hi. thanks for joining us. i'm kristen sze. welcome to our daily program called "getting answers" we're asking experts to answer questions for you in real time. today we'll goat more of your covid-19 questions and cover the headlines with dr. bob wachter. a local community sending firefighters to california to help with hospitals, which are overflowing with patients. first, the deadly hit and run in san francisco on new year's eve. troy mcalister, the suspect, made his first court appearance on homicide charges in the deaths of the two women

pedestrians. the fallout over this tragedy is getting more intense. joining us to talk more about it is retired san francisco miss commander and current university of san francisco law professor rick koreaa. >> i'm not a law professor. i wouldn't want to upset those people over there. >> i think they might have used that in a tweet. perhaps in an honorary way. we're happy you're here all the same. we agree this is just a real tragedy. where there is disagreement is who was responsible other than the driver. a parolee charged with stealing the car he hit those women with. >> here when mr. mcalister was arrested on december 209, the san francisco police department neglected to even notify his

parole agent. we cannot expect parole to intervene or to effectively supervise people if other agencies fail to communicate to them. that's what happened on december 20th. >> already. he thinks mcalister was on the streets because of a communication problem. mainly sfpd should have shoulder the board they arrested him. too you agree with that? is that how i'd supposed to work if. >> well, the inspector that gets that case is supposed to notify parole i think under the department general orders. the question is what in the system allowed, you know, if that actually happened, if there was no notification, where in the system was there a breakdown? there are many points between arrest, rebooking, and a charging decision or a decision to discharging the case, where

the issue of parole would have come up and could have come up. >> now, could the d.a.'s office also have picked up the phone with parole to say, hey, police arrested mcalister. this is what we intend to do with him, you might want to consider this or that action. is that something the d.a.'s office might do? >> i don't know their internal policies. let me say this. your question speaks to an opportunity here to hook at the system and say how did this happen. the pd general order was drafted in 1994, available on line. it could use a revisit. then in the district attorney's office, maybe sit down with the other stake holders and take a good look at that process and find identity could, you know, that gap have been resolved there, and it's your policy to protect dependence -- or at least give parole a chance to

put a hold on somebody. >> when you were part of a police department, was it your policy if your guys had arrested somebody that you want to make sure that they will get on the phone and know that parole knew about it. >> you should look at the department general orders, which are available on line. 6 .12 describes notification of parole, also, pro days, possible probation holt, the circumstances for that. however, there's an interface that comes -- that's just the first chance. the second chance when the inspector meets with the d.a., a charging d.a. to see how to proceed with the case. i don't think finger pointing is marley helpful here. i think it's time for folks to look at these policies and make sure that they are overlapping enough.

>> yeah. i think that is the goal. people want too know how can we prevent this in the future. it is spg to note, though, the parole department, the board said we followed the protocol and they indicated that they were also waiting on a re-filing of the charges by the d.a., which never came, which leads me to the question. in each case, i assume police presented all the evidence and in each case, the d.a. did not prosecute. could it be that simply all those times there was simply not enough evidence? >> well, it's a little inside baseball but the system itself is designed -- this is statewide. if you took all arrests, about 55% of the arrests result in filing of criminal charges, so a significant number are, you know, tracked out of the system at early stages. in san francisco last year, in

2019, i'm sorry. there were 235 trials out of arrests of somewhere around 9,000 felony arrests. that's not inconsistent with what see statewide. but these horrible outcomes are almost -- go along with this -- the way the system is set up. i know that's hard for folks to hear. but with so much recidivism and so many people being pushed out of the system, you're going to get cases like this, terrible tragedies. this one's particularly bad because of the daly city opportunity. >> he was arrested on december 29th. regardless of who had the communicating responsibility, let's say they hear about it. they have this parolee. what is that they need to have before they decide, ok, we're

revoking your parole or putting a hold on you. does it depend on the d.a. filing charges or can they say no, go ahead and file charges anyway. >> the parole authorities would notify the jail that there was a parole hold and they would move to go through their process of revoking that parole. the question really turns on public safety and what -- you know, what is the type of crime involved, is it a personal crime, is it -- is there a continuing risk to the public? i think those are the instances where you'll see probation holds. >> mcalister does have a mile long record including two separate robbery cases. until he got arrested he was looking at a three strikes case that would have put him away for

life. what is it about this that had somebody say we're not going to do a parole hold or revoke right now? >> well, it really comes down to -- you know, if you're going to implement programs that are designed to lower jail populations or track more folks out of the system, i think you have to be hyper vigilant for the public safety threats to folks. i don't know mr. mcalister's record. i do know that, you know, someone with a history of violent crime over and over again is someone that maybe shouldn't be tracked out of the system and that there should be accountedability and new charges filed. at the same time you should have programs that are new and cutting edge. i'll say this. that the folks in the criminal justice system are dealing with problems and folks, where the problems started way upstream and a lot of times the robs they

