let's bring in legal analyst areva martin. she joins us now to break down the potential legal ramifications of the shooting. areva, good morning to you. >> good morning. >> obviously the investigation here is far from over, but could someone end up facing criminal charges? >> absolutely, victor. many factors will be considered by investigators and the first question is who loaded that live ammunition into that gun? who handled the gun after the live ammunition was put into the gun? who knew about the live ammunition? then there are all these questions about safety protocols and the failure to follow the safety protocols, so much so we're hearing crew members walked off the set. there were complaints made about the safety protocols not being followed that were ignored. so all of those questions will go to determine whether this rises to the level of criminal, you know, homicide which is very possible in a case like this. if there's more than simple negligence, someone, it could be possible -- it's possible that there could be m

accidental shootings including the killing of brandon lee during the filming of the crow" and with us areva martin. i have always appreciated being able to call upon you for the past years. you've taught me some gun safety and i've appreciated it. so you've been on sets like this. how does something like this happen? >> well, the physics of how bullets enter people has been flown for about 5,000 years so there is no excuse for something like this to happen. in order to shoot one, you have to have a firearm capable of discharging a projectile. you have to have a casing. you have to have primer and a bullet. and you put those things together and if a bullet comes out and enters someone, that is exactly what it is designed to do and you have to figure out how you make that doesn't happen. one, you could make sure by looking inside of the cylinder that there is nothing in the gun that could come out. and of course you want to make sure that there is no bullet on the end of the ammo that you're loading into the gun. so you have to break several rules. even if you have a real live gun, a real liv

. >>> and joining us now is legal analyst areva martin. good morning to you, areva. i want to get into some of these conditions that zohreen talked about on the new california school mandate. what does it mean for the parents? do the kids get kicked out of school, and i imagine that lawsuits are being drafted as we speak. >> absolutely, juju. we should expect litigation over this matter. we've seen it happen in other states, and california will be no different. but, yes, it could mean kids will not be allowed to enter school if they cannot show proof of vaccination. as the governor said in announcing the vaccine mandates, school districts throughout california already mandate that children receive certain vaccinations in order to enter school, so from the governor's perspective this is just another vaccine on the list of vaccines that are currently required for students. >> and, areva, we all know that it's not just schools but employers are also mandating vaccines. what options do workers have? >> not many options, juju. they have the option to seek alternative empl

. >> joining us now is cnn legal analyst and civil rights attorney, areva martin, also the author ofn told," a plaintiff group here, areva, welcome in, new york. >> great to have you. >> these plaintiffs, they are going to appeal the decision. they hope a more conservative supreme court will side with them. what's your take on this? >> this is a huge decision, and we should say this plaintiffs group have sued other universities, they sued the university of texas, and in 2016, the supreme court withheld the texas admissions policy that allowed them to consider race not as the only factor or sole factor but one of many factors. what these universities do is they consider grades, extracurricular activity, you know, test scores, socioeconomic background and a litany of other things, so i think this decision is huge. we know the university of north carolina, like so many have historically low admission rates for minority students, particularly african-american students and this allows that university to continue to admit students of color that reflect more of what the demographics are of

so joining me now is cnn legal analyst, areva martin. areva, good evening to you.poke about this the affiliate koat receiving this affidavit. i mean, getting a look at the search warrant, i should say tonight. t says assistant director handed the prop gun to alec baldwin. the assistant director supposedly didn't know any live rounds were in that gun. they had been prepped by an armor. who is legally liable here? >> lots of questions, don. first of all, my just heart goes out to this young woman, her family, her son, her husband. can't imagine a tragedy like this. the reality is no one should die on a movie set. no one should have a live -- a gun with live ammunition and pointing it at someone unless there is some intention to harm that person. and we know alec baldwin had no intention to harm this young woman. but somebody made a mistake and somebody has to be held accountable for the assistant director to hand the gun to alec baldwin with live ammunition and to say he didn't know. well, it raises all kinds of questions about supervision and gun-handling procedures

