and is dependent on the credibility or believability or accuracy of the expert witness called for that purpose as well as the following factors. one, the validity of the theory of identification by fingerprint comparison. two, the credibility of the witness who performs other necessary functions in making the comparison, such as inked finger impressions and latent lifts. and, three, the accuracy of procedures in identifying, preserving, recording and maintaining integrity of the physical evidence, all of which are questions for the jury. now, the defendants are charged with crimes against the laws of this state. a crime is a violation of a statute of this state in which there is a joint operation of act and intention. intent is an essential element of any crime and must be proved by the state beyond a reasonable doubt.

intent may be shown in many ways, provided you the jury believe it existed from the proven facts before you. it may be inferred from the proven circumstances or by acts and conduct, or it may be in your discretion inferred when it is the natural and necessary consequence of the act. whether or not you draw such an inference is a matter solely within your discretion. criminal intent does not mean an intention to violate the law or to violate a penal statute, but means simply the intention to commit the act that is prohibited by the statute. the defendants will not be presumed to have acted with criminal intent, but you may find such an intention upon consideration of words, conduct, demeanor, motive and other circumstances connected with the act for which the accused or

being prosecuted. now, every party to a crime may be charged with and on victimed of commission of the crime. a person is a party to a crime only if that person, a, directly commits the crime, b, intentionally helps in the commission of the crime or, c, intentionally advises and encourages, hires, counsels or procures another to commit the crime. any party to a crime who did not directly commit the crime may be prosecuted for commission of the crime upon proof that the crime was committed and that the person was a party to it even though the person alleged to have directly committed the crime has not been prosecuted or convicted, has been convicted of a different crime or degree of crime, is not amenable to justice or has been acquitted.

knowledge of the part of a defendant that a crime was being committed and that a defendant knowingly and intentionally participated in or helped in the commission of such crime must be proved by the state beyond a reasonable doubt. if you find from the evidence in this case that a defendant had no knowledge that a crime was being committed or that a defendant did not knowingly and intentionally commit, participate or help in the commission of the alleged offense, then it would be your duty to acquit that defendant. on the other hand, should you find beyond a reasonable doubt that a defendant had knowledge that a crime was being committed and that a defendant knowingly and intentionally participated or helped in the commission of it, then you would be authorized to convict that defendant. a person shall not be found guilty of a crime if the act or omission to act constituting the crime was induced by a

misapprehension of fact that, if true, would have justified the act or omission. now, the law provides that a criminal action shall be tried in the county where the crime was committed. venue is a jurisdictional fact that must be proved by the state beyond a reasonable doubt as to each crime charged in the indictment, just as any element of the offense. venue must be proved by direct or circumstantial evidence or both. the defendants are charged with the offenses of malice murder, felony murder in four counts, aggravated assault, two counts, and false imprisonment and criminal attempt to commit a felony. i will now define the offenses for you. for malice murder, the state must prove that the defendant, one, caused the death of another person, two, unlawfully, and

three, with malice aforethought. the killing must have been done with malice to be murder. malice, as the term is used here, is not necessarily ill will or hatred. rather, it is the unlawful intent to kill without justification. you may find malice when the circumstances show that the defendant acted with the deliberate intention to unlawfully take the life of another person. you may also find malice when there does not appear to be significant provocation and all the circumstances of the killing show an abandoned and malignant heart. the state does not have to prove premeditation to prove murder. if the killing is done with malice, it is murder, regardless of how briefly the malicious intent existed. no specific length of time is required for malice to arise in a defendant's mind.

malice may be formed in a moment and instantly a fatal wound may be inflicted. if malice was in a defendant's mind at the time of the act or the killing and moved a defendant to do it, that is enough for the killing to be murder. the state does not have to prove motive to prove murder. any evidence of motive has been admitted for your use in determining a defendant's state of mind at the time of the killing. a person also commits the crime of felony murder when in the commission of a felony that person causes the death of another human being. under the laws of georgia, aggravated assault, false imprisonment and criminal attempt to commit false imprisonment are all felonies that will be defined later in this charge. you may find a defendant guilty

of felony murder if you believe that he caused the death of another person by committing one of the felonies just described regardless of whether he intended the death to occur. there must be some causal connection between the felony and the death. felony murder is not established simply because the death occurred at the same time as or shortly after the felony was attempted or committed. the felony must have directly caused the death or played a substantial and necessary part in causing the death, regardless of when the death ultimately occurred. a person commits the offense of aggravated assault when that person assaults another person with a deadly weapon or any object, device or instrument that, when used offensively against a person, is likely to or actually does result in serious bodily injury.

