Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Wolf Blitzer Reports

FBI Acknowledges Withholding Evidence in Oklahoma City Bombing Case

Aired May 10, 2001 - 20:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.


THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
WOLF BLITZER, HOST: Tonight, a stunning development in the Oklahoma City bombing case. As the FBI acknowledges withholding evidence, will Timothy McVeigh's execution go forward next week as scheduled?

A once-a-day pill that controls a form of leukemia with almost no side effects. The government quickly gives its approval.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Today I have the privilege of announcing one of those medical breakthroughs which to me is outstanding.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: We'll have details and get perspective from the head of the National Cancer Institute, Dr. Richard Klausner.

And the president's energy agenda will have no quick fix for soaring gas prices and rolling blackouts. Some Republicans worry about the political fallout. Should they? I'll ask Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham.

Good evening. I'm Wolf Blitzer reporting tonight from the CNN center in Atlanta.

There's been a potentially significant development in the Oklahoma City bombing case. Tonight, the Justice Department in Washington is confirming the FBI accidentally withheld evidence from convicted bomber Timothy McVeigh's attorneys. An official says once the government was made aware of the documents, they were turned over to McVeigh's lawyers. The official insisted the documents were, quote, "not material to the case" and should have no bearing on the outcome of the conviction.

But the key question tonight: Will McVeigh's lawyers ask for a delay in the execution? And that's our top story.

Joining me tonight from our Washington bureau is CNN correspondent Susan Candiotti and CNN legal analyst Greta Van Susteren. First to you, Susan. Tell us what you have heard within the past hour about this development? SUSAN CANDIOTTI, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, what we know for a fact is that the FBI, accidentally it says, did not turn over certain information, certain information that they acquired during the course of their investigation to the defense attorneys representing Timothy McVeigh. The notified the Justice Department, and the FBI notified the defense attorneys just the other day about this additional information.

We also know that the FBI, the Justice Department insists that this information in no way creates any kind of reasonable doubt, they say, about the guilt of Timothy McVeigh, reminding everyone that Timothy McVeigh, in a biography that was published just last month, has fully admitted his role in the Oklahoma City bombing.

So, what's happening now is that the defense attorneys for Timothy McVeigh have been notified of this additional information. We're told that it consists of around 3,000 pages worth of material, and at the present time, I'm told by the member of the defense team, there is an effort under way to try to reach their client, Timothy McVeigh, to discuss this matter with him.

The question is whether -- whether the defense team will move for a stay of execution, or as one of the defense attorneys raises the specter of whether the Justice Department itself will ask for a stay to give time to the defense attorneys to examine all of this new information.

BLITZER: Susan, does it make any difference that Timothy McVeigh has repeatedly suggested, insisted that he wants to die as scheduled, next week. Does this latest development affect that?

CANDIOTTI: Well, that's a good point, Wolf, and I put that question to a member of the defense team. And Richard Burr told me that when I asked him that very question -- after all, this is someone, Timothy McVeigh, who has fully admitted to the bombing and has taken full responsibility -- Mr. Burr's response was: "Well, what if Steven Jones is right? What if there were other people involved in the bombing? Shouldn't that question be answered?"

Well, no one knows the answers to any of these questions now, although throughout, the U.S. government has said that it thoroughly investigated the Oklahoma City bombing, and there is no new information, they insist all along -- and even now -- that there is no wider conspiracy involved, that they have their man, in Timothy McVeigh and his convicted co-conspirator Terry Nichols.

BLITZER: Let's bring in Greta Van Susteren. Greta, give us some perspective, some legal perspective. What does this mean, as far as this development, in this scheduled execution next week?

GRETA VAN SUSTEREN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Wolf, it's incredibly important, because a defense lawyer can't let his client go to a lethal injection and die having not reviewed all the documents in the prosecution's case. The prosecution had several years to turn this over. They should have turned it over before trial, and they didn't. And now, a defense attorney is in a terrible position of what to do. What defense attorney must do is go through each document and make sure that each document was not important to the defense of the case, and then consult with his client to determine what the client wants to do or not to do.

Now, Susan, who covered the trial for CNN with me as well in Denver, and I both -- we both saw an awful lot of evidence being presented by the government, and now we hear this discussion about statements made to an author in which he admits his guilt. The judge is not going to be looking at statements that Mr. McVeigh made to an author. We don't try people in books to authors. We try people according to rules and evidence.

And if the prosecution violated one of the rules, which is to surrender all material information before trial to the defense, then the government is going to have to do a lot of answering to Judge Matsch. Now, Judge Matsch can suspend the date of the execution order so that he can sort through and see what is the appropriate thing to do.

