joey jackson is here.when vice president kamala harris was on "good morning america" when asked about whether president biden have discussed re-election? -- so you're not discussing 2024? >> absolutely not. >> go to my question a at smerconish.com and answer the question, will joe biden seek re-election in 2024? and then...the present. and finally, ebenezer...the future! introducing the all-electric eqs. happy holidays from mercedes-benz. find your rhythm. your happy place. find your breaking point. then break it. every emergen-c gives you a pont blend of nutrients so you can emerge your best wi emergen-c. there's a different way to treat hiv. it's once-monthly injectable cabenuva. cabenuva is the only once-a-month, complete hiv treatment for adults who are undetectable. cabenuva helps keep me undetectable. it's two injections, given by a healthcare provider once a month. hiv pills aren't on my mind. i love being able to pick up and go. don't receive cabenuva if you're allergic to its ingredients or taking

joey jackson, thanks so much for joining us. >> always. more than two hour flight from guatemala clinging inside the plane's landing gear. video shows the 26-year-old man after he emerged from the wheel well. they gave him water until the paramedics and customs and border protection officers arrived on the scene. he has been taken to the hospital and it remains unclear how he got on the plane and remained undetected until they landed. >>> back in the 1920s there was a horrific plan to steal money and land from the people. this is life with lisa leng. she joins us next with a preview. so you do it because you have to? (naj) no, we do it because it's the right thing to do. we help clients enjoy a comfortable retirement. (other money manager) sounds like a big responsibility. (naj) one that we don't take lightly. it's why our fees are structured so we do better when our clients do better. fisher investments is clearly different. (tiger) this is the dimension of imagination. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ kiss the people you love. mark this moment in time, and cel

that's what we call justice in america. >> joey jackson, mark o'mara, thank you for coming out to play the night before thanksgiving. wishing you good things tomorrow. >> happy thanksgiving. >>> the justice system, it worked in this case. not for my next guest. he spent decades behind bar in one of the wrong cases. the newly exonerated free man joins me next. >>> providing power to reduce emissions, intelligence to eliminate waste, and collaboration tools that help the workplace and the planet. between meeting human needs and a sustainable future, there's a bridge. cisco, the bridge to possible. (tiger) this is the dimension of imagination. ♪ >> man: what's my safelite story? my truck...is my livelihood. so when my windshield cracked... the experts at safelite autoglass came right to me... with service i could trust. right, girl? >> singers: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪ ♪ limu emu... & doug ♪ ♪ superpowers from a spider bite? i could use some help showing the world how liberty mutual customizes their car insurance so they only pay for what they need. (gasps) ♪ did it work? on

joey jackson, everybody, when we come back. ♪ superpowers from a spider bite? could use some help showing the world how liberty mutual customizes their car insurance so they only pay for what they need. (gasps) ♪ did it work? only pay for what you need ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ spider-man no way home in theaters december 17th (tiger) this is the dimension of imagination. ♪ are you taking a statin drug to reduce cholesterol? it can also deplete your coq10 levels. i recommend considering qunol coq10 along with your statin medication. the brand i trust is qunol. do you take aspirin? plain aspirin could be hurting your stomach. new vazalore is the first liquid-filled aspirin capsule clinically shown to cause fewer ulcers than plain aspirin. vazalore is designed to help protect... releasing aspirin after it leaves your stomach... where it is absorbed to give you the benefits of life saving aspirin... to help prevent another heart attack or stroke. heart protection with your stomach in mind. try new liquid-filled vazalore. aspirin made amazing! ♪ ♪ you

that's what we call justice in america. >> joey jackson, mark o'mara, thank you for coming out to play the night before thanksgiving. wishing you good things tomorrow. >> happy thanksgiving. >>> the justice system, it worked in this case. not for my next guest. he spent decades behind bar in one of the wrong cases. the newly exonerated free man joins me next. no annual fee on any discover card. sustainability is essential to creating a better tomorrow. that's why cisco is committed to achieving net zero emissions by 2040. and we believe our smart buildings solutions can help. providing power to reduce emissions, intelligence to eliminate waste, and collaboration tools that help the workplace and the planet. between meeting human needs and a sustainable future, there's a bridge. cisco, the bridge to possible. we strip in the community garden. i've been stripping here for years. i strip before take-off. breathe right strips open your nose for relief you can feel right away, helping you take in air more easily, wherever you are. as a dj, i know all about customization. that's why i love l

