BREAKING NEWS TONIGHT A SPLIT VERDICT IN THE CASE OF TWO FORMER JEFFERSON PARISH DEPUTIES ACCUSED OF KILLING AN UNARMED MAN IN MARRERO. HERE’S HOW IT BREAKS DOWN ISAAC HUGHES FOUND GUILTY OF NEGLIGENT HOMICIDE JONATHAN LEWIS FOUND NOT GUILTY. SO THAT MEANS HUGHES COULD BE FACING ANYWHERE FROM 0 TO 5 YEARS IN JAIL. AND THAT MEANS LEWIS GETS TO WALK FREE. ELIZABETH KUEBEL WAS IN THE COURTROOM WHEN THE VERDICT WAS REACHED. AND, ELIZABETH, YOU SAID THE DEFENSE ATTORNEY OBJECTED TO THE VERDICT. CAN YOU TELL US MORE ABOUT THAT? WELL, THIS MAY, AND KNOW THAT ENTIRE WEEKEND FINDING ONE OF THOSE FORMER S T AT ALL, FINDING THE OTHER GUILTY. BUT ON A LESSER CHARGE. SO LET’S PUT UP THEIR PICTURES RIGHT NOW FOR YOU AND WALK YOU THROUGH EXACTLY WHAT THAT VERDICT WAS. LAST HOUR. THE JURY FOUND FORMER OFFICER ISAAC HUGHES GUILTY OF NEGLIGENT HOMICIDE, AND JONATHAN LEWIS WAS FOUND NOT GUILTY. REMEMBER, THEY WERE ON TRIAL FOR A MANSLAUGHTER CHARGE. THE JURY SAID THEIR VERDICT WAS UNANIMOUS. AS LEWIS WALKED OUT OF THE COURTROOM AND WE ASKED HIM HE DID NOT HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY. AS HE WALKED OUT AND GOT IN A CAR AND DROVE AWAY, BUT THE FAMILY OF DANIEL VALLEY DID HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY AS THEY SPOKE TO US FOR A FEW MOMENTS. IMMEDIATELY AFTER THIS VERDICT WAS REACHED, AND THIS IS HOW THEY REACTED TO IT. WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS AND REACTIONS TO THIS VERDICT? FOR MY SON TO REST IN PEACE AND TIME FOR THE FAMILY TO START HEALING. AND WHAT’S KIND OF YOUR, YOU KNOW, YOUR REACTION? WALKING OUT. YOU GUYS HAD A REALLY LONG FEW DAYS AND UM, A FEW YEARS. UH, YOU KNOW, KIND OF WHAT’S GOING THROUGH YOUR MIND RIGHT NOW. I APPRECIATE EVERYTHING THEY DID FOR US. JEFFERSON PARISH. WE ALSO SPOKE TO BOTH DEFENSE ATTORNEYS FOLLOWING THIS VERDICT. JONATHAN LEWIS’S ATTORNEY, FRANK DISALVO, SAID THAT HE WAS RELIEVED, BUT NOT HAPPY BECAUSE HIS FRIEND GOT CONVICTED. AND JUST MOMENTS AGO, I TALKED TO DEFENSE ATTORNEY JOHN FULLER. HE SAID THIS COULD HAVE BEEN WORSE BECAUSE REMEMBER, THEY WERE ORIGINALLY FACING MANSLAUGHTER CHARGES. REPORTING LIVE IN JEFFERSON PARISH ON THIS MAJOR BREAKING NEWS, I’M ELIZABETH KUEBEL WDSU NEWS. ELIZABETH. THANK YOU. CLEARLY A HIGH PROFILE CASE. THE TRIAL WE’VE BEEN COVERING ALL WEEK. NOW, LET’S GET A LITTLE BIT MORE PERSPECTIVE ON THE VERDICT. YEAH. OUR LEGAL ANALYST, STRAVOS PENA GALLOPOULOS, IS HERE TO OFFER SOME INSIGHT. SO THANK YOU SO MUCH. YOU WERE HERE LAST TIME DURING THE KARDELL HAYES TRIAL. SO WE APPRECIATE YOUR TIME. LET’S START WITH THE U.N.O. LOUIS TO SPLIT VERDICT HERE. LOUIS WAS FOUND