to constitute such an assault, actual injury to the alleged victim need not be shown. it is only necessary that the evidence show beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant attempted to cause a violent injury to the alleged victim or intentionally committed an act that placed the alleged victim in reasonable fear of immediately receiving a violent injury. as to count six of the indictment, the state must prove as a material element of aggravated assault as ledg allen this case that the assault was made be a deadly weapon. as to count seven of the indictment, the state must prove as a material element of assault that the assault was made be an object, device or instrument that, when used offensively against a person, is likely to or does actually result in serious bodily injury. a firearm, when used in the way a firearm is ordinarily used is a deadly weapon.

in deciding where a pickup truck is an offensive weapon in this case, you may consider all of the following factors. the nature and extent of any injury inflicted, the manner in which it was used, any display of it to the jury, any other circumstances of the case. whether or not under all of the facts and circumstances of this case a pickup truck, as alleged in this bill of indictment, did in fact constitute a weapon likely to cause serious bodily injure is a matter to be decided by the jury from the evidence in this case. now on count seven as to defendant william r. bryan, you may consider the following lesser offenses. simple assault. a person commits simple assault when that person attempts to

commit a violent injury to the person of another. reckless conduct. a person commits reckless conduct when that person endangers the bodily safety of another person by consciously disregarding a substantial and unjustifiable risk that his act or omission will cause harm or endanger the safety of another person and the disregard constitutes a gross deviation from the standard of care which another person would exercise in the situation. a person commits the offense of reckless driving by driving any vehicle in reckless disregard for the safety of persons or property. if you do not believe beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant william r. bryan is guilty of aggravated assault as alleged in count seven of the indictment but you do believe that the defendant is guilty of the lesser offenses just listed,

you would be authorized to find the defendant guilty of the lesser and should so indicate on the verdict form. continuing now with the charges set forth in the indictment. a person commits the offense of false imprisonment when, in violation of the personal liberty of another, he arrests, confines or detains such person without legal authority. a person commits criminal attempt to commit false imprisonment when, with intent to commit false imprisonment, that person performs any act that constitutes a substantial step toward the commission of the crime of false imprisonment, which has been previously defined for you. ladies and gentlemen, i charge you that whereas here in count seven and nine of the indictment, the state alleges that the defendants committed a crime in more than one way, the state need not prove that the defendants committed the crime

in each way charged. rather, it is sufficient if you, the jury, should find beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendants committed the crime in at least one of the ways alleged. now, ladies and gentlemen, the defendants have raised a defense that even if they committed the acts described in the indictment, there are circumstances that justify it. once this defense is raised, the state must disprove it beyond a reasonable doubt. the fact that a person's conduct is justified is a defense to prosecution for any crime based on that conduct. the defense of justification can be claimed, a, when the person's conduct is justified as the use of force in defense of self or

when the person's conduct is reasonable and is performed in the course of making a lawful arrest. the private person may arrest an offender if the offense is committed in his presence or within his immediate knowledge. if the offense is a felony a private person may arrest him. or by the accused admitting such a crime is being or has been committed. a private person may not act on the unsupported statement of others alone. a private citizen's warrantless

arrest must occur immediately after the perpetration of the offense or in the case of felonies, during escape. if the observer fails to make the arrest immediately after the commission of the offense or during escape in the case of felonies, his power to do so is extinguished. a private person may arrest an offender upon reasonable and probably grounds of suspicion, that is on probable cause, which is defined as facts and circumstances that are sufficient to warrant a prudent person or one of reasonable caution in believing in the circumstances shown that the suspect has committed an offense. the facts necessary to establish probable cause for arrest are much less than those required to prove guilty beyond a reasonable doubt at trial. the test merely requires a probability, less than a certainty but more than a mere suspicion or possibility.