joey jackson, everybody, when we come back. financial picture. a plan with tax-smart investing strategies designed to help you keep more of what you earn. this is the planning effect. do you take aspirin? plain aspirin could be hurting your stomach. new vazalore is the first liquid-filled aspirin capsule clinically shown to cause fewer ulcers than plain aspirin. vazalore is designed to help protect... releasing aspirin after it leaves your stomach... where it is absorbed to give you the benefits of life saving aspirin... to help prevent another heart attack or stroke. heart protection with your stomach in mind. try new liquid-filled vazalore. aspirin made amazing! >> man: what's my safelite story? my truck...is my livelihood. so when my windshield cracked... the experts at safelite autoglass came right to me... with service i could trust. right, girl? >> singers: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪ is struggling to manage your type 2 diabetes knocking you out of your zone? lowering your a1c with once-weekly ozempic® can help you get back in it

i want to bring in mark o'meara, and joey jackson. , what does it say about the prosecution's faith in their case that they have now asked for these lesser charges to be included? >> yeah, wolf, good to see with you. when you look at lesser included offenses, the standard is whether it's a reasonable view of the evidence that might support some charge other than the charges for which they're charged. generally it's not really a matter of confidence in the case, but whether the prosecutors believe they can sustain any type of conviction. generally what prosecutors do, they shoot a lot at you, and whatever sticks becomes problematic to you. i think the prosecutors have an uphill battle. it's one thing to argue whether rittenhouse should have been there in the first instance, whether he acted as law enforcement, but that's not the issue. the issue is whether he engaged in self-defense, and did so reasonably and thought his like was in immediate danger. >> yes, indeed. does it make sense from kyle rittenhouse's point of view that he agreed

joining us now to discuss, we have lawyer and jury consultant allen and joey jackson. peel back the curtain for us on what's going on in that jumry room. where do they begin? >> typically, jurors just start a free-flowing discussion about the case. it doesn't necessarily follow the verdict questions that they're supposed to answer because if you think about it, after not being able to speak about the case for so long, finally, they get to take a deep breath and there's a lot to talk about. so, what will probably initially happen, before they get into the verdict questions and into the meat of it all, there will be some perspectives offered, people will weigh in a little bit, and then slowly but surely factions will emerge, and pretty quickly, it will be evident what the split is in the jury, if there is a split, as time goes on, you'll see or the jury will see who's on what side and who's arguing on behalf for an acquittal, who's arguing on behalf of guilty verdict. all that gets thrown in and that leads the way for more of a focused discussion on the verdict questions

senior analyst joey jackson is joining us. racial makeup of this jury? >> i think it's problematic. i think certainly there are issues with respect to who is on that jury when you look at the demographics of the community. 70% white, 25% or 27% african-american, and you have one of the 12 jurors, right, 11 being white. i think that's a major concern, and i think it leads to the distrust that people hold for the system, particularly when you have the judge, wolf, saying it appears there is intentional discrimination, but let's start the trial, nanyway, and not giving any real remedy to the defense to remedy that situation. >> what does the law say, joey, about racial discrimination during the jury selection process? >> it says it's not permitted. what happens is you have the prosecution in order to get a conviction. you have the defense which seems to be, or appears to have done, right, a systematic preclusion/exclusion of african-americans. the law says you can exclude a juror for any reason or no reason as long as, wolf, it's

let's get perspective from legal analyst joey jackson also a criminal defense attorney. , appreciate having your perspective. natasha noted the pivotal moment in the trial. rittenhouse testifying in his own defense. i want you to listen to what his attorney said about that decision specifically. >> had to put him on, it wasn't a close call. in wisconsin if you don't put a client on the stand you're going to lose, period. >> i'm curious to get your reaction to that, joey. did his testimony ultimately help his case? it seems like it did. >> yeah, boris, good morning to you. so what happens is when jurors sit in judgment, there are always two narratives, right? there's the prosecution's narrative with respect to what they say happened and then there's the defense narrative. who would be more helpful to establish that narrative than the defendant himself. the problem is, when you put a defendant on the stand, you expose them to so much contribution, that's called cross-examination, when they have to answer tough questions and get pinned down in inconsistencies. in this partic

analyst joey jackson joins us now to break it down. are showing video of the protests and they are hearing the gunshots that killed joseph roserosenbaum, th first person who was killed. how powerful is that to a jury? >> good to be with you. it's very powerful but can be interpreted different ways. from a prosecutor's perspective, you have a lot happening. jacob blake was shot two days earlier, august 23rd, 2020, and as a result of that you had a lot of pandemonium. you had massive concerns by the community. that led to these protests, et cetera, were people were coming out. a jury is about, right, to listen, and they're listening to this testimony but trials are about taking a jury there. in taking them there, prosecutors are certainly going to show this videotape, and you can interpret that videotape the way prosecutors want you to, which is, look, all of this was happening, but he's the only one, the defendant, who shot and killed someone. why? then you have the defense that says you had all this pandemonium that led to his belief th