NOT GUILTY, AND HE WAS THE ONE YOU SAID WHO OPENED FIRE SECOND TIME. AND THE FIRST GUY, UM, DEPUTY, UH, HUGHES WAS FOUND GUILTY OF NEGLIGENT HOMICIDE. SO CAN YOU TALK ABOUT THE LESSER CHARGE IN THAT COMPARED TO A MANSLAUGHTER CHARGE? MANSLAUGHTER HAS GOT A SENTENCING RANGE OF 0 TO 40. IT IS IN THE IN THE RANKING OF HOMICIDE RELATED CHARGES IN LOUISIANA. IT IS THE SECOND MOST SERIOUS VERSE VERSUS SECOND FIRST DEGREE MURDER. SECOND DEGREE MURDER, MANSLAUGHTER, NEGLIGENT HOMICIDE IS THE LEAST OF THOSE OF THOSE RELATED CHARGES. NEGLIGENT HOMICIDE HAS GOT A SENTENCING RANGE OF 0 TO 5 IN MANY CIRCUMSTANCES, NEGLIGENT HOMICIDE IS CONSIDERED WHEN AN ACCIDENT HAS OCCURRED. PEOPLE ARE FOUND TO HAVE COMMITTED, COMMITTED A MISTAKE OR AN ACCIDENT, BUT NOT DELIBERATELY INTENDING TO KILL. THAT’S THE MAJOR DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A MANSLAUGHTER AND NEGLIGENT HOMICIDE. SO THEN, GIVEN THIS CASE AND YOU’VE SEEN THE BODY CAMERA FOOTAGE, DO YOU THINK THAT WAS APPROPRIATE FOR THIS TRIAL? IT’S CONSISTENT WITH THE MATERIAL OR THE MATERIAL RELATED. THE OFFICERS WERE WERE RESPONDING TO TO A POTENTIAL CRIMINAL CONDUCT. THEY SAW SOMEBODY WHO WAS NOT WAS NOT COOPERATIVE WITH THEIR ORDERS. OFFICERS ARE OFTENTIMES TRAINED, TRAINED TO TRAINED TO RESPOND TO PEOPLE NOT BEING NOT BEING COMPLIANT, ESCALATING, ESCALATING TO TRY AND GET COMPLIANCE. IT’S NOW IT’S A QUESTION OF MAKING SURE THAT THEY DON’T ESCALATE TOO FAR, WHICH WAS THE QUESTION IN THIS IN THIS CASE, WHETHER OR NOT THE USE OF FORCE WAS APPROPRIATE. AND THAT’S WHERE THE JURY AND JURY CAME IN, MAKING THE DECISION THAT HUGHES HAD ESCALATED HAD USED ESCALATING FORCE TOO MUCH. TOO MUCH HAD GONE TO THE USE OF HIS WEAPON, WHICH MAY NOT HAVE ACTUALLY BEEN NECESSARY. LEE LOUIS, BY COMPARISON BY COMPARISON, WAS RESPONDING TO THE CIRCUMSTANCES SURROUNDING AND HE ONLY FIRED AFTER OTHER SHOTS WERE FIRED. SO IT MAKES SENSE THAT IT’S MORE CONSISTENT WITH HIM. NOT NOT BEING THE AGGRESSOR IN THE PROCESS. AND AS A RESULT, BEING MORE APPROPRIATELY FOUND TO BE NOT GUILTY AND QUICKLY WAS IT THE BODY CAM VIDEO THAT MADE THE CASE FOR THE STATE? TYPICALLY THIS WAS THE FIRST TIME JP ACTUALLY HAD BODY CAM VIDEO LIKE THIS. TYPICALLY THEY RELY ON THEIR OFFICER’S WORD. HOW MUCH OF A FACTOR WAS THAT? IT’S GOING TO BE A MAJOR FACTOR. A VIDEO, A VIDEO UNO EDITED VIDEO IS GOING TO BE CONSIDERED THE THE TRUTH TELLER, THE PEOPLE, THE THING THAT REALLY THE JURY CAN RELY ON TO TO KNOW WHAT HAPPENED IN THE MOMENT. AND THAT’S GOING TO BE A MAJOR FACTOR IN ANY DECISION. ALL RIGHT. MR. GALLOPOULOS, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND YOUR ANALYSIS.