Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Live At Daybreak

Legal Grounds

Aired October 07, 2002 - 06:29   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.


CAROL COSTELLO, CNN ANCHOR: And now, we head to our regular DAYBREAK feature Legal Grounds with legal analyst Kendall Coffey.
Kendall joins us on the phone live from Miami to talk about what's on the court docket this week.

Ooh, it's a busy week, too, isn't it, Kendall?

KENDALL COFFEY, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Yes, it really is, Carol.

COSTELLO: Let's talk about these sleeper cells that they've arrested in Buffalo and Portland. The Buffalo, the alleged Buffalo sleeper cell, I should say, is to appear in court today. All six are asking for bail. What's the possibility that they'll get it?

COFFEY: They'll be getting a ruling by tomorrow and this is an important test case in a lot of ways. Because like the Oregon cell, you've got a scenario of people who basically appeared to be involved in training, some degree of training -- we don't know how much -- and then nothing else after that. There's nothing specific to indicate what their plans were, what particular measures of terrorism they might have been undertaking.

Is that a crime? Obviously the government says so. Should they be denied bail where they have close ties to the community and there's no specific evidence of further violence? Obviously, the judge in Buffalo is very troubled by that and is looking at it very closely.

In many ways, this is a conceptual test of the philosophy of preemption and prevention. The government is saying we don't want to wait till they progress very far in making plans that could cost the lives of Americans. We're going to bring charges now and we're going to keep them locked up until trial. That way there's no risk of anybody getting hurt.

COSTELLO: Does it make a difference that some members of the Buffalo cell actually trained in Afghanistan and some members of the Portland cell did not?

COFFEY: Well, I think from the government's standpoint, it's the same crime. It's a crime of providing material support and services to al Qaeda. And one of the issues is going to be is that really a sufficient legal charge. The judge in Buffalo is studying the view that maybe that's a little too vague. If somebody just shows up for training, either attempting to train and never getting it done, in Afghanistan, or actually going to Afghanistan, is training for a period of time and doing nothing else a sufficient crime within the meaning of the statute?

In the John Walker Lindh case, the judge believed that it was. There are other cases that are different. If the judge in Buffalo questions the legal sufficiency of the criminal charge, that could be a big setback to the administration. Not likely to happen, but something that we're going to be very concerned about over the next day.

COSTELLO: I can understand why.

Let's talk a little bit more about Robert Blake. He's to appear in court for a bail hearing. Is it possible that the judge might grant that?

COFFEY: I think it's unlikely, but the defense has been trying to get this bail hearing almost since April 18, when he was charged. Blake actually stood up at one point and explained that because he's dyslexic, he really needs to get out of prison to be able to assist in his own defense. There is no exception for dyslexic celebrities. He's charged with murder. I don't think he's going to get a bail bond here. Or he's not going to get...

COSTELLO: Well, that's a new...

COFFEY: He's not going to get out on bail. But, Carol, remember one thing, the defense is trying to get as many hearings as they can before trial. Why? It gives them a chance to find out more about the prosecution's case, get better prepared for the trial. So even if he doesn't get out on bail, they gain something by getting additional hearings, additional knowledge about what the prosecution's evidence is.

COSTELLO: Oh, got you. So they can fight better.

We want to mention Martha Stewart. What do you know? What's new with her?

COFFEY: These are dark hours for Martha Stewart. She's off the New York Stock Exchange. Her stock has plummeted all the more. The government has in hand a cooperator, Douglas Faniuel, that is prepared to say that the so-called stop loss order was an invention. There isn't maybe yet enough evidence to bring charges because using a cooperator who himself has changed his story a couple times usually isn't enough of a case against a Martha Stewart, where you don't have any smoking gun documents.

But if the government gets into its full Merrill Lynch broker, they're about one witness away from having enough of a case, if they get the Merrill Lynch broker, Bogdanovich, to cooperate against Martha Stewart, the already hot water starts to boil.

COSTELLO: And has Martha Stewart's actions in any way worsened her case?

COFFEY: Well, I think one of the big things that people keep talking about is was this an overwhelmingly strong case of insider trading to begin with? Maybe not. But did the actions of cover-up and perhaps, according to the government, basically inventing a story about a stop loss order, that is to say, that there had been an agreement that the stock would be automatically sold as soon as it went below $60 a share, was that kind of creation, according to the government, really the big mistake that was made here? How many times have we seen that the original allegations may not have been so bad, but it was the cover-up that really landed somebody in handcuffs?

COSTELLO: Yes, well, it'll be interesting.

Kendall Coffey, thank you very much.

We'll check back with you next Monday.

Appreciate it.