. >>> joining me are joey jackson as well as shan wu, a defense attorney and federal prosecutor. thank you so up many for joining me today. joey, i want to first go to you. as you heard sara saying, the jury requested to see the video, the moment that ahmaud arbery was killed. they also wanted to listen to the 911 call. what does that tell you about what this jury is thinking on this second day of deliberations? >> a couple of things, alex, it's good to be with you. when you look at the tape, what does it do? it takes you to the actual event. when you're looking at that, you're looking at the issue of self-defense. you wonder if the jurors are focusing in on whether the self-defense was justified or not. that's a major basis. when you look at that, you examine are the jurors asking, was there provocation on the part of the defendants. in the event there was provocation, you're not entitled to self-defense. were the defendants committing any felony, aggravated assault, when you use your trucks in order to assault mr. arbery, that would be a violation. therefore, you would not get t

criminal defense attorney, cnn legal analyst joey jackson.ilyn mosby, baltimore city state's attorney, prosecutor of the infamous freddie gray case, 2015. i start with you, counselor mosby, it's good to have you. >> nice to see you. >> dicey call, to put a defendant on the stand, especially in a double homicide case. was it the right move? >> so i think overall, i think it was very much the defense strategy to put kyle rittenhouse on the stand today and to portray him as the innocent young man, not looking for any trouble but rather invested into the safety of his community, that never wanted to resort to killing anybody. this was the reason, in my opinion, that we got that disingenuous, and this is my opinion, disingenuous breakdown on the stand that the jury could easily sympathize with. however, i was really, really, really disappointed with the judge that did not allow the prosecutor to call into question the sincerity of rittenhouse, his sentiments and credibility about the killings. i have to say honestly i felt like rittenhouse opened

joey jackson joins me now. he is also a criminal defense attorney. great to see you as always.ith the arbery case. what is your big takeaway for the opening day at the trial? >> pamela, good evening to you. the big takeaway is that you have two battling narratives. i think the prosecution did a lot in their opening statement to neutralize this citizens arrest law. how do they do that? well the citizen arrest law is only applicable if there is a crime and number two if it is committed in your immediate presence or that you have some other knowledge of. and you could only chase after someone if they committed a felony. so i think the prosecution in their opening statement spent a lot of time safing that, yes, arbery was in this construction site but he certainly wasn't engaged there any criminal activity as we look at the three defendants there. and then of course when it got to the defense case they spoke about very much the citizens arrest law, the issue of self-defense, the fact that they have to protect the neighborhood, they were concerned citizens, et cetera and so i think

let's bring in cnn legal analyst and defense attorney joey jackson. let's start here.>> right. >> and there are members of this jury who want some justice for these girls, the vehicle for that is ghislaine maxwell. how does a defense attorney navigate that, that variable? >> yeah. so with great difficulty is the answer. people want accountability, right. and when it comes to that accountability to the extent that he's not there, who is next up. who aided and who facilitated and groomed and assisted him in this endeavor. i think the attorneys will say she's just equally as a victim as these girls were. she's it no knowledge of this. she put her trust in him like everyone else. think about mr. epstein and how many people he fooled to gain the riches and the status that he made and the fact of the matter is she was one of his victims just like the others. i think we'll hear that the big thing to overcome is you're going to hear compelling testimony, from now women then little girls, with respect to chapter and verse. when did you meet miss maxwell, what did she do to you

cnn legal analyst and criminal defense attorney joey jackson joins us now. e told the prosecution could rest its case as soon as today, joey. it seems like this is moving very quickly, no? >> reporter: yeah. it really is, ana. good to be with you. remember, critical in a case like this, and the prosecution has presented 20-plus witnesses so far, really trying to bring the jury there which is what all the cases are about, bring the jury to that event, but i think the critical issue in a self-defense case is really three pillars. number one centers around the immediacy of the threat and in the event you're going to use deadly force as rittenhouse did was he under fear of immediate death or serious bodily injury, that's number one and that to this point seems to be the picture that the defense is painting that he was. the second pillar is really the proportionality of your conduct. did you act proportionate to the threat that was posed upon you. as you heard testimony yesterday with respect to someone pointing a gun ought, right, a gun, you have a gun, the propo

