Fox News
Expand
Browse All Video
Watch Live

You're watching...

Marc Lamont Hill on controversial Chris Dorner comments

Details

  • Description

    Columbia Professor explains comments comparing cop killer to a superhero

  • Duration 7:01
  • Date

Clips

Also in this playlist...

Editor's Picks

Auto-advance: ON

Auto-advance
View All

Transcript

This transcript is automatically generated

-- the top story tonight doctor Marc Lamont Hill teaches at Columbia University here in New York City and has appeared on the factor a number of times you may have seen.

He's an ardent liberal guy and that's fine all points of view are to be heard on this program.

But yesterday on CNN.

Doctor hills it's something very controversial.

About mass killer Christopher door.

As far as -- himself goes is that like a real life super hero to many people don't get me wrong what he did was awful killing innocent -- -- as bad.

Who would you read his manifesto when you read the message that he left.

He wasn't entirely crazy he had a plan and a mission here and many people are rooting for him to kill innocent people.

They're waiting for somebody who was wrong -- -- figure kind of revenge against the system it's almost like watching -- and change in real life it's kind of exciting.

Now put yourself in the shoes of family members who are suffering grievously right -- this moment.

Because of journalists' murders.

How do you think the are reacting.

To that kind of analysis.

Joining us now from lower Manhattan is doctor Hill City thirty years of this I've known a long time and gotta get a chance to explain this -- Well first thing is you -- in the family members.

Victims.

And quite frankly my heart goes out to them and if my words -- any -- causing any pain.

Or trauma or stress more than the majority experience in the night -- -- -- -- deepest condolences and my apologies I have no problem saying that.

What I was saying on CNN -- was not.

That I support -- -- -- not that he was super hero to me I was asked to explain.

Why he was getting so much on line support what I was saying is to many people they're not seeing him as a masculine the media narrative is that he's just the mass killer the media narrative is this he was someone who was wrong by corrupt department and now he's exacting.

His revenge which was the jangled comparison.

I'm -- and -- what he did.

But -- we Americans are capable of having to talk to the same time we can walk and chew gum at the same time we can.

Critique him and say -- daughter was wrong for what he did.

But there might be a real story here about corruption about violence about targeting individual people that we can also talk about at the same time and I think that's what this crisis has -- for us.

Let me tell you why you're wrong.

In any kind of a historical context winners a heinous crime committed.

You cannot take anything away from the crime by trying to explain why certain misguided people are supporting the killer.

Now would be like saying.

You know there are some Russians.

Who support it's down.

Because they were victims of bizarre.

Who took their land away you can't do it.

I I want to share what you -- trying to do you were trying to explain this mindset on the Internet.

And -- call in radio programs the people who hate the police and -- to LA police races.

-- tried to explain what would do Warner over the edge.

I got.

That but what you didn't do.

And and and and number why I don't even think that engagement.

-- -- is worthy.

This close to the crops.

-- you -- you let things die down a little bit before we get into that condemnation.

Of -- and the people supporting him absolutely that you didn't do that.

You condemned -- Warner but not the people who are supporting him.

Which right I condemned the vote so that's why you put yourself in a position to be chastised -- understand my point of view.

Endorsing a point of view and -- I wish in retrospect that I had explained further.

I don't think -- that the fundamental argument that I was making was wrong even if the message itself gets lost because we're having this conversation that we're not having the currencies and actually what I can't have a conversation on speculation.

This system says -- so is it actually is speculation because the system ruled a judge and an investigative -- he.

The Los Angeles police department.

The do Warner did something wrong and he was fired.

Now that the LAPD is reopened the investigation.

Line we'll be right -- -- -- prop but right now another don't they don't have to do anything he.

That case -- -- in the face of media scrutiny ability absolutely if the media wants to scrutinize I don't have a problem with that -- you come up with the facts first.

-- we'll you don't speculate -- and -- you don't have any facts and he has he has a hard fact about the Los Angeles PD every year they get thousands of complaints of brutality and corruption every two Bailey's apartment gets that.

901 -- end and -- every major police department in those claims get investigated by their internal affairs bureau -- with the police investigate the police and decide whether or not the police were wrong or right.

And in that context you don't get justices -- that there's no outside force us up.

But you're an adventure if you want to do macro analysis -- a wide police should be investigated by an outside you know on agency had nothing to do with police.

I I don't have a beef with that.

But you don't -- don't.

-- -- -- now that's -- this crisis allows notably -- it would be irresponsible of us.

To simply talk about border as the crazy mad man and not also also on thing's also people out there.

Also talk about police corruption you can only do that when you have.

Evidence that police corruption is in play and there is no evidence in his case and the second.

Mistake that you make and being a professor this this comes right into your academic background.

Is that you view of credibility.

To a killer.

To -- guy was obviously not thinking clearly.

He killed for human beings -- and human beings you don't give any credibility to him.

Anything he sets and everything he says is suspect because of what he did you have hardest -- and that.

And that's why it's important to -- -- those two things.

I'm not saying investigate the LE TD because Christopher daughter initiate the conversation about the LE TV or police more broadly there's already got about us as a decade -- essentially long.

Our critique of the LET that we need to have and he put the spotlight back on it.

I'm not legitimizing conversation comes later that he doesn't know it yeah I think you -- think that this isn't it doesn't have been in this -- are people Warsaw I get to decide -- doctor and I get to use your candidates are listening talk about -- -- -- -- -- would tell -- yourself but even more trouble -- -- -- 24 hours.

Less than 24 hours.

After a police officer is murdered by this -- you're out there with hypothesis.

-- I.

Little high -- it's not a hypothesis is that it police corruption exists.

I'm not saying that Christopher not in this case you guys the problem and they can only get I'm not saying that Christopher dornin is a manifesto was sure what that's not my that's not my -- out of I -- -- -- doctor.

You were in.

Sensitive we have to be victims' families and I have to say what you were and I think it brought about the visit to the -- was offered them our condolences but I'm still take you back -- -- -- -- a terrible.

Take the F out of there and you got it and we appreciate you coming on the program and I.

I don't want.

Hill to suffer here because those -- standup guy over the years but I absolutely think you're wrong and insensitive.

And that's my opinion.

Load More