But this is not insignificant. I spoke to a member of the defense team for Terry Nichols a little while ago, and what they're being told is that there are as many as 500 302s. And what 302s are, when FBI agents go out on the street and investigate people -- and they investigated hundreds and hundreds of people, and talked to everybody about this case -- the FBI actually take notes from those interviews. They're obliged to turn those over to the defense.

They may be very important. They may have exculpatory information, tend to show that Timothy McVeigh is not responsible for this crime, even though he has apparently admitted to authors. That's not the issue here, but anything that would have been used at trial, they'll -- whether or not the information in these 302s would have been helpful to cross-examine the witnesses. That's the type of thing that could be important in those 302s, and the defense lawyers must go through those documents before they even advise their client.

BLITZER: Greta Van Susteren and Susan Candiotti. Susan, you wanted to add something?

CANDIOTTI: Just something. You know, this is not the first time that information was not turned over. In fact, when the trial was over with, the defense team received information, lead sheets, as they're called from the FBI that had to be turned over to them, and they did go through all of those and admitted that they found no additional information that would have helped them during the course of their appeals.

So, this has happened before where the Justice Department has not turned over all information. In this case, FBI insists, however, that it was an accident.

VAN SUSTEREN: But they're obliged to, accident or not. The process must be fair, thorough, according to the rules. They may have no information in those documents that will help Timothy McVeigh. Nonetheless, the defense attorneys cannot let their client go to the execution chamber without going through them and checking.

BLITZER: OK, Greta Van Susteren and Susan Candiotti, thank you very much. And Greta, of course, will have much more on this breaking story at the bottom of the hour on "THE POINT WITH GRETA VAN SUSTEREN."

Meanwhile, there's another major story we're covering tonight, this one involving a potential medical breakthrough. Cancer specialists are speaking about, quote, "the dawn of a new era." Acting with unusual speed, the Food and Drug Administration has approved a revolutionary new pill for a type of leukemia.

As CNN medical correspondent Rhonda Rowland reports, the once-a- day medicine could turn out to be a cure for some patients.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

RHONDA ROWLAND, CNN MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The new cancer pill Gleevec has been called astonishing. Studies show the pill, formerly known as STI-571, works in the majority of patients with chronic myelogenous leukemia, a common form of adult leukemia, results almost unheard of in cancer therapy.

DR. HARMON EYRE, AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY: It is a major breakthrough. On a scale of one to 10, I'd put this at an eight or a nine.

ROWLAND: Patients like Virginia Garner, who had been at the brink of death, have seen their lives turn around within weeks of taking the pill just once a day.

VIRGINIA GARNER, LEUKEMIA PATIENT: I just have a feeling about this new drug that it's going to turn out to be something that everyone is going to be amazed at.

ROWLAND: A prediction made more than two years ago. Today, Garner's in remission with no signs of leukemia. But while studies show most patients like Garner and others remain in remission after one year of treatment, researchers say it's too early to talk about cure.

DR. BRIAN DRUKER, OREGON HEALTH SCIENCES: We've only had two years of experience at effective doses, and we need more experience before we can say that we've completely eradicated this leukemia.

ROWLAND: What makes Gleevec so amazing is that, unlike traditional chemotherapy, which attacks all cells scattershot, killing cancer cells randomly, this drug blocks the action of an enzyme that causes leukemia, leaving healthy cells untouched.

DRUKER: That's why in our clinical trials we've seen such remarkable benefits with very few side effects. ROWLAND: Side effects may include mild nausea, swelling and muscle cramps.

(on camera): There's also evidence Gleevec is effective in treating a type of intestinal cancer. Studies are under way to see if it helps patients with brain tumors and lung and prostate cancer.

So patients may wonder, if the drug is now available to treat leukemia, why not go ahead and use it to treat these other types of cancers?

(voice-over): Scientists say until more research is completed, it's not a good idea to use the pill in all cancers.

EYRE: However, doctors can, given the right circumstance, prescribe the drug for individuals with cancers in whom there's some evidence in the literature that it might work.

While Gleevec may not help every type of cancer, researchers say the pill ushers in a new era for cancer treatment, targeting what goes wrong in each particular cancer and finding a way to stop it.

Rhonda Rowland, CNN, Atlanta.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BLITZER: Gleevec, with its targeting of cancer cells, is being called the "wave of the future." To learn more about this drug, and the potential it may hint at, let's turn to Dr. Richard Klausner, he's the director of the National Cancer Institute. He joins me from our Washington bureau. Dr. Klausner, thank you very much for joining us. Give us your perspective. How big of a breakthrough is this?

DR. RICHARD KLAUSNER, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE: Well, as you said, this is a picture what the future of cancer treatment looks like. It's future where we know the molecular causes, we know the molecular machines that are responsible for cancer, and we are able to identify and even design drugs that go after the machines.