let's talk everything with our legal expert, laura coates, former federal prosecutor and joey jackson, former criminal defense attorney. thank you so much for being here. so much has happened early this morning and then this afternoon. your reaction to the prosecution's argument so far and the lunch break coming in the middle of the closing argument. >> you know, i would never want a break because i don't want any of the steam that i'm building and momentum of trying to be per situative of the jury to be interrupted in any way or detailed, and the prosecution has come out of the great trying to simplify this in a way that the jury instructions, boring but important, cannot do, which is to simplify and to say this case is about a 17-year-old outside of the community who shot two unarmed and wounded a third men and did so with a gun that wasn't even his. the idea of him being somebody who was lying about his motivation for wanting to be there, a thrill-seeking teenager who was a danger to society. but issue here comes, of course, down to the jury instructions, ana, which is the jury has

this man, joey jackson, knows the reward of putting a client on the stand. ed the state of play in georgia today. first of all, joey, thank you as always. >> thank you, chris. >> what was your overall take about whether or not it was the right move? >> look, i think in a situation like that i can't say that i would have done something differently. why? i think that the defense had a significant issue challenging the prosecution's case. always a game time decision as to whether or not you're going to put a client on the stand. in the event you think you're behind-u think he's got to explain why i had to avail myself of the citizen's arrest statute, you do it. why i had to engage in self-defense, you do it. why i think how i acted reasonably was appropriate, you do it. and i think they were so far behind it didn't matter. calculated decision? i think he tripped himself up quite substantially. and i think it hurt. but you know what? i can't say that i would have done something differently under these circumstances. >> let me show you with a couple pieces of soun

. >> let's discuss this with cnn legal analyst, joey jackson and dan adams, a former prosecutor in wisconsindefense attorney. gentlemen welcome, dan, let me start with you. this judge has a history of these unusual antics, and really sentences, ordered hiv, aids tests for sex workers, sentenced a shoplifter to tell store managers she was on supervision when she walked into a retail shop. you are there in milwaukee, is what we have watched over the last couple of days typical or even from your perspective, this is beyond? >> well, i think what we're seeing from bruce schroeder is a particular judge's particularities. every judge has their idiosyncrasies, and fortunately or unfortunately, we are seeing judge schroeder's in the bright ly lights of the media in this national trial. i don't think he's being unfair to one side or the other in this particular case. i think he's protecting the rights of the accused which ultimately is one of his jobs as the judge overseeing this case. >> joey, not unfair to one side or the other, what do you think? >> listen, at the end of the day, a judge, remember

i want to bring in criminal defense attorney joey jackson. always good to see you.at he's doing, this defense attorney. it's just stupid for him to be doing it because since when is it new to have supporters of a victim's family coming into a courtroom? >> ins knew at all but it's troubling to hear statements like that. it reminds you of why we're in that trial to begin with. a person running down the street and this is what occurs. it's part of a larger mind-set. what makes you think that's okay? you're a person who studies the law. you're an attorney, and you're there for an educated person. but it's more than that. we know courtrooms are public accommodations. we know courtrooms are come one, come all. courtrooms are about the rights of an individual to have a public and fair trial. you're saying and minimizing and otherwise suggesting there's certain people that should be excluded from that? but we know something else. we know jurors are given specific instructions. what are they? you focus that case on the evidence before you. i don't care about who's sobbing i

we'll talk more about this with joey jackson and deputy general. good morning to you both. starting with you. is this indictment a game changer? >> it is. of course for bannon. as everyone was emphasizing, a real game changer for the other witnesses. the we had owes and the clarks of the world. bannon is now done. he's in the criminal justice system. there is nothing he can do. it might take a couple of years to work itself out. that's all right. they want to be able to send this chilling message up the spines of any other witnesses thinking of trying to defy them. now the calculation has been radically altered and people are sweating on capitol hill who yesterday were thinking they could just walk through and not worry about a subpoena from the congress of the u.s. it will be interesting to see how they act. they've issued 35 subpoenas so far. we'll how this compels them to comply with these indictments. >> to you, bannon is expected to self-surrounder on monday. what i found surprising, these charges don't mean he will be forced to testify or produce these documents. righ

joining us now to discuss is cnn legal analyst, joey jackson. >> this is so heart breaking in so many ways, when someone is falsely accused and they continue to assert their innocence and you have a situation where they're in jail for just way longer than they should be and then you have statutes which are ill designed to compensate them. so it is first a human emotion, forgetting one minute as to the legal issues of it. but just the human emotion, my goodness, i'm sure so many people share that emotion. but we just have to do better and i think putting someone in jail, based upon witness identification, which is inherently flawed for so many reasons, you identifications flawed because of the nature of a crime, people are in shock, people are just, you know, really not in a position, when you're in such a horrified state, et cetera, to make the identifications, and then you had faulty forensic analysis with respect to a hair sample which was demonstrated to be 90% ineffective. on so many levels we have to be better as a system and shouldn't have