in determining whether probable cause exists, the totality of the circumstances must be considered. whether probable cause existed is for the determination of the jury. now, an arrest is defined as the taking, seizing or detaining of the person of another, either by touching or putting hands on him or by any act indicating an intention to take such person into custody and which subjects such person to the actual control and will of the person making the arrest. an arrest can occur even when a subject is not told that he is under arrest. a person is authorized to use in making a lawful arrest only that degree of force that is reasonably necessary to accomplish the arrest. the mere fact that a lawful arrest is being made does not give the person the right to use excessive force or an unlawful

degree of force upon the person being arrested. when upon whom an illegal or unlawful arrest is being made has the right to resist the arrest if such force -- let me read that again. one upon whom an illegal or unlawful arrest is being made has the right to resist the arrest with such force as is reasonable necessary to prevent the arrest. a person commits the offense of criminal trespass when that person knowingly and without authority, a, enters upon the land or premises of another person for an unlawful purpose, b, enters upon the land or premises of another person after receiving prior to entry notice from the owner, rightful occupant or upon proper identification an authorized representative of the owner or rightful occupant that entry is

forbidden or remains upon the land or premises of another person after receiving notice from the owner, rightful occupant or upon proper identification an authorized representative of the owner or rightful occupant to depart. a person commits the offense of burglary in the first degree when without authority and with the intent to commit a theft therein, that person enters or remains within the dwelling of another. for purposes of this law, a dwelling includes a house, building or struture which is designed or intended for occupancy or residential use. it makes no difference whether the building was occupied, unoccupied or vacant. however, you may consider occupation status in determining whether or not the structure was designed or intended for residential use. to constitute the offense of

burglary it is not necessary that it be shown that a break-in occurred. to constitute entry, the evidence need only show a breaking of the plane of the structure alleged by the offender or by any part of his body or by any instrument controlled by him. the evidence need not show that an actual theft was accomplished. however, an intent to commit a theft, that is, an intent to steal is an essential element of burglary. you may infer an intent to steal where the evidence shows unlawful entry without authority into the place of another where some items of some value are present or kept inside and where there is no other apparent motive for the entry. a person commits the crime of hijacking a motor vehicle when

such person obtains a motor vehicle from an individual without his or her consent. even if the acts described in the indictment were committed there are circumstances that justify them. the state must disprove it beyond a reasonable doubt. the fact that a person's conduct is justified is a defense to prosecution for any crime based on that conduct. the defense of justification can be claimed as self-defense and a citizen's arrest. sometimes a defendant's threat or use of force is legally justified so as not a crime. let me read that again. sometimes a defendant's threat or use of force is legally justified and so is not a crime. a defendant is justified in threatening or using force against another when, one, he reasonably believes that the threat or use of force is

necessary, two, to defend himself or a third person, three, against the other person's imminent use of unlawful force. a defendant is justified in using force that is intended or likely to cause death or serious bodily injure when, one, he reasonably believes that the use of such force is necessary, two, to prevent, a, death or serious bodily injury to himself or a third person or, b, the commission of a forcible felony, which means a felony that involves the use of force or violence against another. aggravated assault is, again, a felony which can occur by use of fists if they are used as an offensive weapon. the state has the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant's actions were not justified. if you decide a defendant's actions were justified, then it would be your duty to find the

defendant not guilty. a defendant is not justified in threatening or using force if he provokes the threat or use of force intending to use that threat or force as an excuse to harm the other person, is committing a felony, aggravated assault, false imprisonment and criminal attempt to commit false imprisonment are felonies that have been previously defined, or is the unjustified initial aggressor unless he withdraws from the encounter and clearly communicates to the other person his intent to withdraw and the other person continues or threatens to continue the use of unlawful force. for a defendant's threat or use of force to be justified, one, the defendant must believe that his threat or use of force is necessary, two, that believe must be reasonable, that is, a reasonable person would also believe that the threat or use

