Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Talkback Live

What Fate Awaits Alejandro Avila?; Could a Bad Economy be Good for Democrats in Fall Congressional Elections?

Aired July 22, 2002 - 15:00   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.
KATHLEEN KENNEDY, GUEST HOST: Hello and welcome to TALKBACK LIVE. I'm Kathleen Kennedy. Arthel Neville is on assignment on AMERICAN MORNING with Paula Zahn.

Alejandro Avila is expected to be arraigned in an hour and a half from now on charges of kidnapping, sexually assaulting and murdering 5-year-old Samantha Runnion. Orange County Sheriff Michael Corona says he's confident Avila is the right man, and Carona says he would back the death penalty for Avila if the suspect is convicted.

A little later, you are going to meet a forensic psychologist who is going to talk about profiling child killers. And I want to hear from you. Call me at 1-800-310-4CNN, or e-mail talkback@cnn.com.

All right. It's time to meet our guests. Rob Warden is executive director of the Center on Wrongful Conviction at Northwestern University. Also with us is former federal prosecutor Laura Brevetti, she is now a defense attorney in private practice. Guys, thanks for coming on the show today.

Rob, let me get right to it. Knowing what we know so far, we have physical evidence supposedly from the scene where Samantha was abducted and from the scene where her body was found. We have a little girl who could probably point the finger at and may have already done at Avila, and we have DNA evidence. Is the prosecution right to go for the death penalty in this one?

ROB WARDEN, WRONGFUL CONVICTION CENTER, NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY: Well, I think that the death penalty system in America has been shown to have been so woefully broken that at this point we should probably just forego seeking the death penalty in favor of life in prison without parole.

I think it's particularly unfortunate that we are only debating this important public policy issue of whether or not we should have the death penalty in the context of an absolutely horrific crime like this. Now, we should remember, of course, that this defendant, as all defendants in America, are entitled to a presumption of innocence until guilt is determined.

We have seen, however, since capital punishment was restored in the mid-'70s in this country approximately 100 people have been sentenced to death who were later shown to have been innocent. In many of these cases the evidence of guilt has seemed absolutely overwhelming on the face until we got into the case a little bit deeper.

Here in Illinois, where I'm from, we have had an error rate in capital sentencing cases of 5 percent. You know, that's one in 20. The system is just so broken that it can't be fixed.

KENNEDY: Laura, let me cut in here. Laura, do you think it's too premature to say yes or no we should go for the death penalty on this one?

LAURA BREVETTI, FORMER PROSECUTOR: Well, it's not premature for those who know what the evidence is that they have gathered. It's not premature for them. Of course, I think it's premature for us on the outside, because we are not privy to it. I mean, it is unfortunate that this is the case that we are debating the issue of the death penalty. You are either for death penalty as a concept, or you are against it. If you are for death penalty and if this case, if this defendant -- if they have the evidence against the defendant they say, this is a case for the death penalty.

KENNEDY: All right, so what's the criteria that has to be met to seek the death penalty?

BREVETTI: Well, California, as all states, have put together, their legislature, a list of special circumstances that a jury and only a jury will decide whether this case and this defendant fits those special circumstances. One of the special circumstances is, was this murder committed in the commission of another offense, or does this individual have a prior criminal history that warrants the death penalty in this case.

KENNEDY: All right, Rob, let me ask you this. The way that Samantha's body was found -- apparently her body was found posed in a very provocative manner. Will this influence the prosecutor?

WARDEN: Well, of course it will, and it will influence the jury. The real problem is that these tough kinds of cases make -- tend to make very bad public policy. Our whole criminal justice system tends to be very incident-driven. Polls have shown that most Americans certainly want to see that anyone who we would sentence to death in fact committed the crime.

The problem is, we can look at a certain number of cases where the evidence is really overwhelming, and then we can look at others where it appears that there's fairly strong evidence of innocence. But then, the vast majority, I would say 90 percent of the cases, are ones where can never be 100 percent certainty. And as long as we have this death penalty, this machine that we can turn on, as long as it's on and running, we are running a grave risk of executing an innocent person for no real benefit to society, because we can really protect society simply by keeping someone in prison for life without the possibility of parole, which by the way is much cheaper than paying for all the appeals that a normal capital punishment case entails.

KENNEDY: OK, Rob and Laura, we're going to get our audience involved here. Chris, who do you have?

CHRIS: This is Tiffany from Massachusetts -- Tiffany..