thanks so much for that report and let's get more on this with joey jackson and paul. t was difficult to sit through portions of martin's piece just now. we'll talk about some of this. at this point, which side do you think has made a more effective case? what do you think? >> yeah, jim, i think that the prosecution was really effective today for the following reasons. i really believe that there's this citizen's arrest law that the defendants are predicating their defense upon and i think what she's doing that is the prosecutor is really removing that from the table. how? she's arguing the law allows you to make such an arrest if a crime was committed in your presence or if you have immediate knowledge as to a crime. now the defense has been relying upon these neighborhood break-ins, things that have been happening, a neighborhood on edge, people concerned. but nothing with respect to a crime being committed in their presence. the three defendants. or that they had any immediate knowledge of. so hshe's hammering the point that the defendants will not get to avoil thems

top legal mind, joey jackson. nd of the show, eli, justice correspondent, for "the nation," who followed this case from the start. in deference to our new friend of show, joey, let's give ellie a crack at this. in terms of your observations, do you believe that lesser charges are going to be allowed? and do you believe this judge's demeanor will be heard about again on the prosecution? >> the judge has been biased towards rittenhouse, from the beginning. not of the trial, of the entire case. i'm talking about his pretrial motions and his refusal to force rittenhouse to adhere to his bail reverse terms. and that's carried through to the trial, where on the last day of the trial, rittenhouse's expert witness got a clapping from the jury pool because the judge ordered them to give a cheer for veterans on veterans day. it happened that the expert witness was a veteran. so, the judge's demeanor has been dbiased throughout. does that lead to an appeal? not if there's an acquittal. we have a system if you are acquitted of

joey jackson weighs in on what to expect inside the courtroom. >> i think they'll use the victims that young as 14 in demonstrating she was complicit and she was an enabler. she will argue that she was very much manipulated by epstein herself and she had no knowledge or idea to what was occurring, what his intentions are, et cetera. i think those narratives will be competing. >> while maxwell faces up to 70 years in prison if convicted of all six charges, she denies any wrongdoing. >>> another high profile trial starting later today with jesse smollett. he claimed he was a victim of a hate crime. the former "empire" actor pleaded not guilty to charges and has repeatedly denied making up or orchestrating the attack. he faces up to three years in prison if convicted. >>> as december approaches, people are scrambling to get what they need to make their holidays bright. people looking to deck the halls with a real christmas tree are in the same situation. >> they had, oh, my goodness, maybe 1/3 of the supply that we've seen in past years and they're tiny. they're cute but they're like char

i want to bring in our legal analyst and criminal defense attorney, joey jackson. that testimony in this trial has concluded, do you think the defense did enough to convince the jury that rittenhouse was acting out of self-defense? >> i really do, wolf. ba based upon the pure facts of what we've seen. we can have the debate as to whether rittenhouse should have been there. he's not a police officer. he's not a technician. why is he there in the first instance, that's a separate issue. that's not what the jury's being there to decide. those political questions are left to debate. with respect to the facts, i think what the defense did is three important things. by putting him on the stand, wolf, they humanized him. they want to present to the jury a person who has feelings. who indicates that hey, i didn't want to do anything, i didn't want to kill anyone i needed to. we saw him breaking down into tears. it was prepared and effective. pivoting to issue two with respect to explaining. why was it that i had to shoot one person? because they were pointing a gun at me.

attorney for the middle district of georgia and joey jackson, he's a criminal defense attorney and cnnnalyst. glad to have you both. i can't help but shake my head when i hear the description of how the defense tried to characterize the victim in this case. michael, let me bring you in. just the prosecution's rebuttal is left tomorrow and this case in the hands of the jury. i want to know what you think of the closing arguments today and what side do you think was most effective? >> i'm glad to be on. i think the prosecution carried the day in the arguments. i think she was methodical when she went through dismantling the argument of self-defense. i wasn't particularly impressed with the defense closing arguments as you know sometimes you dance with what bring ya when you're sitting on that side of the aisle. i thought the efforts to make arbery out as somehow like he was a villain until the neighborhood was a mistake and i thought that talking about the neighborhood sort of in this way we want our neighborhood the way we want it and saying as long as the neighborhood is us, i thought

cnn legal analyst joey jackson standing by to discuss when we come back. ♪ ♪ there are beautiful ideasin in the dark. but with our new multi-cloud experience, you have the flexibility you need to unveil them to the world. ♪ (tiger) this is the dimension of imagination. ♪ ♪ at t-mobile for business, unconventional thinking means we see things differently, so you can focus on what matters most. whether it's ensuring food arrives as fresh as when it departs... being first on the scene when every second counts... or teaching biology without a lab. we are the leader in 5g and a partner who delivers exceptional customer support and 5g included in every plan. so, you get it all, without trade-offs. unconventional thinking, it's better for business. bye mom. my helpers abound, i'll need you today. our sleigh is now ready, let's get on our way. a mountain of toys to fulfill many wishes. must be carried across all roads and all bridges. and when everyone is smiling and having their fun i can turn my sleigh north because my job here is done. it's not magic that makes more holiday deliveries to ho

