SCHNEIDERMAN: CUOMO VS. VANCE

Is there a conflict of interest in the investigation of the Eric Schneiderman scandal? Manhattan District Attorney Cy Vance, Jr. is reportedly unhappy with Governor Andrew Cuomo’s decision to not let him investigate the allegations against the former Attorney General. We have the latest.

Check out our extended interview with Wendy Murphy below.

Aired on May 09, 2018.

TRANSCRIPT

> GOOD EVENING AND WELCOME TO METROFOCUS.

I'M JENNA FLANAGAN.

NEW DETAILS TONIGHT ABOUT THE SCANDAL SURROUNDING NOW FORMER ATTORNEY GENERAL ERIC SCHNEIDERMAN.

A FIFTH WOMAN DESCRIBES WHAT HE CALLS A DISTURBING FIRST AND LAST DATE THAT INVOLVED LOTS OF DRINKING AND AGGRESSIVE I HAVE BEHAVIOR PROCESS.

THIS AS GOVERNOR CUOMO APPOINTS MADELINE SING AS AS THE PROSECUTOR ON THE INVESTIGATION THAT THE NOW DISGRACED ATTORNEY GENERAL ASSAULTED FOUR WOMEN.

TAKING IT AWAY FROM CY VANCE WHO WAS NONE TAO HAPPY WITH THE DECISION AND CRIES OF POLITICLY MOTIVATION.

BUT IS THERE A LEGAL CASE ERIC SCHNEIDERMAN?

SHOULD WE QUESTION THE TIMING OF THE ALLEGATIONS?

AND HOW WILL THIS HE SAID/SHE SAID PLAY OUT IN A COURT OF LAW?

HERE TO BREAK DOWN THE COMPLICATED CASE IS FORMER SEX CRIMES PROSECUTOR WENDY MURPHY.

WENDY, WELCOME TO THE PROGRAM.

GOOD TO BE WITH YOU, JENNA.

FIRST, I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THIS JURISDICTION OF THE CASE.

IS THERE REALLY A PRESS DEN FOR CY VANCE TO BE SO UPSET.

NO, NO, NO.

THIS IS A PERFECT CASE FOR A SPECIAL PROSECUTOR TO BECOME INVOLVED FOR A LOT OF REASONS, INCLUDING THAT SCHNEIDERMAN WAS INVOLVED IN CHALLENGING CY VANCE'S DECISION NOT TO GO AFTER HARVEY WEINSTEIN AND EVEN THAT ALONE WOULD BE GROUNDS ENOUGH TO OF SOMEONE ENTIRELY INDEPENDENT TAKE OVER.

BUT THIS REALLY ISN'T A REGIONAL PROSECUTORIAL CASE RUN OF THE MILL SEND IT TO THE D.A. CASE.

THIS IS THE CHIEF LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER FOR THE STATE OF NEW YORK FACING EXTREMELY SERIOUS ALLEGATIONS.

IT SHOULD BE HANDLED BY SOMEONE ABOVE THE FRAY AND ABOVE ALL POSITIONS OF POWER WITH REGARD TO LAW ENFORCEMENT IN NEW YORK AND IT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO.

THE SPECIAL PROSECUTOR IS THE ONLY OPTION.

SO TURNING NOW OF COURSE TO WHAT MAY BE HAPPENING WITH CHARGES BEING FILED, ET CETERA, FIRST OF ALL, IS THERE SOMETHING TO BE SAID ABOUT QUESTIONING THE TIMING OF THIS ARTICLE COMING OUT?

ERIC SCHNEIDERMAN, AS WE KNOW HAD BEEN VERY INVOLVED IN SUBPOENAS AND SUING THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION, ET CETERA.

FOR A LOT OF PEOPLE IT SEEMS ODD THAT NOW THIS ARTICLE COMES OUT.

WE'D ALL LIKE TO TALK TO RONAN FARROW ABOUT TIMING, AND WHO SPARKED WHOM TO MAKE THE FIRST CALL.

UM-HUM.

WAS IT POLITICALLY MOTIVATED?

IT'S A FAIR QUESTION.

ON THE OTHER HAND -- THERE IS NO DOUBT ABOUT IT THAT SCHNEIDERMAN GOING AFTER TRUMP RAISED A LOT OF POLITICAL HACKLES FOR PEOPLE.

BUT SCHNEIDERMAN GONE DOESN'T MEAN THE ENTIRE NEW YORK ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE IS NOW NOT GOING TO HAVE A ROLE TO PLAY WITH REGARD TO TRUMP OR ANYTHING ELSE THAT'S ALREADY BEEN GOING ON.

SO I THINK IT'S A LITTLE BIT NAIVE THINKING THAT GETTING RID OF SCHNEIDERMAN MEANS THAT ANYTHING THAT MAY HAVE BEEN POLITICALLY MOTIVATED IS SOMEHOW NOW NOT GOING TO CONTINUE.

THAT'S WHERE -- THAT'S WHERE I THINK THE ISSUE ALMOST DOESN'T MATTER.

IT'S IMPORTANT TO ASK THE QUESTIONS, WAS THIS POLITICALLY MOTIVATED?

BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY IT MIGHT NOT MATTER.

AND THAT IS EXACTLY SOME OF THE PUSHBACK I WAS SEEING AT LEAST ON SOCIAL MEDIA THAT SCHNEIDERMAN IS NOT THE OFFICE.

THEY ARE NOT ONE IN THE SAME IF HE IS GONE THE OFFICE CONTINUES.

BUT MOVING TOWARDS THE ACCUSERS, NOW WHAT WE READ IN THE ARTICLE -- IT WAS SOLID REPORTING ON THE PART OF THE NEW YORKER.

AND THE STORIES WERE VERIFIED.

BUT DO THEY STAND UP IN A COURT OF LAW.

THAT'S ALWAYS A JURY QUESTION, ISN'T IT.

SOME JURORS MIGHT SAY THEY BELIEVE THE WOMEN.

SOME MIGHT SAY THEY DON'T.

BUT THAT'S WHY WE HAVE JURIES.

YOU GIVE THE JURY THE OPTION OF BELIEVING BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT OR NOT.

PARTICULARLY WITH CRIMINAL CHARGES.

THE WORD OF A WOMAN IS O ONE WOMAN IS ALWAYS SUFFICIENT TO BRING A CRIMINAL CHARGE.

THE DECISION ABOUT CREDIBILITY IS SOMETIMES VETTED BY THE PROSECUTOR IN ADVANCE.

BUT MOST OF THE TIME THE RESPONSIBLE PROSECUTOR WILL SAY THIS IS A RESPONSIBLE CITIZEN WHO REPORTED A CRIME.

THIS PERSON SHOULD HAVE THEIR DAY IN COURT AND LET A JURY FIGURE IT OUT.

IN TERMS OF THE CHARGES, I THINK THAT'S AN INTERESTING QUESTION IS NOW WHAT WE KNOW ABOUT WHAT THE WOMEN HAVE SAID, STUMG THEY'RE TELLING THE TRUTH, WHAT CHARGES COULD WE SEE?

AND UNFORTUNATELY -- I'VE SAID THIS SO MANY OTHER OCCASIONS BUT NEW YORK LAW STINKS WITH VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN.

IT'S BAD.

IT'S INCREDIBLERY DIFFICULT TO PROVE RAPE AND WE DON'T HAVE THE CHARGES HERE.

BUT THAT'S AN EXAMPLE WHY NEW YORK NEEDS TO GET ITS ACT TOGETHER AND REFORM THE LAWS PERTAINING TO VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN.

BUT IN TERMS OF JUST THE FACTS REPORTED IN THE NEW YORKER STORY I THINK WE HAVE SOME HOPE OF SEEING A CRIMINAL CHARGE FOR WHAT WE -- WE SHOULD BE CALLING STRANGULATION.

THERE WERE A COUPLE OF ALLEGATIONS OF STRANGULATION.

UNDER NEW YORK LAW THEY CALL IT RESTRAINING BREATH OR SOME OTHER YOU'VE MISTIC WAY.

THAT WAS A LAW THAT SCHNEIDERMAN HIMSELF DRAFTED OR AT LEAST PUSHED THROUGH THE LEGISLATURE.

Y HE HE DID IN 2010.

I'M NOT SURE I WOULD CALL IT IRONIC SO MUCH AS STRATEGIC.

WHEN A GUY IS DOING BAD THINGS BEHIND CLOSED DOORS WHAT BETTER DEFENSE AGAINST EVER BEING HELD ACCOUNTABLE THAN TO ATTACH YOURSELF TO THE CAUSE OF PROTECTING WOMEN?

IT'S JUST SO TYPICAL.

MEN BEHAVING BADLY PUTTING UP A FALSE FRONT TO INSULATE THEMSELVES.

BECAUSE, LOOK I'M SURE THE WOMEN WERE THINKING NOT ONLY IS HE THE CHIEF LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER IN NEW YORK, HE HAS BEEN THE NAME AND THES FACE OF ALL THE ANTI-VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN NISH HE WAS?

WHO IS BELIEVING ME?

AND IF THEY DO WILL THEY WANT TO TAKE HIM DOWN GIVEN HE IS DOING SO MUCH GOOD FOR WOMEN AS A CLASS.

THAT'S WHY I FIND IT NOT ONLY IRONIC BUT PROBABLY STRATEGIC AND DESPICABLE AT THAT.

THERE IS A LOT INVOLVED, THE REACTION WITH THE STORY I THINK HAS GARNERED A LOT OF EMOTION.

AND THAT'S A VALID ONE YOU BROUGHT UP.

I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR JOINING US ON THE PROGRAM AND GIVING US SOME CLARITY INTO WHAT EXACTLY STANDS IN COURT OF LAW AND WHAT OF COURSE WILL BE PUBLIC OPINION THAT WE'LL HAVE TO WRESTLE WITH.

YOU'RE WELCOME.

THANK YOU.

©2022 WNET. All Rights Reserved. 825 Eighth Avenue, New York, NY 10019

WNET is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization. Tax ID: 26-2810489