TIFFANY: I actually disagree a little with the comment that the death penalty is cut and dry. I'm actually someone who is generally against the death penalty, but that's because of how it's applied and the brokenness of it, but I do think that there are circumstances where the death penalty can be appropriate, and I think in a situation as egregious as what happened with this young woman that it would be appropriate in this situation.

KENNEDY: Laura, let me ask you this, from a legal standpoint, is there any reason why you wouldn't seek the death penalty?

BREVETTI: Well, in general or in this case, I mean, generally speaking, it depends on the individual who we have accused of committing a crime. The Supreme Court has recently spoken about the issue of mental retardation, and that is one area where I think we are in agreement that people should not be put to death. Age -- whether a juvenile has committed the crime.

In this case, it's hard to know what those special circumstances are to aggravate the offense, and also to perhaps mitigate the reasons why you would not seek the death penalty. We need to know more of the facts of the case.

KENNEDY: All right, let me ask you this, Rob. Avila has been accused and acquitted in 2001 on child molestation charges. Two children under the age of 14. And I'm wondering if the prosecution can use this or would it use this in its case?

WARDEN: Well, I'm sure that they won't be able to use cases in which there was no conviction to warrant the sentence of death. He's been acquitted of those cases. That will not be a relevant factor.

The only relevant -- the only question when it comes to guilt or innocence of this crime is whether or not he committed this crime and what the evidence is that he committed the crime. The evidence in mitigation and aggravation, which are relevant to the consideration of whether this is appropriately a capital case under California law is quite another question.

KENNEDY: All right. We have got Rosemary on the line from New Jersey. You have a question or comment?

CALLER: Yes, I think we better get tough with these people. I mean, an eye for an eye. These little children have no way to fight back. These people, sick or not, should be put to death, because they are of no value to themselves nor to anyone else. That's how I feel about that.

KENNEDY: Well, guys, you have heard this -- we have heard it in our audience today. This -- when it has to do with children, it gets personal for people, and we have a lot of mothers in our audience here today. How in the world do you defend this man with this kind of publicity? BREVETTI: Well, I guess the question is directed to me, and you see, this is where Rob and I agree to a certain extent. And while I may not be totally against the death penalty in special circumstances case such as this one, we have to make sure that the defense has the resources to defend this man.

We have to make sure that the system works absolutely in this case, so that we know when this person is put to death that we have given that person every opportunity, the courts every opportunity to review it before we give the ultimate penalty. There should be open discovery. There should be money given for the defense to conduct their defense, such as investigation.

And when that's all been exhausted and a jury gives the death penalty in this case and a court has reviewed it, then at least we know the system has worked.

KENNEDY: Rob, can this guy get a fair trial?

WARDEN: Well, we can never be certain that the system has worked in any case. It's simply beyond human capacity to be perfect. Perfection is something that we cannot even aspire to achieve.

That's the unfortunate thing in a lot of these cases. In the almost 100 cases now that have been overturned in which people have been wrongfully sentenced to death, the proof appeared to be overwhelming. Most of these cases were reviewed by reviewing courts. Some of them appeals have been exhausted before, by some serendipitous development, something came to light that showed that this person, in fact, was innocent of the crime.

Now, if we could show, for instance, that the death penalty were deterring crime, that would be another matter. But one thing that we've got to keep in mind is that the appellate process will drag on in a capital case for eight or nine years. And by that time the person we execute is very often a very different person than the person who committed the crime.

KENNEDY: All right Rob, thank you so much. I hate to cut you off there; we've got to get a break in.

Rob Warden and Laura Brevetti, thanks so much for being on the show with us today.

All right, do you think prosecutors should seek the death penalty in the death of Samantha Runnion? Take the TALKBACK LIVE online viewer vote at cnn.com/TALKBACK.

We'll be right back.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KENNEDY (voice-over): Still ahead on TALKBACK LIVE: inside the mind of a suspected child killer.

MICHAEL CARONA, SHERIFF, ORANGE COUNTY, CA: We have an individual who clearly has a pattern of sexual deviancy, sexual misconduct. And this time it's risen to the level where he's killed a 5-year-old girl.

KENNEDY: Who is Alejandro Avila, and does he fit the profile of a violent sex offender who preys on children?

We'll talk to a forensic psychologist when TALKBACK LIVE returns.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I want you all to know each other. Watch out for your babies. Watch out for each other's babies. Take care of one another, OK. Thank you again.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KENNEDY: Boy that's hard to watch.

Welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE.

We're talking about suspected child killer Alejandro Avila. Now, as we said earlier, Avila will be arraigned in a California courtroom and in a little over an hour from now.

CNN's David Mattingly is in Santa Ana, California. He's been covering this case.

David, what have you got?

DAVID MATTINGLY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, at this hour we're told that Avila will not actually be in the courtroom for his arraignment. He will stay in the jail and will be handled over videoconferencing. That was a decision made by him and his attorney this morning. They will stay in the jail. The proceedings will be carried out in the courtroom as usual; he just won't physically be in there.

KENNEDY: Is that unusual?

MATTINGLY: Not unusual for Orange County. They have a tremendous amount of defendants who have to go through the legal system here. Having that video set-up enables them to get them in and get them out much more quickly instead of having to transport them from the jail to the courthouse.

We've been asking about, was this a security concern in this case; but we've been told no. The sheriff's department said they had no problem providing security today. This was strictly a decision by Avila and his public defender.

KENNEDY: All right David, fill in some blanks for us now. What kind of evidence do we know that the authorities have?

MATTINGLY: Well, there are a lot of blanks to fill in there, and we can't exactly do that yet. What we do know, we were able to confirm over the weekend that DNA evidence, in fact, does connect, according to authorities, connect Avila to the victim, Samantha Runnion. That came to light over the weekend, and that's what we'll be expecting to hear as the court proceedings go on.

KENNEDY: And police are looking into some other unsolved molestation cases and murder cases to see if there's any link there, is that right?

MATTINGLY: This investigation is continuing. They're going to continue to look at the evidence. They're continuing to encourage people to send in tips.

They want to a complete picture of this defendant from the time he was a young man until now to see if there's anything they can connect him to in his past. This investigation is not going to be over until they are certain that they are not going to be able to connect him to other crimes.

KENNEDY: I think that investigators had some 2000 or something tips; one which came from Avila's former girlfriend. What else did she have to say?

MATTINGLY: Well, if it's the same girlfriend that we're talking about, Avila was accused a couple years ago -- went to trial last year and was acquitted, accused of molesting two young girls. One the daughter and one the niece of his then-girlfriend.

KENNEDY: OK. And what else do we know about him? As a person, what do we know about him?

MATTINGLY: We know what his mother has told us: That he is a person who is fairly easygoing, and likes to joke. But today the mother saying she doesn't know what to think about these charges against her son. She has said in the past that he is innocent.

KENNEDY: And he has a girlfriend now, is that right? And has she spoken to authorities?

MATTINGLY: No word from her, at least out here, that we know of. So maybe that will be coming to light later as well.

KENNEDY: OK, so where is he being held?

MATTINGLY: He's being held in the Orange County Jail, and that's where he's going to remain so that he will be doing the videoconferencing from that location and go back to his cell.

He's in a cell by himself, which is a common procedure for people accused of child molestation cases. Beyond that, he's being treated like any other prisoner, we're told.

KENNEDY: And do we know anything about his expected plea?

MATTINGLY: Not at this point. A couple of days ago, after his arrest, he was telling people that he was innocent. His mother maintaining his innocence. We'll see if that's changed today.

KENNEDY: All right. How soon could we see this go to trial, David?

MATTINGLY: That is entirely up to the courts here, and up to the attorneys in the case. All we know is right now, in about an hour- and-a-half this arraignment will take place here in Orange County.

KENNEDY: All right, we appreciate you filling in the blanks for us today David Mattingly. We always appreciate you keeping us up to date.

With us now is Michele Galietta. She has a PhD in clinical psychology, specializing in forensics. She is on the faculty of the John Jay College of Criminal Justice.

Thanks for coming on the show today.

MICHELE GALIETTA, FORENSIC PSYCHOLOGIST: You're welcome.

KENNEDY: All right, tell us: What kind of person commits an act like this?

GALIETTA: Well, what I can tell you is that it's very rare, sexual psychopaths and people who murder children make up a very, very small percentage of people who are child molesters in general.

KENNEDY: Well, give us an idea of the characteristics, though? I mean, is this -- could this be anybody in this audience?

GALIETTA: You know, it sounds like you're talking a little bit about profiling.

KENNEDY: Right.