. >> cnn legal analyst joey jackson on the rittenhouse trial there. >>> former u.s. president donald trump has called a small victory in his efforts to keep documents related to the white house other way from congressional investigators. cnn's evan perez reports. >> reporter: a federal appeals court is pausing the release of hundreds of pages of trump white house records from the national archives to the house committee investigating the january 6 attack on the u.s. capitol. the three-judge panel granted former president donald trump's delay request while the court decides whether trump can keep secret documents that he says are protected by executive privilege. now, this is an unusual legal battle because president joe biden has waived privilege, citing the extraordinary events of january 6 to find out what happened and how to prevent another disruption to the peaceful transfer of power. three judges, two appointed by president obama and one appointed by president biden wrote, the purpose of this administrative injunction is to protect the court's jurisdiction to ad

cnn legal analyst and criminal defense attorney, joey jackson and shimon who is on the ground for us in kenosha. joey, how do you think the defense has done at making kyle rittenhouse seem justified for using deadly force. >> don't get braizen. they've done excellent. putting aside this emotional piece, which was very powerful, people will debate was it real, the reality is i say they did well for the following reasons. number one, he explained himself with respect to why force was necessary. that when a gun was being raised at him, there was a witness who testified that lived and he came in and testified he shot him in the bicep. he said there was a gun pointed at me, i was in fear for my life. mr. rosenbaum, who grabbed his rifle, he explained the grabbing of the rifle. three, he explained how a skate board was being used as a bat to hit him. last point and that is that we always talk about defendants with respect to conscious of guilt. they do something and run away. he actually turned himself into after the fact, there by negating that issue of guilt. talking about panic attacks,

we have a senior trial counsel attorney with joey jackson law and a criminal defense attorney as well and glenn kirschner, an msnbc legal analyst. i want to start with you. you said, even if the jury was not entirely convinced of the persuasiveness of rittenhouse's self-defense claim, they may not have been able to reject it beyond a reasonable doubt, thus a not guilty verdict. is there a fix for this? >> i guess the only fix for it, kendis, is if legislatures retool the self-defense law because right now it's an extremely high burden. once there has been some evidence introduced at trial that a defendant may have acted in self-defense, it's up to the prosecutor to disprove self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt, and that's a real challenge as we just saw play out in the rittenhouse case. i've heard defense attorneys a hundred times make an argument that goes something like this. ladies and gentlemen of the jury, you may think my client is guilty, but that means you must vote not guilty. you may think it's very likely that my client is guilty. that means you must vote not guilty becau

joey jackson, laura coats. laura, what do you think? did the prosecutor meet his burden?> you know, i don't think they met their burden on all of the counts and here's why. in wisconsin it's a very low threshold for a defendant to demonstrate some aspect of self defense. the prosecution always has the burden of proof as you well know but once the self defense claim is asserted then the prosecution has to disprove that the person was entitled to use that and frankly the two people to give you the frank and forthright explanation as to whether they themselves were acting in self defense against kyle rittenhouse died and the third person survivoring member of the victim unit is somebody that had a gun in the hand, a testimony that a -- more than anything else so at the end in the closing argument they made the strongest case about the notion of kyle rittenhouse being an active shooter and if anybody had an access to self defense it was everyone there trying to subdue an active shooter that did kill again and then rebutting fully this idea of self defense, entitled to kyle ri

. >> joining me now is cnn legal analyst and criminal defense attorney joey jackson and former new york there was video played of arbery's death. during that time his mother was in the courtroom sobbing. do you think there's potential impact in that? >> there is huge impact on that. we have both tried murder cases as prosecutors and defense attorneys. usually the family member leaves the courtroom before graphic video or photographs are displayed concerning the deceased. there is always fear there would be a reaction, as there was in this case. in this case the mother had every right to remain in that courtroom, and she did. and when she reacted to her son being shot to death, i think that was a i big, big moment in the trial. and it had to have a huge effect on the jury. . >> joey. >> yeah, there's no question about it, john. the jurors will be instructed by the judge to leave the emotion at the door, judge the case predicated on the facts approximate circumstance as they come out before them, right. having said that, we're human beings. there is a child that is lost here. an adult. no