That's exactly what this represents. It is the single most interesting and I think most important drug that we have ever had in the war against cancer. Now it's specificity for its molecular target is also part of the future of cancer. There's unlikely to be any cure for cancer. Cancer is many diseases. This drug only treats certain types of cancers. We need to still explore which types may be affected by this drug, but that's what it's going to look like, specific molecular machines for specific cancers and specific drugs.

BLITZER: If some of our viewers out there or their loved ones do have cancer right now, how excited in the short term should they be Gleevec?

KLAUSNER: Well, again, for those patients with this disease called chronic myeloid leukemia, or CML. This is a real advance. And this drug will be available by next week and it should be available for essentially all individuals with this disease. We're already opening dozen of clinical trials to look at other situations, other cancers that have the types of molecular machines that Gleevec inhibits, and we will be testing quickly, in patients, whether there are other cancers that benefit.

The reason why it's worth taking heart from this, this advance means hope because Gleevecs are going to be reproduced. It may not be tomorrow. But we have an enormous pipeline now of discovery of molecular targets and the beginning of the identification of drugs for molecular targets against virtually all cancers. But it will take a while. We were very lucky with Gleevec. We understood a tremendous amount about its target. We eventually will have other Gleevecs for other cancers.

BLITZER: Dr. Richard Klausner, on that hopeful note, I want to thank you very much for joining us, sharing your perspective with us. Thank you very much.

Meanwhile, the Senate followed the House Of Representative and passed the nearly $2 trillion budget. It is not binding, it outlines government taxing and spending. It doesn't require the president's signature. But as the price of gasoline soars and blackouts roll will the Bush Administration suffer some political damage?

I'll speak with the energy secretary, Spencer Abraham.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: Welcome back. Is the honeymoon over for President Bush? asked this week how he's handling his job, 53 percent of Americans polled approve, 33 percent disapprove. That contrasts to last month when the president got a 62 percent approval rating.

In the same CNN/"USA Today"/Gallup Poll, 58 percent now say the energy situation is very serious. Back in March only 31 percent took that view. Is there a connection? Certainly many Republicans are worried about political fallout from the energy crunch, and many Democrats are taking advantage.

A short while ago I spoke with Energy Secretary and former Senator, Spencer Abraham.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BLITZER: Mr. Secretary, thanks so much for joining us. I want to get right to that front-page story in today's "New York Times." You probably saw the headlines: "Price of Gasoline May Pose Problem for White House." Are you beginning to feel the pressure from this increased price of a gallon of gasoline?

SPENCER ABRAHAM, U.S. SECRETARY OF ENERGY: Well, you know, it's interesting, Wolf. Back in March, when I gave a speech and said America was confronting a major energy crisis and we needed to put together a national energy plan and take action, I was criticized for exaggerating the problem. And now people are saying we're not taking it seriously enough. But this administration, from the president on down, takes this very seriously. We're talking about different approaches that can be used to address issues like gas prices, but we're not going to take action rashly. That could make the situation worse.

We're going to put together a national energy plan to address issues that relate to gas prices and a variety of other energy challenges and crises which confront the nation.

BLITZER: Several of your colleagues and the Senate Democrats spoke out today. Joe Lieberman says, this administration so far is not showing leadership. Listen to what the Connecticut senator had to say earlier today:

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. JOE LIEBERMAN (D), CONNECTICUT: The first act of leadership that we could use from the Bush administration is for them to call in the leaders of the oil companies and plead with them, in the national interest, to draw a line here.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: Are you ready to accept that recommendation from Senator Lieberman?

ABRAHAM: We'll look at all options, Wolf. But, you know, it's interesting. These are exactly the same kinds of problems we had last summer. They're problems we'll have next summer, and the one after that, if we don't implement a national energy policy. That's the leadership America needs. We haven't had it for eight years.

And what we require right now is a comprehensive plan, which we're about to release next week, that will begin to put America on a course toward energy independence where we're building more supplies here at home, less dependent on foreign oil, and more able to deal with the kinds of energy crises and challenge that we confront.

BLITZER: You know that one of the problems you have, maybe a public relations problem, but it was underscored in that same "New York Times" article earlier today. It quoted Senator John Edwards of North Carolina as saying this.

Let me read it to you: "There's a gut feeling among a lot of people that the oil companies seem to be making a lot of money while gasoline prices are going up. The fact that the president has a long and deep relationship with oil companies is the kind of thing that Americans may associate with these gasoline prices."

The prospect of $3-a-gallon gasoline, something that I'm sure you're very concerned about.