GALIETTA: And what we know is that profiling is actually not very effective. At least the research evidence doesn't support the idea that profiling -- that looking at the evidence of a crime, looking at the way a crime was committed will actually tell you a lot about a person's individual personality characteristics or their demographic characteristics.

So it doesn't help to go from the crime backward to what kind of person the person is.

KENNEDY: Is a person, though, that commits molestation, who kills a child, normally a person, or usually a person who has been abused in their past?

GALIETTA: There seems to be a higher representation of people who were abused physically and neglected in their childhood, but that doesn't mean that all people that were abused or neglected grow up to be killers.

I think the important distinction here is that people who murder a child, in the course of molesting them, are very different than your average child molester.

KENNEDY: All right, Chris, you have somebody?

CHRIS: This is Donna, former prosecutor from Detroit.

DONNA: Yes, I was just talking about how the sexual offender is a control issue. I tried a case for a serial sexual rapist, and he was raping school girls, 14, 15 on their way to school. It was a control issue. And because of how horrendous this crime is, we want to catch somebody. We want to put the blame on somebody as quickly as possible. But until we have all the evidence and we know everything that's going on, we can't really say whether death penalty is relevant or not. And at this point, although it's a horrendous crime, I can't say I would support the death penalty.

KENNEDY: All right. We want to bring in right now Pat Brown. She is a criminal profiler and executive director of Sexual Homicide Exchange Inc. Thanks, Pat, for coming in today. All right, let me ask you the same question. What kind of person does this kind of thing?

PAT BROWN, CRIMINAL PROFILER: Well, someone who is not like the rest of us, as we would hope. What we're really looking is a kind of person who does have a control issue and he's angry at society, and this is his way of getting his control and power and he often can take it out on a small member of society, who is one of our precious possessions, and says to everybody, look what I can do to something that's important to you.

KENNEDY: All right. Robin has something she wanted to say. She had a question.

ROBIN: I wasn't really certain how she could make that statement about him being one way back then would affect the way he is now today. You have got to look at what he has done today to the young girl who's 5 years old and make a determination as to what he's done now. I wasn't real clear about what she was saying about his past.

KENNEDY: OK, let's talk about this. I want to get to several things. First, let me ask you this. This -- Samantha's body was left in a way where she was posed in a very provocative way. You have to wonder what kind of person does something like this? Pat?

BROWN: Well, as I say, this is somebody who stepped over a very, very unusual line that most of us wouldn't cross. He's extremely dangerous. Anyone who would grab a child, rape her and leave her in such a way to mock society and to mock the child herself is someone we never want to see on the streets ever, ever, ever again.

KENNEDY: All right, we have got to take a short break, but we'll continue this discussion right on the back side of this break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KENNEDY: Welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE. We are talking about the Samantha Runnion murder case and profiling a child killer. We have two guests with is, Pat Brown, a criminal profiler, and Michele Galietta is with us to talk about this.

Pat, let's talk a little bit more about the kind of person that does this. There was apparently a lot of evidence, physical evidence left at the scene where she was abducted and the scene where she was found. And you have to wonder, was this calculated, or is this person just dumb?

BROWN: I think you probably pointed it out quite correctly. He seems on the dumb side to me. I think one of the problems was, which somebody was indicating, is he went to the apartment complex for another purpose, to see another girl -- or shall we say child, I'm not even sure -- and she wasn't available, so he grabbed what was available. And this is a pretty sloppy crime, which was one reason the police were able to catch him, along with the fact that there was good cooperation between the jurisdictions. But he was definitely very sloppy. He abducted a child in front of a witness, and then he dumped the body in such a way that you could find it quickly and gather all the evidence. This is not a smart killer at all.

KENNEDY: Michele, what signs point to a serial molester or a serial killer?

GALIETTA: Again, like I said before, it's very hard to go from one crime and say that someone is a serial molester, or serial killer especially. You know, it requires a series of events to see whether or not that happened. There does seem to be this kind of charge lingering in the background that he molested children before, but I think that's what's pretty clear is there was a lot of violence involved in this crime, and so then you start thinking about sexual sadism, and sexual sadists are people who derive some kind of sexual satisfaction out of not just the sexuality involved in the crime but the violence, the murder, and they derive some satisfaction from the suffering of their victims. And that's what it seems like we are looking at.

KENNEDY: Pat, is it possible that this person, whoever it was, wanted to be caught?