of force is necessary and, three, the defendant's reasonable belief must be what prompts him to threaten or use force. a person who is not the aggressor is not required to retreat before being justified in using force he reasonably believes to be necessary. a defendant is not justified in using excessive force while acting in self-defense. if you decide that a defendant used more force than was reasonable necessary to defend against the alleged victim's threats or use of force, then the defendant's actions would not be justified. now, if after considering the testimony and evidence presented to you, together with the charge of the court, you should find and believe beyond a reasonable doubt that a defendant in glenn county, georgia, did on february 23rd, 2020, commit the offenses as alleged in the indictment, you would be authorized to find

the defendant guilty. in that event, the form of your verdict would be we the jury find the defendant guilty. if you do not believe that a defendant is guilty or you have any reasonable doubt as to the defendant's guilt, then it would be your duty to acquit the defendant, in which event the verdict should be we find the defendant not guilty. conviction of one defendant does not necessarily require conviction of another or all. you, the juror, must determine the guilty or innocence of each defendant separately. you'll be given a special verdict form for each defendant to use when you retire. you are to consider each count separately. in the space provided on the verdict form, you will indicate either guilty or not guilty depending on your verdict for that count and that defendant. now, i want to emphasize that anything the court did or said during the course of this case

was not intended to and did not intimate, hint or suggest to you which of the parties should prevail in this case. whichever of the parties is entitled to a verdict is a matter entirely for you to determine. and whatever your verdict, it must be agreed upon by all of you. the court's interest in the matter is that the case be fairly presented according to the law and that you as honest, conscientious, impartial jurors consider the case as the court has instructed you and return a verdict that speaks the truth as you find the truth of the case to be. your verdict should be a true verdict based upon your opinion of the evidence according to the laws given you in this charge. you are not to show favor or sympathy to one party or the other. it is your duty to consider the facts objectively without favor, affection or sympathy to any party.

in deciding this case you should not be influenced by sympathy of prejudice because of race, creed, color, national origin, sexual preference, economic status for or against either party. now, you are only concerned with the guilty or innocence of each defendant. you are not to concern yourselves with punishment. one of your first duties in the jury room will be to choose one of you to be the foreperson who will manage your deliberations and who will sign the verdict which all 12 of you freely and voluntarily agree. you should start your deliberations with on open mind. talk with each other and consider each other's views. each of you must decide this case for yourself. but you should do so only after a discussion and consideration of the case with your fellow jurors. do not hesitate to change an opinion if you are convinced that it is wrong. however, you should never surrender an honest upon in

order to be congenial or reach a verdict solely based on the opinions of the other jurors. during deliberations you must not communicate with anyone other than your fellow jurors about this case. you may not use any device or media such as a cell phone, smart phone, computer, internet, internet service or any text or instant messaging service or blog website. you cannot use any of those to communicate to anyone any information about this case or to conduct any research about this case until i accept your verdict. whatever your verdict is, it must be unanimous. that is, agreed by all. as to each count of the indictment and as to teach defendant. each verdict must be in writing and signed by one of your members as foreperson, dated and returned to be published in open

court. i do ask whoever the foreperson is, please write in pen. please don't sign the verdict form in pencil. now, ladies and gentlemen, you may retire to the object to the for jury room but do in the begin your deliberation until you have received the indictment and evidence in the case. we do need to separate out the three alternates. three of you are alternates, which we will separate out for deliberations. the three alternates will continue to be jurors in this case and still subject to all of the instructions of the court. if at some point during the proceedings, one of the deliberating jurors is not able to complete their duty for the court, then the alternate will be brought into deliberations and deliberations will begin again with that alternate. with that, ladies and gentlemen, i ask that you retire to the jury room. >> all rise for the jury.

