to get that done, that there's local government that would be enacting much of what is in the george floyd police reform bill. romaine: we are sitting on the edge of your seats awaiting this verdict and we have been in this possessive -- in this position countless times before in our lifetime and i'm sure in yours as well. >> we have to continue to push. it takes the public and

continues to await the public and have the public push their elected officials. as i said, it is done in the house. now we just need it done, and that question comes to if you break the filibuster or not, and if you don't, then you look at why elections are important in america and we can make sure we change the balance of power in that particular body, so we are hopeful we will get the correct verdict, and to me, looking at those nine-plus minutes of george floyd being held to death is clear, and i think the reason why we got it very clear is that the prosecutor has done an excellent job, and i think that will help things also. i used to be a prosecutor at one

time. i thought the prosecutor made an excellent case, and i would be shocked at any verdict other than what our eyes showed. my eyes did not lie with what i saw during this trial. caroline: we are hearing that the verdict will not heal the pain and not take away community pain in particular. your chair of the house foreign affairs committee. you saw not only the u.s. reaction to this but the international reaction. do you feel there has been a seachange, not just from a community level, but also from a corporate level? has corporate responsibility up its game as well? congressman meeks: it needs to.

this is why i made reference to the voting rights act and the civil rights act. when we see the pain inflicted upon african-americans like my late colleague john lewis by the police department as he tried to cross the edmund pettus bridge and various times in which they were peacefully demonstrating, the fact that the cameras were there, and now we have seen instant after instant on camera where it becomes clear to the american public of what african-americans have said all along, when you see them from being abused and/or killed by police. yes, i agree with the vice president wholeheartedly. this will not ease the pain. george floyd, no matter what the verdict is, will not be brought back.

therefore, we will continue to grieve and continue to work and continue to challenge until we have a specific change. what is important, having put in place a system where police officers no longer have automatic immunity so they know that there is some sense of justice and hope that that sense of justice as a result makes police officers police differently. most police officers are good, but those that do commit bad acts need to be held accountable. that is what the george floyd bill is about. we are an imperfect nation, and that has always been, but we need to continue to fight to become a more perfect nation, and that then will be the example that we can say -- that we can set for other countries

around the world because you are absolutely right. i have heard from presidents and ambassadors all over the world. they are trying to see, often times when we talk about justice in america, particularly for african-americans historically, i don't hide away from our past and how many times african-americans have been victimized brutally until -- as a result of systemic racism in america. we can address that and we have to show how we are improving from that and we continue to stand and fight to make this a better country. i would hope others would follow the same example of what you see many individuals who are protesting the death of george floyd and breonna taylor and i could go on and on and on about many others.

joe: you mentioned your experience as a prosecutor and your admiration for the work of the prosecutor in this case. what stood out to you in terms of the effectiveness of the approach? representative meeks: particularly, the things that generally do not happen in this type of case -- police officer after police officer after police officer they were trained to do and how they did not follow the training. medical doctor after medical doctor after medical doctor talking about the loss of oxygen is what caused him to die, not any type of ingested drugs or anything of that nature, and then what you have in this case, which was a mitigation you may not have had in the past, the tape itself.

first, george floyd prior to being accosted and handcuffed and murdered, just walking around. he did not seem to be under any severe stress or on the verge of death or anything of that nature. you utilize the "but for" rule. but for what chauvin did, he would be alive, and anyone that sees it can feel similarly. romaine: you obviously have a background in law and in prosecution. i'm curious as to if the case that the defense made, if you think that was enough, if at all, to sway the jury, at least enough jurors, to not approve

those charges. representative meeks: i think the defense was trying to throw whatever they could for reasonable doubt. the prosecutors made sure to make all the connections to what a reasonable conclusion would be as opposed to what the defense team did. ordinarily, i would say, you know, in this case, clearly, it was not a plea offer for anything of that nature, nor should there have been. the defense did whatever they had to do, throw a shotgun or whatever you may have out there in hopes that make prevent a conviction, and that is exactly what he tried to do, but i don't think he was able to convince anyone in that regard. the facts were simply not there. the facts are what your eyes showed you and what the

testimony was of civilian witnesses, police witnesses, young people, family members. you look at that in totality, and it was just overwhelming. romaine: really appreciate your taking time to give your insights today. representative meeks, democrat of new york. we are still waiting for the verdict to be read. we know that a verdict is in p or in only two days of jury deliberations after a three-week trial. our executive editor who has been overseeing coverage of the trial joins us now. as we awaited the judge to announce the verdict, can you -- as we await the judge to announce the verdict, can you give us a sense of what the jury is dealing with? tina: they are facing three different charges. one is murder in the second degree, meaning someone was killed performing a felony act.

in this case, the felony act is chauvin's use of felony force as a police officer. that holds the possibility of 40 years in prison if found guilty. third-degree murder is one that consists of someone died while you were -- while the accused was doing something that was inherently dangerous. he should have known that bad things would result from it. that carries a maximum of 25 years in prison. the last one is manslaughter, which is you were not intending to kill anyone and that carries a maximum of 10 years in prison. as we mentioned, these are charges that are in the statute of the state of minnesota. what they also have is sentencing guidelines. i have asked that -- they have asked that the sentencing

guidelines be waived and that derek chauvin be processed after closing arguments are wrapped up, either to waive the right of a jury to decide -- those would greatly reduce the sentence. sentencing guidelines were sort of meant to take into account a person's behavior, how they have lived their lives, other mitigating factors that would make them not eligible for the maximum sentence. the sentencing will not be happening today. we will be getting just the verdict -- guilty or not guilty -- and if there is a guilty verdict, we expect the sentencing to be probably contentious moving forward as we go into the next phase of the system. caroline: we want to thank you for staying across this story,

of course. while we are anticipating news from about 4:30 p.m. new york time, what remains, nothing, it would appear. romaine: and this is a country on edge for probably a variety of reasons. the announcement of that verdict going to be closely watched, and more importantly, the fallout from that decision, depending on which way it goes. caroline: we are now going to move across to our "bloomberg technology" team. here is emily chang. emily: welcome to "bloomberg technology." i'm emily chang. we are awaiting the verdict in the derek chauvin trial. derek chauvin was among the four police officers who detained george floyd, resulting in his death. chauvin is the