BROWN: No. I disagree with that entirely. That's one of those myths that goes around. Mostly they get caught because they are sloppy or arrogant. And I kind of disagree about the serial killer issue. You have got a person who crosses a line like this and commits this kind of horrific crime, chances are he is exactly that, a serial killer. Whether he gets a chance to commit more crimes or not, I would still put him in a serial killer category, and let's be really safe about it.

KENNEDY: All right, David Mattingly, as we said before, has been covering this case in Santa Ana, and he joins us once again. What have you got, David?

MATTINGLY: Some new information coming into us just a few moments ago. We're told that the proceedings will begin today as they originally planned with Avila being over video conference, but we are told that his attorney will ask for a continuance, and that means this -- we'll have to wait until about August 23, the new date that is going to be set, August 23, until we hear how he responds to the charges against him. So that coming down just in the last couple of moments.

KENNEDY: Do we know why?

MATTINGLY: Possibly because things have been moving here rather quickly. Attorneys typically do this so they can get more time to prepare a defense. We'll have to wait and hear what the explanation is when we get into the courtroom.

KENNEDY: All right, David Mattingly in Santa Ana, thank you.

We have somebody in the audience who has something to say -- Casey.

CHRIS: Casey is a criminal defense attorney.

CASEY: Well, I am just diametrically opposed to the death penalty. I think it's broken, for all the reasons that have been stated here before. It can't be fixed. And once you have killed somebody, you can't bring them back to life.

More importantly, I think that it's premature to start judging whether or not the death penalty is appropriate in this case, because we don't have sufficient facts to do that. And we haven't looked at one of the things that is most important in my mind as to the defendant's state of mind. He may have been mentally ill at this time. And we don't put people to death who are mentally insane.

So, I think that it is way too early to talk about whether or not the death penalty is appropriate or inappropriate. And what we ought to be talking about is, let's gather the facts. Let the professionals address those facts. And let the chips fall where they may at some other point in time, although, again, I'm diametrically opposed to the death penalty.

KENNEDY: All right, Larry, what did you want to say?

LARRY: I'm a criminal defense attorney. And I have handled criminal cases in the past.

And what I have learned from my experience is the fact that the death penalty does not deter this type of crime and this type of activity. I firmly believe that the people that commit these crimes normally are imbalanced, oftentimes have psychological problems that go deeply, deeply into their past. And I think the reason that the death penalty is still around is, basically, it's an eye-for-an-eye society and it's a form of retribution. But, in my experiences, I don't believe that it deters these types of horrible crimes.

KENNEDY: All right, Pat, what does deter them?

BROWN: I'm shaking my head here. I think that's ludicrous.

First of all, one of the reasons serial killers operate is because they don't believe A, they can be caught. And, secondly, they are not so worried about our criminal justice system. There are serial killers who I have talked to who have said: "I will not commit a crime in this state because they have the death penalty. So, I'm going over to another state where I feel a little bit safer."

The death penalty does deter. And a whole criminal justice system that would really wreak havoc on these guys very quickly, catch them, get them put away and punish them severely would be a good idea.

Now, there was a guy that was just put away -- not put away in Hawaii. He also abducted two girls. And one girl he had in a state of undress and he was naked standing next to her. And he was caught. And he was ruled -- quote -- "insane," put in a mental institution. And he said, "Oh, I'll participate in a sex-offender program and I'll take some medication." This guy may be out on the streets to kill another child very, very soon. And that's one of the problems with our system.

KENNEDY: All right, guys, thank you so much.

We have to take a break. But later this hour, find out who Al Gore is blaming for the nation's economic blues. Stay right there.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(APPLAUSE).

KENNEDY: Welcome back to TALKBACK LIVE. I'm Kathleen Kennedy, in for Arthel Neville.

We are talking about the Samantha Runnion case, as we mentioned before, and what happens in the mind of a killer, someone who would take a 5-year-old girl and not only kill her, but molest her as well? She died from asphyxiation in the end.

And we have an audience today full of mothers who we have been talking to on the breaks. And I have three children. And I can tell you that, when you cover cases like this, it gets personal. And I want to hear from some of you on what you think about this.

Lisa?

LISA: I'm a first-time mom and a new mother. And, as far as I'm concerned, I'm totally, totally for the death penalty if there is no doubt that this person totally did it. And my view is, they wouldn't have to worry about prosecuting this gentlemen, because I would take care of it for them.

KENNEDY: Danielle?

DANIELLE: Hi. How are you?

