paul callahan who has been following this as well. paul, your reaction to the judge and jury. >> it is a real shocker. given the crime itself. prosecutors proved a crime that was cruel, it was premeditated it was calculated. the jury unanimously found that aggravating circumstances existed which would support the imposition of the death penalty. so it special sounds like this jury was going to impose the death penalty. but the last question had to do with mitigating circumstances. and apparently one or possibly more of the jurors thought there was some mitigating circumstances. we don't know what mitigating circumstance they're talking about. although the aggravating circumstances are outlined in detail. they are outlined in detail. the circumstance of what mitigating circumstance existed, we don't know. finally, under florida law, if you don't have a unanimous decision that the aggravating circumstances outweigh the mitigating circumstances, then the death penalty cannot be imposed. so obviously one or more of these jurors thought th

i want to bring in jean casarez and paul callahan.ve you been following this trial since it began. what stood out to you in the fact that as we talked about before the break, this jury deliberated for 24 hours if that. >> that is right. and one of aspects of deliberation is to go through all of the evidence because you're looking to see if the aggravating and mitigating factors are there. this is a balancing act for the jury. they're looking at the aggravating factors which is everything carlos told us about the scene there in miami and also gating factors. why he should not get the death penalty and what the defense brought out to the jury lifetimes of struggles in school and at home, a born to a woman who abused drugs and alcohol while she was pregnant and incorrect medical diagnosis that his brain was not formed at 19 years old when this shooting took place, struggled with medication and mental disorders so the jury has to balance this out for a young man that they have looked the every day since april. jury selection time. >> and

. >> joining me now, paul callahan and jeff zeleny. so there is a lot to get to. i want to go back to the letter that we got just a short time ago. this letter from the former president which really i guess is just re playing his greatest hits if you read through it. it is a lengthy response, it does not directly address the subpoena, what do you see in this letter? >> well, look, the letter, if you read it, it is a bit of a time warp. you may think it is in the days an weeks after the november 2020 election or in the month of december of that year. but it is not. we've learned so much from the committee's work over the past year, learned so much information from the doj and what the attorney general, other judges across the country have said there simply was not election fraud enough to overturn the election. so the president, the form he president started out in all caps saying the election was stolen. it simply isn't true. so he included attachments of photos of crowds from that day. it is largely beside the point. is the question is, is he going to comply with