. >> those charges, areva, would be for the person who was responsible for the custody of the gun andecessarily the shooter because if you look at the history of the movie business. the actor does not pick up the gun or whoever is supposed to do it. if that was followed, it was the person who did that part of it and not necessarily alec baldwin, am i correct? >> i don't want to go there, don. i don't want to agree with you on that. >> everybody i have spoken to in the movie business, the actor never picks up the gun. the actor is not responsible for what's in the gun. it's the armor and the person who's in charge of the props, unless if there is something weird that happens. >> the actor in this case is also the producer on this set, there is a question of responsibility that this producer had in terms of safety protocols on the set. >> is that a civil liability and that's not if he's a producer he's in charge of the production? >> possibly could be civil but could rise to the level of some kind of culpable. clearly everybody wants to see alec baldwin exonerated and not held him accou

i want to bring in josh campbell and areva martin. hello to both of you.osh, the district attorney says they're not ruling out criminal charges. what else do you know about their investigation? >> hi don. we're learning new information about the status of the state investigation here, don. an official with the district attorney's office tells me it's active at this hour. that they have not ruled out any criminal charges. that's important because we have been wondering about that question of liability. will any person or a group of people be responsible for the death of halyna hutchins? an official here with the district attorney's office saying their work continues and trying to sort that out. >> what is your reaction to the possibility of criminal charges in the case not being ruled out? >> not surprised at all, don, given all the information that's coming out, there is allegations that there were bullets on this set because there was lots of ammunition on the set and perhaps crew members were engaged in some kinds of target practice on their down time sh

cnn legal analyst areva martin joining us now. i can't wrap my head around this.oting, the evidence we've had to date is he didn't know that, he didn't have that information when he shot three individuals, killing two. the fact he didn't know they were involved in this activity makes that, in my opinion makes that evidence irrelevant. talk about loaded terms. to call someone a rioter or a lotter is a pejorative term that suggests they deserve to be shot and really deserved to die. incomprehensible decision by this judge. >> a judge can be influential on juries. by your read, is the judge assigning criminal culpability to the victims here? >> jim, he's definitely signaling something to these jurors. in addition to not allowing them to be called victims, he also has allowed in this video tape showing the police giving water to people like rittenhouse, suggesting again they were there with the approval of the police, and the prosecutors fought really hard to keep that evidence out. again, that doesn't have anything to do with rittenhouse's conduct on that day. it def

. >>> joining us now is legal analyst areva martin. thank you so much for joining us. alec baldwin said several times -- >> good morning, stephanie. >> alec baldwin -- good morning. he said several times he can't comment on the investigation. if he elaborates any more can he get himself in legal trouble by speaking about the case? >> well, absolutely, stephanie. what we know about this case from the district attorney in that press conference that she held this week is everything is on the table. she wouldn't rule out that alec baldwin or anyone else on that set is immune from criminal prosecution. this is a criminal investigation that's taking place in new mexico. i think he's smart and his wife was smart to try to prevent him from continuing to speak with the paparazzi about any details related to halyna's death. >> and of course, it's still early in the investigation and important to keep that in mind. now, alec baldwin is one of five producers on the movie. how would his role as a producer of the movie affect him legally? >> good question, stephanie. obviously as a

. >> let's get perspective from areva martin.n about whether a fair and impartial jury can be seated in this community. what do you think? >> i think it's going to be complicated, ana. we know in the high-profile cases it's very difficult to find people who haven't heard about the case, haven't read about the case, haven't seen the extensive media, but this case is more complicated than the typical high-profile case because not only do we have the disturbing video of the shooting of ahmaud arbery, we also have the prosecution of the original district attorney. we have that district attorney who played knavetism towards one of the defendants who are actually worked, gregory mcmichael, who had actually worked in her office. that delayed the actual indictment of these three defendants, and it wasn't, as you said in the opening until there was a huge public outcry and the release of that videotape that we actually saw any kind of action taken with respect to those defendants, so i think all of those issues are going to come into play

." >>> areva martin is out with the new book out next week "awakening."ies, leadership, and the lies we've been told. he has to answer questions under oath. he has been president of the united states for four of those years. this is an incredible shift in the power dynamic. not so much the specifics of this case. but if you're the other lawyer, how do you approach the former president? >> first of all, you know the president doesn't want to be there. he has a propensity for not telling the truth. and he is very combative. this is going to be videotaped. so your strategy may be to rile the president up to get him to become confrontational. to get him to refuse to answer questions all with the goal in mind of showing this videotape during this trial as an effort to gain points during this trial. one thing i think is important that was brought up in the tape, punitive damages are at steak. so what former president trump knew, whether he incited, encouraged these men to take the actions that they took is going to be a big point of this deposition. >>> you wan