I'm a mother of two. And while, emotionally, I feel that this guy should be put to death, I am against the death penalty. So, I believe that he should go to jail and suffer the crime. From a historical perspective, most people who have committed crimes usually kill themselves anyway. So that is not a punishment. So he should go to jail and suffer.

KENNEDY: Pat, is that a cure for this kind of behavior?

BROWN: What do you mean, a cure for what kind of behavior?

KENNEDY: Well, jail.

BROWN: The jail doesn't cure the behavior. The jail keeps them off the street. And that's a good place for them. The only reason I think that the death penalty should be abolished -- if it should be -- would be that it's causing trouble with getting convictions. Other than that, I don't have a problem with it. I'm just concerned that they stay where they need to stay, away from society, and have no chance of ever, ever getting out again.

KENNEDY: All right, Linda, on the line from Connecticut?

CALLER: Hi.

KENNEDY: Hi, Linda.

CALLER: Yes.

I worked at the probation department for 26 years. And I dealt with these criminals, these sex offenders. Believe me, there's no turning back with these guys. They don't want to know nothing. They are stalkers to the extreme, especially for young kids. They need the death penalty.

Now, we are talking about this guy because we are not sure of all of the details yet. But if the sheriff says he's 100 percent sure, I'm 100 percent sure. You got to put them away, death, especially for kids. I have seen a lot of sex-offender crimes. And it's horrible, let me tell you..

KENNEDY: Michele, can they be rehabilitated?

GALIETTA: You know, the research evidence is not great, again, that we can treat this successfully, even with the anti-androgen medications.

A lot of people say, what about chemical castration? I caution people, because it's so behavioral as well as just physical. Especially someone who tortures someone is not necessarily just interested in sex. It's very, very unlikely.

KENNEDY: And even people who have been though that have been known to molest again; is that right?

GALIETTA: Oh, absolutely.

KENNEDY: OK, Chris?

CHRIS: A probation officer from Houston.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes. I'm a mother also. I have three daughters, twin girls, 3, and an older daughter that's 5. I can sympathize with the family in this case. But, in Texas, we have been criticized as being the death capital of the world. So, if the death penalty is working, why are we still killing so many offenders?

KENNEDY: All right, we have to leave it right there. We have got to again take a short break.

Michele Galietta and Pat Brown, thank you both for being on the show today.

(CROSSTALK)

KENNEDY: Up next: If it's bad for the economy, could it be good for Democrats? I'll explain right after this.

Coming up on TALKBACK LIVE: Will a savage bear market leave Republicans covered in Gore?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

AL GORE, FORMER VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: The Bush- Cheney economic policy is a total catastrophe for America. They ought to tear it up and start all over again.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KENNEDY: Who do you blame for the mess we are in?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KENNEDY: Welcome back, everybody.

All eyes are on the stock numbers in this last hour before the closing bell.

Let's check in again with CNN senior business correspondent Rhonda Schaffler on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange -- hi, Rhonda.

RHONDA SCHAFFLER, CNN SENIOR BUSINESS CORRESPONDENT : Hi there, Kathleen.

Well, at this point, we are seeing another round of selling here. This is really a dramatic day on Wall Street, coming on the heels of that big sell-off Friday. The Dow, obviously, at these levels at risk of closing below 8000, haven't seen that happen in years. Nasdaq could close below 1300. It's bit of a '90s flashback on Wall Street: markets in general trading at levels not seen since '97, '98 -- some Telecom stocks under pressure today -- investors, of course, having the first chance to react to the biggest corporate chapter 11 bankruptcy filing in our history.

That's WorldCom. And you have this persistent situation here of mistrust. And it just seems that Wall Street is having trouble shaking it off, even as the markets go to lower levels. And, at some point, strategists say the markets will get attractive. But if the trust isn't there, nobody can step up to buy just yet -- Kathleen.

KENNEDY: You been wearing your seat belt today, Rhonda?

(LAUGHTER)

KENNEDY: Rhonda, I want to ask you this. What other than WorldCom is weighing in on the market today?

SCHAFFLER: Well, it's interesting, because, while this was largely expected, the bankruptcy filing here, it certainly does nothing to help lift sentiment.

You are seeing other telephone company stocks move lower, some financial stocks under pressure because there's concerns about banks' exposures to all sorts of companies, whether it's WorldCom or some other companies that may be struggling. So, it's another exclamation point in a continued series of negative stories that we have to keep reporting.