and joining us now is marilyn moosby and joey jackson, a criminal defense attorney. thanksgiving. thanks for making time for us today. marilyn, i want to start with you and the defense in this case for the three men, their lawyers say they're going to appeal. at what point do you think that has any chances of being successful? >> so, now that they've been convicted of these murder charges and they're facing life, we know that the judge will ulti ultimately decide whether or not he's going to impose parole. the defendants will likely appeal. they'll allege that the judge committed some form of error in excluding certain evidence at trial, which they'll argue is necessary for their defense. in this particular case, i believe they sought to introduce ahmaud arbery's criminal record. there was, they sought to introduce the fact that he was on pro bagprobation at the time was killed. there were reports of his mental health they wanted to introduce and they were even seeking to introduce the use of force expert that the judge denied. so i don't think that either any of tha

i want to bring in cnn analyst and criminal defense attorney joey jackson .fore them? >> it is difficult, wolf. it wasn't made easier by the judge's jury instructions. they were very confusing. i'm not sure that the jury asked the judge for clarification right away. it means they're doing their jobs. there are also other difficult issues to tackle, like provocation. was rittenhouse the initial aggressor. they have to show he was doing an illegal act, something unlawful. when the court got rid of the charge of underage possession of an ar-15, then what is the illegal act? it's according to the prosecutors when republican party raised the ar-15 not at rosenbaum but at zaminsky and then the two of them chased rosenbaum afterwards. it's going to be up to the jury to decipher these hazy videos to determine whether or not the defendant raised that ar-15 at these guys. provocation is the linchpin to the prosecutor's case. >> joey, does the inclusion of some lesser charges make the jury's job easier or harder? >> i think it makes it harder, right? here is why, wolf.

joey jackson joins us. i'm sure you've taken part in jury selection before.as a certain number of objections, some unexplained, that they could use. how could a final result end up so skewed and by the way not reflecting the percentages of the local population? >> it's problematic. good morning to you. listen, the bottom line is that you can exercise as you mentioned challenges. when you're selecting a jury, the prosecution has a certain number of challenges where you can take someone off the jury for any reason or no reason. the defense has the same thing except if the reason is discriminatory. usually it's called a batson challenge, and usually it's engaged in by the defense in order to protect their clients' rights to ensure that the panel, the veneer, is diverse. in this case, it's a reverse challenge. the prosecution is saying, wait a second, why is it that you struck 11, used 11 strikes to strike african-americans? more troubling as we saw the demographic of the community is 70% white, 25% or so african-american. but jury, you're entitled to a fair tria

joey jackson and david ehrenberg, chris stewart, great to see all of you. we appreciate it. thank you so much. >> next we'll dig deeper into the guilty verdicts with all three members, yes all three membersch prosecution team. there they are. their standing by to join us live, next. hey, it's ryan reynolds. as owner of mint mobile, my goal is to spend as little as possible on things like commercials so we can pass more savings to customers. and when i saw what they're charging for holiday-themed stock videos these days, well, you can see what i decided to do. and that means we can afford to offer the samsung galaxy a12 and premium wireless together for just fifteen dollars a month. so let's all just use our imaginations, 'kay? just imagine me someplace festive no, no, don't make it weird. the dove beauty bar makes my skin feel fresh. i've encouraged serena my best friend to switch. feels moisturized and clean. my friend stefanie, her skin was dry. i'm like girl you better get you some dove. she hooked me up. with a quarter moisturising cream, dove cleans effectively and care

criminal defense attorney joey jackson with us now as well as former u.s. stant attorney for the southern district of new york, elie honig. joey, i want to ask you first and foremost, when we see these jurors, and we know the defense was pivotal in the makeup of these jurors, they were able to remove eight potential black jurors, i think a lot of people look at this and they think, how does this happen? how do you answer that? >> yeah, christi, good morning to you. good morning, elie. it happens because you had a situation here where the judge acknowledged that, in his view, there was intentional discrimination, but failed to faction a remedy. in the event you have a court indicating this is the appearance that something is amiss, i think then you are incumbent as a court to do something about it, right? clearly you acknowledge there's a problem. so, that's how it happens. it happens prior to that because both sides have what are called challenges. you can strike a juror for any reason or no reason at all, provided that reason is not on discriminatory. so, h

joey jackson, we could see the jury get this case tomorrow, we're told so there is a lot tso i will have you back to discuss further. >> looking forward to. >>> president biden sounding the alarm on inflation after initially downplaying the rise in prices in july, but is there anything he can do? plus, houston police and lawyers for travis scott now pointing fingers at each other over who should have stopped the congress. it comes as lawsuits over the tragedy keep piling up. >>> and nearly is-1 million kids ages 5 to 11 now have the covid vaccine shot. is this the key to getting out of the pandemic? it feels too good to be true. it's kicking back and relaxing as we pick up your car. and when you get paid on the spot, it feels like scoring big. you know the feeling. you just never imagined you could get it from selling your car. well, with carvana, you can. experience the new way to sell a car. my plaque psoriasis... ...the itching ...the burning. the stinging. my skin was no longer mine. my psoriatic arthritis, made my joints stiff, swollen... painful. emerge tremfyant™. with tremfya®, a