encounter don't have good solutions at this stage, at this stage of arrest. >> i mean, i think everybody else agrees that there are no easy solutions. in this case there definitely is a lot of soul searching. in the interview he said that he's making a change, that in the future they'll communicate with parole directly instead of relying on police. although i have friends who say that's always done, you pick up the phone. i want to bring up his previous background as public defender of san francisco before becoming d.a. he stood in at one of the hearings at a hearing for mr. mcalister. do you think that should mean he recuses himself on any decisions involving mcalister. >> it's easy to give an opinion one way or the other. i don't know all the facts

there, his level of involvement, how involved he was in the charging decisions. i will say this. as a lawyer, you default to recusing yourself or building a firewall between you and even the appearance of a conflict of interest. it's a best practice. >> look, i think what everybody is hoping for is some sort of change in the wake of the tragedy, and i have to ask you, what do you expect as a result of what happened in this case might become different in san francisco or perhaps even california? >> you know, i got to change your question and say what would i like to see happen. i'd like to see a good model programs being implemented and at the same time hyper vigilance for the pup safety. people may not be satisfied with the traditional punitive criminal justice system but at the end of the day, you have a violent felony, maybe that person doesn't need to be

tracked into a novel program. so instrumentalize these changes in the system. that's going to require, i think, a centrist thinking the about how to approach justice system problems. people are wondering why when you have your hands on somebody is he let go and this outcome happens. but if you're letting 45% of the folks out, as they do across the state, these things are not unforeseeable. they -- you know, it's within the margin of error, i guess you could almost say. and that's tough. but i'll end on this point. you must at some point hold people accountable and decide to charge versus directing them back to parole or probation to send a message that you're not just going to go through the

rele involving door. >> there are some people who will benefit from the spore of that comes as part of the parole process. you're right, not one size fits all. thank you so much for your time and insight. take care. >> thank you. >> appreciate it. all right. we had a lot of viewer questions about covid-19 yesterday. we're going to bring back a doctor to answer them all for you, the chair of the

welcome back. we're in a crucial point in this pandemic as vaccines slowly start to roll out. with so many covid-19 headlines, we wanted to bring in dr. bob

wachter. thanks for joining us. >> pleasure. >> so far southern california, possibly here in northern california, we just don't know. how long do you think it's probably been here? >> it has to have been here for weeks. we haven't been looking very hard. now that we are looking, i think we're going to find more of it. we've found four or five cases in the united states. fun of them traveled in the curreuk. >> a lot of people are worried. recent information shows although it is more contagious, health officials say it doesn't seem to be more potent, if you will, and that the vaccine is still likely to work for it. is that still the case? any info we need to know. >> the only up foe is the fact that it is more contagious makes it even more deadly even if on a

per case basis, it's not going to make it worse. so it is scary and it does mean that we've got to ramp up the vaccination as fast as we can to try to have fewer people exposed to it. >> new york city's mayor is calling for a travel ban to and from the uk. is it a good idea or is it too late for something like this or is it here? >> it's hard to know whether it's too late. i think it probably is a good idea. this took off in the uk about two months ago. now it now represents 60% of the cases in london, so if we can keep it down or keep it out as much as possible, that's probably a smart idea. but the point is real, that it's already here and already doing some of its damage even as we speak. >> i want to talk about the

vaccine. your op ed suggested delaying the second dose so that more people can get the first dose earlier, sooner. the secretary of health and human services says that's a bad idea. what's your thought? >> we think it's worthy of consideration. i don't like the argument we should stick with the man because it's the plan. things are going badly. case are surging everywhere. the new variant is a new curveball. so if we can get more people vaccinated with their first dose, which is probably about 80 to 90% protective, if to do that it means delaying the second dose for a month or two, i think you're ultimately going to save more lives. part of the reason we wrote it is we want to generate interest in why it's happening. try to figure out what is the smartest strategy to get people

their first dose or using a smaller number of vaccines and giving people their second dose. >> what does that mean implementing it? could california say we like it, let's do it, and unilaterally start distributing their vaccine doses that way? >> they could. it's not ideal. i think ideally, there's a national question that appears to be happening that involves the cdc, dr. fauci and others and they take a hard look at the facts on the ground and say although we think there's some uncertainties associated with it, we know what's happening now and what's happening now is really a disaster and we're going to explore it. if it were me, i would wait to see what the feds ultimately choose to do. right now they've chosen to stick with the tried and true. i think that's not an unusual decision. if the ramp up of the vaccine it might not be as necessary.

if a week from now we're still sluggishly distributing this vaccine, i hope they'll continue to study it and make a different decision. >> on facebook ruth wants to know when any of us over 75 years old might get our vaccines? what do you think snoo. >> i think we're going to get through the first group, health care workers and people in long term health felts, we're vaccinating 1500 people a day. we've done about 900 people. we should be able to complete our cohort in the next two, three weeks. we're probably talking about the end of january. there's going to be more resources applied. people realize we've been going at this too slowly. the number of people dying is almost the equivalent of a 9/11

or a pearl harbor every day. the day after those events, we said it's an emergency, we need to go as fast as possible. this is not a pearl harbor/ 9/11 kind of response. i hope we'll get there. >> i do, too. i don't want to cast blame but i can help but to wonder we knew that the day will come when we would have the vaccine and it would need to be distributed across the country. why weren't the distribution networks already totally set? we've had nine months? >> that's a great question. i think it probably was a lot to ask to develop those plans nine months ago but two months ago when we knew that advantage seeps were looking really promising and in the beginning of november once we heard we had these unbelievably effective two vaccines, that's the moment that congress should have passed the