COFFEY: Thank you, Carol.

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






Aired October 7, 2002 - 06:29   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
CAROL COSTELLO, CNN ANCHOR: And now, we head to our regular DAYBREAK feature Legal Grounds with legal analyst Kendall Coffey.
Kendall joins us on the phone live from Miami to talk about what's on the court docket this week.

Ooh, it's a busy week, too, isn't it, Kendall?

KENDALL COFFEY, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Yes, it really is, Carol.

COSTELLO: Let's talk about these sleeper cells that they've arrested in Buffalo and Portland. The Buffalo, the alleged Buffalo sleeper cell, I should say, is to appear in court today. All six are asking for bail. What's the possibility that they'll get it?

COFFEY: They'll be getting a ruling by tomorrow and this is an important test case in a lot of ways. Because like the Oregon cell, you've got a scenario of people who basically appeared to be involved in training, some degree of training -- we don't know how much -- and then nothing else after that. There's nothing specific to indicate what their plans were, what particular measures of terrorism they might have been undertaking.

Is that a crime? Obviously the government says so. Should they be denied bail where they have close ties to the community and there's no specific evidence of further violence? Obviously, the judge in Buffalo is very troubled by that and is looking at it very closely.

In many ways, this is a conceptual test of the philosophy of preemption and prevention. The government is saying we don't want to wait till they progress very far in making plans that could cost the lives of Americans. We're going to bring charges now and we're going to keep them locked up until trial. That way there's no risk of anybody getting hurt.

COSTELLO: Does it make a difference that some members of the Buffalo cell actually trained in Afghanistan and some members of the Portland cell did not?

COFFEY: Well, I think from the government's standpoint, it's the same crime. It's a crime of providing material support and services to al Qaeda. And one of the issues is going to be is that really a sufficient legal charge. The judge in Buffalo is studying the view that maybe that's a little too vague. If somebody just shows up for training, either attempting to train and never getting it done, in Afghanistan, or actually going to Afghanistan, is training for a period of time and doing nothing else a sufficient crime within the meaning of the statute?

In the John Walker Lindh case, the judge believed that it was. There are other cases that are different. If the judge in Buffalo questions the legal sufficiency of the criminal charge, that could be a big setback to the administration. Not likely to happen, but something that we're going to be very concerned about over the next day.

COSTELLO: I can understand why.

Let's talk a little bit more about Robert Blake. He's to appear in court for a bail hearing. Is it possible that the judge might grant that?

COFFEY: I think it's unlikely, but the defense has been trying to get this bail hearing almost since April 18, when he was charged. Blake actually stood up at one point and explained that because he's dyslexic, he really needs to get out of prison to be able to assist in his own defense. There is no exception for dyslexic celebrities. He's charged with murder. I don't think he's going to get a bail bond here. Or he's not going to get...

COSTELLO: Well, that's a new...

COFFEY: He's not going to get out on bail. But, Carol, remember one thing, the defense is trying to get as many hearings as they can before trial. Why? It gives them a chance to find out more about the prosecution's case, get better prepared for the trial. So even if he doesn't get out on bail, they gain something by getting additional hearings, additional knowledge about what the prosecution's evidence is.

COSTELLO: Oh, got you. So they can fight better.

We want to mention Martha Stewart. What do you know? What's new with her?

COFFEY: These are dark hours for Martha Stewart. She's off the New York Stock Exchange. Her stock has plummeted all the more. The government has in hand a cooperator, Douglas Faniuel, that is prepared to say that the so-called stop loss order was an invention. There isn't maybe yet enough evidence to bring charges because using a cooperator who himself has changed his story a couple times usually isn't enough of a case against a Martha Stewart, where you don't have any smoking gun documents.

But if the government gets into its full Merrill Lynch broker, they're about one witness away from having enough of a case, if they get the Merrill Lynch broker, Bogdanovich, to cooperate against Martha Stewart, the already hot water starts to boil.

COSTELLO: And has Martha Stewart's actions in any way worsened her case?

COFFEY: Well, I think one of the big things that people keep talking about is was this an overwhelmingly strong case of insider trading to begin with? Maybe not. But did the actions of cover-up and perhaps, according to the government, basically inventing a story about a stop loss order, that is to say, that there had been an agreement that the stock would be automatically sold as soon as it went below $60 a share, was that kind of creation, according to the government, really the big mistake that was made here? How many times have we seen that the original allegations may not have been so bad, but it was the cover-up that really landed somebody in handcuffs?

COSTELLO: Yes, well, it'll be interesting.

Kendall Coffey, thank you very much.

We'll check back with you next Monday.

Appreciate it.

COFFEY: Thank you, Carol.

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