KENNEDY: All right, Rhonda, thanks a lot.

All right, so, who or what is causing the Dow dive? That is the big question today.

At a political rally in Tennessee over the weekend, Al Gore bashed the Bush administration's handling of the economy. Gore said the White House should "completely scrap its economic plan and its team, start over from scratch and start rebuilding this economy" -- unquote.

And it appears the market has driven Gore back into the arms of Bill Clinton. Gore said -- quote -- "I don't care what anybody says. Bill Clinton and I did a damn good job." And those are his words.

(APPLAUSE)

KENNEDY: All right.

Here to talk about politics and the economy are Rich Lowry, a syndicated columnist and editor of "The National Review." Also, we're joined by syndicated columnist and economist Julianne Malveaux.

Julianne, I'm going to start with you. Oh, we have to mention that you are the author of "Wall Street, Main Street, and the Side Street: A Mad Economist Takes a Stroll." And she has a new book coming out this fall with Deborah Perry called "Unfinished Business: A Democrat and a Republican Take on the 10 Most Important Issues Women Face."

Thanks, guys, for both being on the show today.

If you haven't noticed by looking at our audience today, there is an awful lot of red. I did not get the memo today.

(APPLAUSE)

KENNEDY: And I'm completely clashing. Why all this red, Julianne?

I'm going to start with you. Ladies first.

JULIANNE MALVEAUX, ECONOMIST: Well, in 1913, 22 young black women at Howard University founded Delta Sigma Theta Sorority. And the sorority is meeting here in Atlanta. We are one of the oldest, largest and most socially active African-American women's organizations. Today is social action day. I am on the Social Action Commission.

We are glad to be here. We were talking about the economy today at the sorority.

KENNEDY: Oh, well, how convenient. Yes.

In these times -- let's get down to business, Julianne. In these times, especially as election season draws near, everything is ripe for the picking, including the economy, right?

MALVEAUX: Well, with the Dow doing what it is doing, with unemployment rate higher than it has been, yes, everything is for the picking. And, of course, what's going on here, Al Gore is absolutely right. This president described the last 10 years as a binge? How dare he, especially given his background?

What we know here is that the Dow is losing because the Republicans have a corporate culture that has encouraged business chicanery. We won't hold the president responsible for WorldCom. We can't do that. But we can hold him responsible for the climate. And this is a climate that really has been one of absolute disrespect and disregard for the small investor that has been driving this economy all this time.

This is an audience of women. Many retired school teachers, they have seen their pensions drop. And this is happening all over America. People are simply discouraged. And it's on Mr. Bush.

KENNEDY: Ah, Rich, do you agree with that?

(LAUGHTER)

KENNEDY: I would think not, huh?

RICH LOWRY, "THE NATIONAL REVIEW": I don't know. I'm a little daunted here, because none of my former fraternity brothers are in the audience there. So, I'm at a little bit of a -- I'm at a disadvantage.

KENNEDY: And you're a little outnumbered today.

MALVEAUX: Hi, Rich.

LOWRY: But let me extend my congratulations to all of Julianne's sorority sisters down there. That's a nice event.

Well, where to start? A couple things. One, most of these schemes and fraudulent plans were hatched in the late 1990s, before President Bush was president. And they have been exposed while he has been president. So I don't see how, by any stretch of the imagination, you can blame President Bush. What did he do? As soon as he was elected, did he send a secret signal to all corporate CEOs, "Guys, right now, please start committing crimes"? The idea is ridiculous.

And his Justice Department has been very harsh on corporate crime. They put Arthur Andersen, the shady accounting company, out of business, which I think was a very good thing. And I think Democrats should put their money where their mouths are. And if they really think the Bush tax cut was such a bad thing, let's see Senator Daschle -- he's the majority leader of the Senate -- let's see him march down to the floor of the Senate today and say, "Let's repeal that thing."

But he won't do that because he knows that, one, it one would be economically not a very viable policy. And, also, it would be extremely unpopular in the country. So instead we just have Democrats taking potshots at George Bush that I don't think are very supportable.

MALVEAUX: Oh, Rich. Oh, Rich. Oh, Rich. You know what?

(CROSSTALK)

LOWRY: That's what you always say, Julianne.

MALVEAUX: That's what I always say and I'm always right.

(APPLAUSE)

MALVEAUX: Tom Daschle is not going to talk about giving any money back.