$8 million to support vaccine distribution. unfortunately they just passed it ten days ago. we've been late to the dance all the way along. it doesn't surprise me much. think about the way we distributed testing and ppe. we have not had a good and strong federal response. we're seeing the fruits of that yet again. >> i want to get to more viewer questions. alex wants to know if a patient has had septic shock in the past, is it safe for that person? >> absolutely. the vaccine is safe for pretty much everybody. we don't know about its safety in children yet. the question of safety in pregnant women was not tested, but i think the guidance is that they should hear about pluses and mineses about whether to take it. i would if i was in that situation. and someone with a history of severe allergies to its ingredients. that's it. someone who has had septic

shock, it means you've had one time in your life where you got very sick for an infection. if that were me, i would be first to line to get it. >> thank you for spending time with us. hope to talk to you soon. meantime, stay safe. >> you as well. thanks. >> all right, coming up next, how first responders in the bay area are helping the crisis in southern california. how about poor fred wilson? what a shame. so soon after retiring. i hear his wife needed help with the funeral expenses. that's ridiculous! -he had social security. -when my brother died, his wife received a check from social security, all right-- for $255! the funeral costs were well over $8,000. how on earth did she pay for it? fortunately, my brother bought additional life insurance -before he retired. -whew! i bet that cost a pretty penny, huh? not with colonial penn. coverage options start at just $9.95 a month.

less than 35 cents a day. i have it myself. we both do. -both of you? -that's right. neither of us had to answer any health questions or take a physical exam. in fact, no one our age can be turned down. for any health reason. -no one? -no one? nope. hm. is this a plan that offers a lot of protection at first, and then reduces it little by little each year? no! i've had this coverage for years. my benefit never decreases as i get older. your rates go up every year, right? no, not at all. friends keep telling friends about guaranteed acceptance whole life insurance from colonial penn life insurance company. with this coverage, your premium never increases for any reason, and your benefit won't decrease simply because you grow older. options start at just $9.95 a month. if you're age 50 to 85, you cannot be turned down because of your health. colonial penn specializes in protection for mature men and women.

to find out more, call now. (male announcer) call now and you'll also get this free beneficiary planner and this free prescription savings card that can help you save up to 80% on prescription drugs. welcome back. 0% icu. now firefight paramedics are going from the bay area to southern california to help. these photos posted by the city of mountain view fire department showing one of its own who's been sent to los angeles county to help. joining us more to talk more about this is the city's public information officer. robert, thank you so much.

great work your colleagues are doing down there. i want to ask you do firefighters regularly assist hospitals with patients? >> yes, absolutely. we do assist hospitals and patients. from time to time paramedics will assist in performing life support on a patient at a scene or a call thachl paramedic will leave the scene in an ambulance or the fire apparatus that they came in to continue providing care to the patient and they work with the glance crew to transfer that patient to a hospital staff. this is not anything that they don't normally do. however, this is the first time that our city has embedded firefighter paramedics in a hospital. >> tell me how many of those detect the roles they're filling to fill while they're down there and how long do they expect to

see? >> we have two firefighter/paramedics deployed. they expect to be down there for two weeks. this might change and as the needs change we're willing to have our firefighters meet the needs of the community. they're going to be working in line with their training. they're going to be working under doctors orders to administer blood draws, establishing i.v.s and helping provide covid care for these patients at these hospitals. >> now, when you're missing a couple of your paramedics, what does that peen for your department and your ability to meet the needs of your community locally. >> absolutely. this is something that the city does so well. we pivot regularly to meet the needs of our community. you may have seen over the summertime months that we had members deployed throughout the state of california and throughout other states within the country to fight these historic wildland fires we've

been experiencing. we are very good at backfilling positions with other members of department to ensure our fire department always remains fully staff and we're always meeting the needs of our community. >> when they return, will they have to quarantine? will it be a time they'll have to quarantine? >> no, ma'am. they're deemed essential. they're not going to need to quarantine upon return after performing these particular duties. we will kmie with the public health order. should that order change between now a

and that's going do it for

now. thank you so much for joining us today on today's tonight, breaking news. the historic election unfolding right now. the battle for georgia and control of the u.s. senate. the eyes of the nation tonight focused on georgia now. the two senate runoff elections and voters there know this is about much more than georgia. the control of the senate in their hands, the future of president-elect joe biden's agenda. if both democratic candidates win, the party will have control of congress and the white house. if just one of the republicans win, they keep control of the senate. steve osunsami standing by in georgia with what we know so far. all of this tonight as president trump puts new pressure on vice president mike pence to do something about what will then play out on wednesday. congress set to make it official, president-elect joe biden's victory. the president saying that the vice president has the power to reject the electors.