>> and with that, the three men accused of murdering ahmaud arbery now await their fate. jurors will retire to deliberate. the judge spending roughly 42 minutes reading those jury instructions. the judge denied at one point a motion for mistrial from the defense. the prosecution just wrapped up its final rebuttal to the defense before those jury instructions. now the judge has officially charged the jury. joining me now from outside the courthouse, cal perry, who has been watching all of this. also with me danny cevallos, a criminal defense attorney and msnbc legal analyst. let me start with you. let's just talk about what we heard there in that rebuttal.

i want to play -- i could contend this was essentially the thesis of the rebuttal that started before 9:00 a.m. this is just a slice of it. this is the rebuttal to the defense by the prosecution talks about lawful citizen's arrest. >> wanting to question the victim demonstrates their uncertainty on what he had done that day and wanting to question the victim demonstrates a lack of immediate knowledge which is required for a lawful citizen's arrest. they didn't see him commit any crime that day. the state's not saying he wasn't in there. he went in there and wandered around and came out and ran off down the street. we all know that. they didn't know that. >> that would seem to be the crux of the argument there in the rebuttal. in your view, did the prosecution do its job?

>> the prosecution did its job attacking the central theme of the defense, which has to be this is a lawful citizen's arrest. in order to do that, the defendants must have had probable cause to believe a crime was being committed, like the police do when they make an arrest. so the prosecution, by attacking that, is essentially saying, look, if they had to ask questions, then they weren't certain what was going on. whether or not that sells with the jury in light of the defense's argument that this was about a totality of the circumstances, that there were ongoing crimes in the neighborhood that gave rise to a kind of suspicion that wasn't based on what the defendants actually saw, because there is no evidence that the defendants actually saw arbery committing a crime. >> let's talk about william "roddie" bryan for a moment here, danny. he's the gentleman far right there that we were just showing there. this is the guy that followed and shot the video with the cell

phone. it seems as if you think william "roddie" bryan may have a decent shot at acquittal. why? >> william "roddie" bryan has a path to acquittal in this case because the evidence that came out at trial was essentially there was no cooperation, no discussion with the other defendants that bryan got in his car, he followed arbery, he videotaped. he did not possess a gun. the defendant's marshalled the evidence to show it's possible that he wasn't even aware that the defendants had firearms, let alone they would use them and confront arbery with them. so i think, in closing, bryan's attorney has given the jury enough to say, well, maybe these two defendants with the guns are responsible, but the guy who was essentially rubber necking, following this entire incident, there may not be enough evidence, at least not beyond a

reason able doubt, that he was a coparty with these other defendants. >> danny, before we heard the jury instructions, it also seemed as if the prosecution was being very methodical in her approach to speaking to the jury, telling them precisely what she wanted them to do when they got in that jury room. what's the strategy there? >> yeah. i'm a fan of this approach that the prosecution used. talking to the jury as if you're helping them assemble a toy at christmas time when they go into that jury room, anticipating what they might discuss and just giving them kind of a blueprint to go through the jury instructions. notice, she even a couple times made a kind of joke about, you know, these laws, lawyers, what are you going to do about lawyers as if to say i'm one of you, i'm not one of the lawyers with their fancy words. i'm just a regular person telling you how to go in that

jury room and debate. and even if you reach some kind of impasse, send a note out to the judge. don't compromise. you have questions, come out and ask them. it really was an effective way of putting herself in the jury room with the jurors. good technique for the prosecution. >> cal, let's talk about this jury for a moment here. again, a live look inside the courtroom where you can still see lawyers and judge walmsley talking. we're keeping a close ear on the conversations. so far nothing of note. the judge saying heretofore he has been satisfied there have been no substantive issues outside the courtroom that need to be addressed inside the courtroom. cal, what is the mood like outside that courthouse? and what do we know about how the thanksgiving holiday could

affect deliberations? >> reporter: first, to the schedule, we heard this morning from the court the jury will deliberate today. assuming there is no verdict, they will work tomorrow, wed. they may adjourn early for thanksgiving, but that would be just a one-daybreak. if there's no verdict, they would be back on friday. we heard from attorney kevin goff, who's constantly trying to appeal for a mistrial, it almost seems like that is his role as part of the defense strategy. he continues to bring up what is happening outside the courtroom. we heard this yesterday when folks were marching around the courthouse, it was 30 to 50 individuals organized and led by the new black panther party. it was brought up in court as a reason to dismiss the trial. we have seen this each day as the defense tries to bring in what's happening outside the courtroom. today the numbers are small. there is probably 2-1 journalists to demonstrators