. >> joining me now, legal analyst and criminal defense attorney joey jackson, as well as assistant professorf law at brooklyn college, alexis ho. the prosecution had more work to do in the closing arguments. as the jury heads to the deliberation room in a few hours, what's the most important thing they're taking with them from the prosecution? >> thank you for the opening question. the prosecution really delivered. i think they used the weekend well to bring their narrative together. what they did was deliver a compelling story arc. that's what jurors want to hear. they want the evidence. they want the witnesses to make some sort of sense. their overarching narrative was you had this person coming in from outside, not defending their own property, not defending their own family, nor their home, bringing a gun, looking for a fight. then they peppered it with the highlights of evidence jurors saw, reinforcing repeatedly their story line and the story arc. we saw the drone footage. we saw it when rittenhouse shot, initially, mr. rosenbaum. he was on the ground. he wasn't lunging or attacking. o

. >> let's bring in cnn legal analyst and criminal defense attorney, joey jackson.o the opening statements in this case, do you think the defense raised the possibility of doubt in some of the juror's minds? >> it's still too early so tell, but they have three significant problems they need to be worried about not with standing the opening, which is just a preview of what the evidence has shown. problem one is the citizen's arrest law. in order to use that, you have to demonstrate there was a crime committed in your presence or that you had immediate knowledge of. that's at issue. was there any crime committed? the prosecution indicated that he was seen on this cape, that was ahmaud arbery, but he was just milling about at this site. he wasn't doing anything of a criminal variety. with respect of a citizen's arrest, if it's a felony, you can detain. if you're not doing anything, how does it amount to a crime much less a felony. the second problem, the notion that law applies they have the burden of overcoming the issue of was it self-defense? were you in immediate f

. >> joining me now, cnn legal analyst and criminal defense attorney joey jackson.nn senior analyst and former prosecutor elie honig. we'll get to the long dirty toenails issue in a moment. first, i want to address what we're going to see this morning, which is a rebuttal from the prosecution. what exactly is that, and why is it important that it is happening this morning? >> a rebuttal is the final word. it's the prosecutor's chance to address and, hopefully if you're the prosecutor, correct all the things the defense lawyers in this case, three of them, just argued. now, i think there is an interesting tactical advantage to the prosecutor to getting to go this morning. when i was giving rebuttals as a prosecutor, i liked to stand up immediately, before the defense lawyer hit the seat, and said, everything that guy said is bogus. however, there is a practical issue with the 4:30 p.m. rebuttal. you have a jury that's been sitting there all day. they're exhausted. they've heard more information than any human can process. they're probably thinking, i have to get to t

. >>> joining me now is criminal defense attorney joey jackson and stacy richmond.ndant on the stand. now that we have been through it and seen it all, how do you evaluate that decision? >> hindsight 2020. you evaluate and see how the case is going. i think the defense made no headway with respect to the actual people's case, right? in the event that you're a defense attorney, you want to challenge the case, raise reasonable doubt. they didn't do that. you have to do the hail mary. i think there are three. number one, explain if you're in what led you to that critical moment. why you availed yourself of the citizens arrest law. everything going crazy. he's the guy, we had to chase him. number two is interesting. the judge denied the use of an expert witness as it relates to use of force. essentially they used this witness as an expert witness. he was talking about the use of force, escalation, de-escalation. i think the third thing they tried to do in a tricky way is impwaou him with the authority of law enforcement, trying to paint him as law enforcement. the reali

let's bring in now cnn legal analyst areva martin, joey jackson and senior legal analyst elie honig. we've done this often enough where i know that you will say juries like to be told a story. they need a narrative. what is the story in the last hour and 17 minutes that this prosecutor, thomas binger, is trying to tell this jury? >> you read my mind, victor. i asked the exact same question. so far, this is really subpar cross-examination. they're not going to the heart of the case here. what happened. they may be getting there right now but what happened in those crucial moments, seconds right before rittenhouse. >> i'm going back into the courtroom. >> ipads made by apple have artificial intelligence in them that allow things to be viewed through three dimensions and log rhythms. >> log rhythms? i don't understand it all either. and it uses artificial intelligence or their log rhythms to create what they believe is happening. so this isn't actually enhanced video. this is apple's ipad programming creating what it thinks is there. not what necessarily is there. and i don't know what'