Transcript for Attorney Dan Herbert: ‘Today was a very good day for the prosecution’
And for more analysis we have our defense attorney and former Chicago police officer mr. Daniel Herbert thank you so much for joining us. Let's let's a very general question. How Russian do you think in today's prosecution witnesses helped the State's case in particular their burden to prove that this wasn't just unauthorized but amounted to murder. There was very good day from prosecution. The witnesses that they called com they're really going to go a long way to help the prosecution. Prove damage that mr. Jordan committed a murder. Essentially. The prosecution has proven that it. The actions and it mister Truman committed and we're not authorized. Which allows the prosecutors argue that. I sincere or not all rights acts then. Mr. joins intent was not chew properly detain and arrest Steve but ran third to commit a felony and in this case would be assault. Which would give him to that second degree murder. Conviction of third seeking. Then you've defended police officers you've been one yourself. Is it a strong defense to argue their real life situation can run very differently than a training exercise especially in cases like this one. Well it's a question Lindsey reader there's no question and it. Their video it is different then well what the actual human eye is seen. Video the end it's nature's two dimensional it distorts images it doesn't properly show. Distances. And important in this case it doesn't. Actor leader picked. The level of resistance that's being utilized. However. Jurors right now are conditioned to believe. That video was very strong compelling inaccurate evidence and I think it's to say what time. Four cost is defense lawyers to object early show that video doesn't pick things he did certain critical ways. Seeing you would maintain essentially that. You can't necessarily trust what your eyes are seeing. Yeah eight in situations you know you know the video us is rarely sometimes it was not a audio. It's rarely taken from the perspective. All of the officer mr. defendant in this case army and there are certain inherent flaws with video. Now that peace. This video problem is relatively clearer the end it's a situation where long distance the end. Images being distorted. Aren't dead they're human issue here. The defense also argues that the crowd of bystanders that they were distracting and threatening to Daryn chill wind do you buy that do you think that a jury will. I don't being in I don't necessarily believe that the jury will. Here big difference clearly has to explain why it is our intention in more importantly. These submission and the use of forest lasted for. Over nine minutes and really the only way that they have. Founder way to do that is by saying that it. The problem was somehow. On distorting mr. draw one's perception in distorting. His work impacting his sphere. I don't think it's going to be very compelling here because as I've sent. You don't video shows that this was anything but it out of control situation colors and yes of awesome children in this case and his fellow officers. Mr. Gerber appreciate your insight thank you for your time. Thank you.
This transcript has been automatically generated and may not be 100% accurate.