here this morning. it has been quiet all morning. people are now standing by after 13 days the jury finally had the chance to deliberate this case. >> danny, all three defendants charged with malice murder, felony murder, aggravated assault, false imprisonment and criminal attempt to commit a felony. they face up to life in prison if convicted. obviously can't get into the minds of the jury, but based on the argue pts you have heard from both sides over the course of this trial, which charges do you think stick? >> felony murder is always an easier case to make than actual malice murder. the entire public policy behind felony murder is, yes, we know it's an unintentional killing but as a society we say, look, if you engage in burglary, arson, rape, robbery, kidnapping, any of these kinds

of dangerous events, you should expect a death is reasonably probably to result. as long as they can show aggravated assault and a resulting death, then they can get felony murder. i would caution that the defense for william "roddie" bryan made a very interesting causation argument which is william "roddie" bryan may have driven after arbery. he may have committed aggravated assault, but that felony was separate from the other defendants' felony, therefore, you don't have causation. >> a big thanks to both of you. we will be spending lots of time with you over the next few hours and days as, again, if jury has started deliberations in the killing of ahmaud arbery. just a few hours from now, the suspect accused of plowing his car into a wisconsin holiday parade is going to have his first appearance in court. what to expect from that late and the latest on the

investigation in waukesha. then, getting gas prices down. we're going to break down president biden's plan to do just that as he gets ready to talk to the nation about the high prices we're seeing ahead of thanksgiving. we've talked about teacher shortages shortages. now we might not have enough snowplow drivers to clear the roads this winter. what cities and states are trying to do about that, coming up. trying to do about that, coming up small business owners prosper during their most important time of year. when you switch to t-mobile and bring your own device, we'll pay off your phone up to $1000. you can keep your phone. keep your number. and get your employees connected on the largest and fastest 5g network. plus, we give you $200 in facebook ads on us! so you can reach more customers, create more opportunities, and finish this year strong. visit your local t-mobile store today. ray loves vacations. but his diabetes never seemed to take one.

everything felt like a 'no'. everything. but then ray went from no to know. with freestyle libre 2, now he knows his glucose levels when he needs to. and... when he wants to. so ray... can be ray. take the mystery out of your glucose levels, and lower your a1c. now you know. try it for free. visit freestylelibre.us want your clothes to smell freshly washed now you know. all day without heavy perfumes?

now they can! with downy light in-wash freshness boosters. just pour a capful of beads into your washing machine before each load. to give your laundry a light scent that lasts longer than detergent alone, with no heavy perfumes or dyes. finally, a light scent that lasts all day! new downy light, available in four naturally-inspired scents. ♪ ♪ xfinity rewards are our way of thanking you

just for being with us. ♪ ♪ enjoy rewards like movie night specials. xfinity mobile benefits. exclusive experiences, like the chance to win tickets to see watch what happens live. andy cohen: hey! it's me! and tasty recipes from bravo's top chef cheftestants that'll have you cooking like a pro. the longer you've been with us... the more rewards you can get. join for free on the xfinity app our thanks. your rewards.

the man accused of plowing through a holiday parade in wisconsin is set to make his first court appearance today. this morning we're learning a little bit more about the suspect. we just got this brand new mug shot of 39-year-old darrell brooks from the waukesha county sheriff. brooks faces five counts of first down degree intentional homicide. nbc's megan fitzgerald is in waukesha outside the courthouse. i'm also joined by cedric alexander, an msnbc law enforcement analyst. megan, we've got this new doorbell camera video of the suspect. what does this video show? what else have we learned about his criminal record? >> reporter: well, craig, what this video appears to show is just about 20 minutes after this incident at the christmas parade, you can see darrell brooks knocking on the door of a

homeowner, saying that he needs him to call an uber and that he's homeless. now nbc news has talked to this homeowner who says he had no idea of this incident that happened at this christmas parade. he ends up allowing brooks to come inside his home. he even makes the guy a sandwich. then this homeowner says he noticed there were a lot of police officers in his neighborhood. he got nervous and asked brooks to leave. he did. then you see on that doorbell camera the moments that police encountered brooks. this man has an extensive criminal background history, going back decades. just earlier this month, for example, he was arrested for a domestic dispute where, according to court documents, he rolled over the mother of his child. she had a tire mark on her leg. he was able to post bond of 1 thousand dollars and get out. that's something the district attorney here says was very low. but you fast forward to sunday and you're talking about five