ABRAHAM: Well, first of all, again, I served with Joe Lieberman, with John Edwards and their friends. They both are also looking at running for president so I'm not surprised they're out there issuing criticisms. But the fact of the matter is that President Clinton had the Federal Trade Commission, the watchdog agency, closely investigate and carefully investigate for a number of months, the behavior of the oil companies. They just, a few days ago, came back with an exhaustive study that concluded that there was no evidence of gouging and collusion.

At the same time, I, today, asked our Energy Department to begin investigating some of these rumors about $3 gas. We do not see in our agency anything in the supplier/inventory levels that would suggest that the price has to go up like that.

I'm not sure who's starting some of those rumors and what the story is, but I am going to look into it because sometimes these rumors become self-fulfilling prophecies. They actually give people an excuse to start raising the price, and we aren't going to let that happen.

BLITZER: Fairly or unfairly, some people say that, well, look at the profits over the past year of the major oil companies, and take a look at the price per gallon, and they say that the oil companies are making unfair profits at the expense of American consumers.

ABRAHAM: Well, you know, Wolf, as I said earlier, our national energy plan is going to put America on a course to energy independence. Right now, we're very dependent on the importation of foreign oil. More than half the oil we use comes from overseas, from OPEC. When they make a decision, as they did couple of times already this year, to cut back production, that limits supply and raises prices.

They're going to put their interests first, and I think we have to take policy actions to put America's interest first. That means more supplies here at home. If we have more supply, we'll see prices come down, and that will probably, in turn, result in lower profits. But American consumers deserve to have more energy independence.

We also have strained refinery capacity. We haven't built a new refinery in this country in 25 years. That creates problems at this time of year, because there isn't enough refinery capacity to meet demand.

BLITZER: There's a lot of criticism that has been leveled over the past week or so against Vice President Cheney who is making the energy policy recommendations based on his past work, next week. The criticism focuses on the issue on conservation, and specifically what he said in Toronto only about a week or so ago. Listen to what he said. I want your -- to get your explanation of what he meant by this. Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RICHARD CHENEY, VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Conservation may be a sign of personal virtue, but it is not a sufficient basis, all by itself, for sound comprehensive energy policy.

(END VIDEO CLIP) BLITZER: That has caused a lot of criticism, especially among the so-called suburbanites and soccer moms, who believe that conservation is a critical part of any energy policy.

ABRAHAM: I think that the vice president has been misinterpreted by some in the media and some of the antagonists and critics out there. What he said was that conservation is not sufficient by itself. Our energy plan will focus on conservation, that's a major part of the equation in terms of meeting our long-term energy demand. But alone, conservation isn't enough. We also have to increase supply.

You know, in California, we confront these rolling blackouts, they have had the best track record of virtually any state in terms of conservation in recent years. They've also brought a lot of renewable energy sources into play, and it's still isn't enough. They've had a shortfall in supply.

So, what we're going to have is a balanced plan. The vice president has been very careful about making sure we have a balanced plan that balances both the conservation policies with policies that would promote more supply.

Right now, with respect to gasoline, we've got a supply problem. OPEC has reduced production, that constrained supply, that raised prices. America needs to be more energy independent, and our national energy plan will head us in that direction.

BLITZER: Secretary Abraham, unfortunately, we are all out of time. I want to thank you for taking some time and joining us today.

ABRAHAM: Wolf, thank you. I appreciate it.

BLITZER: Thank you.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

Future scientists are showing off their inventions in Silicon Valley. What can you do with an electronic glove? You'd be surprised.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: Welcome back. Tonight on "The Leading Edge:" detective work goes digital. New state of the art software is helping law enforcement solve crimes. The program sorts though pages of information to identify links between people, places and events, helping authorities find clues and inconsistencies in cases.

Now to technology of tomorrow. A high school student has invented a portable, electronic glove that translates sign language to English, enabling the deaf to communicate with people who cannot sign. The project was one of 1,200 unveiled today at a science and engineering fair in Silicon Valley.

I'll be back right after this. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BLITZER: Please stay with CNN throughout the night for continuing coverage of the McVeigh legal developments.

Up next, Greta Van Susteren. She's standing by to tell us what she has -- Greta.

VAN SUSTEREN: Wolf, we're going to cover the news in the Timothy McVeigh case, surprising and perhaps very disturbing news.

Plus, Massachusetts governor is in a hospital ready to give birth to twins. Some people say she can't do her job as governor while she's in the hospital.

Thirdly, divorced, mayor style -- in New York, that is. Mayor Giuliani and his wife are having a major divorce and it's causing a lot of trouble -- Wolf.

BLITZER: Sounds good, Greta. I'll be watching.

Thanks very much for watching. I'm Wolf Blitzer in Atlanta. "THE POINT WITH GRETA VAN SUSTEREN" begins right now.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com