Transcript for It took ‘perfect storm’ to get this verdict: Legal expert
Shawna Lloyd civil rights attorney with a Cochran firm in Florida thanks so much for joining us Shawna. After following this case so closely what's your reaction to today's verdicts. I think my reaction as as black and brown person in America I think that this was a step in the right direction icing sacked as was needed for that community and for people being disenfranchised. Communities that have been seeing this everyday. As a civil rights attorney who sees these types of videos every day. It concerns me that we needed to perfect storm that was this case till you get this type of the verdicts. It sold the type of weakness is that had to be there are 911 dispatcher in EMT. An MMA fighter it's looking at a child by standard it took all of these people and these experts to come together to get this is verdicts when icy body can't videos from people that have been she. Heard and an abuse by officers that. Hasn't passed that have been you know disfigured they can harms. We don't get anywhere near this level of justice so although I am I feel good that the jury. Was able to comes to a conclusion that was supported by the facts I think that we need to be mindful that. This needs to be a lesson that this is happening the video is there and we need to see that reflected in the legal system. More Austin and not just seen cases where we have the perfect scent of witnesses and the right expert so. I'm kind of encouraged but as a civil rights attorney indefinitely and cheating and I scored on how this actually changes there are legislative. And through the laws that are being an active. May have made a lot about the fact that the jury deliberated for only ten minutes. Hours why do you think that they reached its verdict didn't hit such a relatively short amount of time. Whenever we've gone back to uphold juries the first thing they start early days you know do we agree that there's innocent or guilty so here clearly they started without having to have that debate the clearly each individually chain man. At a certain set plays and then they had to address charges. So I think that's where you seen this short time for deliberation it seems that they had already come in similarly situated with each other's opinions and then they were going through the charges. This is of course a diverse jury was five men seven women six flights six of black or multiracial members. I do you think. The jury make up may have made a difference here. Absolutely I think whenever you're looking at a jury that's as diverse as this one is in everything from age. To raise socioeconomic. Background profession. I think what you see is you can't shield consensus is that are more reflective. Of the general population of the environment that were in because you happen to burst senators persons that are coming to make this decision. I think it's why it's so important that each person participate in. The jury duty process at hands. That they do partake in it because it is being. Critical to how voices from different backgrounds deciding all manner of cases especially ones that comes down to these types of criminal cases and civil rights violations. Sir what happens next during the sentencing phase and how much prison time leaving at seven my dad. Well now what we're gonna see is we're gonna see this state arguing for what they've already requests it which is an upward departure essentially what they would like to see. Is these aggravating factors that they've laid out the fact that this crime was perpetrated in front of a minor the fact that it was perpetrated by someone who had higher duty at fiduciary duty and was in a position of trust. The fact that he was an up his position on vulnerability was handcuffed you're seeing an argument right this three addressing why these factors that costs for upward departure of the time that he's been talking about the maximum sentence that the judge could award would be forty years. It's going to be in the judge's discretion because showed men. Had the right to have a jury determine what he waived that right and gave it to the judge so we'll see the judge make a determination on how much more time. Two I think we're gonna see a Max penalty I don't think so in this particular case just K Gil seems to be fair and he seems to be a little bit more even handed. So I think you are gonna see a departure but I don't think you'll see the Max penalty. And lastly as a civil rights attorney what impact if any do you think that this verdict could have on policing in America and accountability for police officers. I think and I and I high I think can hope that this brings a lot more attention she training to hiring. To paying attention whether and these type of infractions that happens and how they're treated once it's happened. When we have an officer that hasn't done it excessive use of force that should demand something different. I also hope to see that this also impacts the law surrounding. Police immunity. And how they're treated when there are at these levels of infractions. This is something that I think we'll see changes I think it also brings change the law enforcement in and of itself. The ability for officers to stand together one with one another with other good officers because we have planning to say. These actions are wrong and I will not stand by it just because we share the same bass. I think that's going to be vital and important as we go forward looking out these cases and yes sex overall coming from this case. John Lloyd and thank you so much for your time tonight your insight throughout the trial. Thank you Lansing.
This transcript has been automatically generated and may not be 100% accurate.