people dead, nearly 50 people injured. of them, 18 are children, many fighting for their lives. ten of those kids in the icu, six in critical condition. this is a broken community right now mourning the loss of those lives lost as well as these children that are fighting for their lives right now, craig. >> cedric, to megan's point there, milwaukee prosecutors said on monday they requested, quote, inappropriately low bail for brooks in connection with that incident where he allegedly struck the mother of his child and ran over her with his car, posts$1,000 cash bond. is this a guy who shouldn't have been on the streets considering his lengthy prior record? >> if you consider his prior criminal record, it is clear to me, i think it's clear to the public and it certainly should be to anyone else, that when you

considered his violent history, it's a wonder, it does make you wonder how he did make it back to the streets. this event would not have happened with the death and mayhem that occurred there would not have occurred. hopefully they'll keep him locked up this time. that's not me being judgmental. that's just me sharing what i think many people in this country are experiencing. if we see the uptick in violent crime across this country, you can go to any police department in the usa, particularly in major cities, and they will tell you that oftentimes this whole bail reform needs to be revisited in a manner that's going to work for the public as well. the number one thing we have to do, being a former law enforcement person myself, that is keep the community safe.

and having him on the streets, as he has been in the past, was not keeping that community safe. >> that's a generalized stereotype, but to your point this was an effort afoot not long ago to lower bails, lower bonds so that people could get out. that part of the system was restructured in many major metropolitan areas, as you know, cedric. did we overcorrect? >> well, i don't think it's a stereotype, craig. i'm going to push back on that and tell you why. because what we observed and saw the other night is what we observe and see across this nation. here again, it need to be revisited and revisited in a manner that is going to work for the public at large. we all understand the fact there are people that are incarcerated and stay incarcerated that have high bonds and cannot make them. but at the same time we got to have a balance in this system that works for everyone that's

involved. of course, we also understand a person is not guilty until they're determined to be guilty or they confess to their guilty. but if we look at surging crime in this country, what you saw the other night and i will consistently stand by that, is clearly evidentiary of what many police departments and police officials will tell you across this country. we need to revisit our criminal justice system. we know that it's not fair all the time, but we've got to do a better job than what we've doing so that people will not have to experience the type of mayhem we're seeing that's occurring because violent offenders are being released and there's a high percentage of them and the data points that out. >> thank you, sir. megan fitzgerald on the ground for us in waukesha.

thank you as well. families across the country hitting the road for thanksgiving and they are getting hit with sky high prices at the pump. we're going to look at president biden's plan to try and ease that pain, next. y and ease that pain, next. knows everyone's unique. that's why they customize your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need. oh, yeah. that's the spot. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty, liberty, liberty, liberty ♪ (gong rings) - this is joe. (combative yelling) he used to have bad breath. now, he uses a capful of therabreath fresh breath oral rinse to keep his breath smelling great, all day long. (combative yelling) therabreath, it's a better mouthwash. at walmart, target and other fine stores. ♪♪

♪♪

it's time to start tapping the oil reserves. it's part of the biden administration's effort to lower gas prices for miles per

hours -- americans. right now the price at the pump is averaging $3.40 a gallon. shannon petty piece joins me from the white house. so the president expected to speak this afternoon. what >> they are blaming these high gas prices on a miss match between the supply being put out, and the demand that has been surging as the global economy starts coming back online during the pandemic, and they said to start bridging this divide, the supply, and meeting the demand, they're releasing 15 million barrels from a strategic reserve. it is mostly reserved for emergencied like a hurricane or if a pipeline goes off or if there is a disruption in the middle east where oil can't get in from those countries, so

they're going to tap into that to try to get the prices down in the interim until the supply and demand issues can be better matched. as far as when consumers might notice this, certainly the oil reserves are not going out overnight. they could take several weeks to months, but oil prices have gone down about 10%. so administration officials are hopeful, they hope that prices will naturally go down, but are the energy companies going to pass that on to people at the pump, something else that the administration has complained they not seeing enough of so far. >> all right, shannon, thank you so much. as winter gets closer, behinding on where you live, it may take longer to clear the roads of snow. cities and states can't find snowplow drivers and they're taking separate measures to try