The fact is that we have gone -- this president has taken us from surplus to deficit. Five years ago, we were wondering: What were we going to do with all this -- quote -- "extra money" we had? Now we are now looking at a deficit. Part of it has to do with the so-called war on terrorism. But let's put a pin on that. Much of it has to do with the tax situation. We lost how many trillion dollars worth of wealth in the last two weeks?

Mr. Bush is not the only force responsible, but I certainly think there is a level of responsibility. And if it isn't little Bush, let's look at big Bush, because remember the fact that...

(APPLAUSE)

MALVEAUX: Remember deregulation. The reason the Securities and Exchange Commission cannot do the kind of work that they need to do is because they have such a small budget.

They can only look into one in seven of the cases that they need to look into, Rich. And Harvey Pitt, with all due respect, has said he's willing to settle for $20 million extra this year. He needs a lot more. We need to regulate these corporations. Otherwise, we won't be able to revive our market. And then our economy collapses.

LOWRY: Right. Well, let me address a couple of those. First of all...

KENNEDY: Rich, let me stop you for a second. We do have to get a quick break in.

Boy, this is a lot of fun. I don't have to do a thing. I'll just let you guys have at it after this break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KENNEDY: Welcome back, everybody, to TALKBACK LIVE.

CNN's Jason Carroll is now in Times Square. He is sort of gauging street reaction to the stock market.

Jason, what have you come up with?

JASON CARROLL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, let's get right to it, Kathleen.

I have got two people right here: Annie Churchill (ph). And we also have Kirk Charles (ph) with us as well.

Annie, I'm going to start with you.

Give us your sense of where you stand in terms of the market, how you have been feeling. Have you taken a big hit? Where do you stand?

ANNIE CHURCHILL, INVESTOR: Well, I actually lost $50,000 this week on the stock market, as my husband told me, because he really -- he handles most of it. But, yes, so I have taken a huge hit.

CARROLL: How are you feeling now?

CHURCHILL: Well, you know, I feel sort of depressed, but I'm going to the (UNINTELLIGIBLE) sale right now to make myself feel better.

CARROLL: That's right. You are a fashion designer. Keep spending there.

Kirk, let me turn it on to you. What do you think about this whole thing? You are a financial consultant. So I'm really listening, wanting to hear what you have to say about this.

KIRK CHARLES, FINANCIAL CONSULTANT: I'm thinking now it's more prudent than ever to be long term. You can't be short term, especially in this type of market. I don't really expect it to shoot up any time in the near future. But, again, you can't be a short-term player. You have to look long term.

CARROLL: All right, Annie you listening to that?

Very quickly, I'm going to throw it out to both you now, very quickly. What do you think about the White House's response to what has happened? Enough is being done, too much? What do you think?

CHARLES: I really don't think that they can really do any more. The response -- what can you do? You just have to ride it out. The market goes up and it goes down. This is not the first time in history the market has gone down.

CARROLL: Very quickly, Annie, your thoughts?

CHURCHILL: Yes, I sort of agree. There's not much you can do. They have done as much as they can.

CARROLL: All right, all right, Annie. Really appreciate it.

Annie, Kirk, I hope things work out for you.

CHURCHILL: Thank you.

CARROLL: Once again, thanks very much, guys. Really appreciate it.

So, once again, basically, Kathleen, I have been out here throughout most of the afternoon. And, basically, people have been telling me that they are cautious about what has been happening, but optimistic as well. And in terms of the White House, you heard it here: basically everyone here basically saying, "Look, the president is doing all that he can" -- back to you.

KENNEDY: All right, Jason Carroll in New York, thank you.

We have just a few seconds left.

How much of this is the media? The more we talk, the worse it gets.

MALVEAUX: It's not the media. These are real numbers. The media didn't make up WorldCom. It didn't make up Enron. These things really happen. And let me just disagree with the folks. The White House could do more. We need good legislation that makes sure that we do good accounting. And the White House can push it, instead of talking about

(CROSSTALK)

KENNEDY: And last word from Rich.

LOWRY: Well, the administration has basically endorsed the Senate bill. It is going to sign some version of it. And the fact is, markets go up and down. And the fundamental underlying economy is pretty strong. Industrial production has been up the last six months. So, hopefully the market will start coming up, too.

KENNEDY: All right, guys, thank you both for being here. And thank you for being with us today on TALKBACK LIVE. That's it for us. I'll be back tomorrow and Wednesday.

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