and hire. for example some massachusetts cities are offering up to $155 an hour. in montana, the department of transportation says they're no longer requiring a area of highway maintenance or truck driving experience. in kansas their facing a 30% shortage. joined now by the superintendent of the kansas department of transportation, mr. jennings, thank you for your time. you told local media there that you're short 16 snowplow drivers right now. we know if roads are not clear, people can't get to work or school, other city services get affected. give us an idea of what this shortage means for day to day operations there, especially going into what is forecasted to be a pretty extreme winter. >> it will just take longer for people to get from point a to point b. i, like you said, i'm down 16 drivers right now.

that puts me at 16 drivers for day, and 16 for night, we work 12 hour shifts. 8:00 p.m. to 8:00 a.m. is the night shift. it will take twice as long for us to clear the roads so the traveling public can get to their destination. >> any idea why the shortage? what is behind it? why have you lost to many snowplow drivers? >> i don't know, craig, i really don't know. i don't -- everybody is shorthanded. all of the cities that surround us are short handed. that's a great question, i don't know why it is so difficult to find people. >> the k-dot budget, what could lawmakers do to make your job easier. even a little bit.

>> it's, of course, you know, starting pay is going to be the number one priority. if, you know, if the pay was a few dollars higher, i don't know that it would help. i know some of the cities around pay a little more than we do, but i don't know what the answer to that question is. >> we just talked about gas prices going up, salt prices are up, hue are these price increases affecting your department as well? >> you know, it always affects us. as far as salt goats right now we're completely full. we stocked up at the end of the season last year for this year. we're still right now. so as far as prices go, i mean, we'll have to pay what they're charging us, just because we

have to have the material. >> all right, greg jennings with us, a snowplow driver shortage, best of luck to you. hope the winter is not too bad there in kansas. >> so do i, thanks, craig. >> folks, if you have ever seen the movie "armageddon" turn up your tv, because you don't want to miss a thing in this next story. later today, nasa going to launch a spacecraft toward an asteroid more than 6.5 million miles away. why, you ask? to see if they can redirect it. seriously. the first test of the so called planetary defense technology should the plot of armageddon ever actually come true if will launch about an hour and a half

from vandenberberg space force base. they expect it to reach the asteroid in the fall of 2022. we should note, very important here, nasa says no known asteroid poses an impact threat to earth for at least the next 100 years. so good news on this tuesday. that's going to do it for me this hour. hour. 360 smart bede balancing so you both sleep just right. and it senses your movements and automatically adjusts to keep you both effortlessly comfortable. so, you can really promise better sleep? yes! you'll know exactly how well you slept, night after night. we take care of the science. all you have to do is sleep. and now, all smart beds are on sale. save 50% on the new sleep number 360® limited edition smart bed. plus, 0% interest for 24 months. only for a limited time.

riders, the lone wolves of the great highway. all they need is a bike and a full tank of gas. their only friend? the open road. i have friends. [ chuckles ] well, he may have friends, but he rides alone. that's jeremy, right there! we're literally riding together. he gets touchy when you talk about his lack of friends. can you help me out here? no matter why you ride, progressive has you covered with protection starting at $79 a year. well, we're new friends. to be fair. eh, still.

tv: mount everest, the tallest mountain on the face of the earth. keep dreaming. [coins clinking in jar] ♪ you can get it if you really want it, by jimmy cliff ♪ ♪ [suitcase closing] [gusts of wind] [gusts of wind] [ding]

are you one of the millions of americans who experience occasional bloating, [gusts of wind] gas or abdominal discomfort? taking align every day can help. align contains a quality probiotic developed by gastroenterologists. a ing, gas and abdominal discomfort. support your digestive health with align, the #1 doctor recommended probiotic. try align today. and try new align fast acting biotic gummies. helps soothe occasional digestive upsets in as little as 7 days. . good day, everyone, this is andrea mitchell reports in washington. jury deliberations are under way in the trial of three men accused of killed 25-year-old ahmaud