Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Live Sunday

Sniper Trial Begins Monday

Aired October 19, 2003 - 16:35   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.


ANDREA KOPPEL, CNN ANCHOR: Opening statements in the trial of sniper shooting suspect John Allen Muhammad begin on Monday. Twelve jurors and three alternates have been selected. Muhammad's alleged partner in the killings Lee Boyd Malvo may also be present in the courtroom. Prosecutors cannot compel him to testify, but they can require that he be present.
With us live to look at the legal week ahead is former prosecutor, Wendy Murphy, who joins us from Boston. So Ms. Murphy, we know that jury selection concluded Friday. What kind of jury were both sides looking for and what kind do you think they got?

WENDY MURPHY, FORMER PROSECUTOR: Well, one thing for sure is the prosecutor really didn't worry too much about jury selection. This is just such a compelling story, a compelling national tragedy. I don't think the prosecution was worried about too much, except perhaps putting in one or two jurors who might have a strong anti-government sentiment. But in terms of this case, I don't think that kind of bias would hurt the prosecution's gas case.

From the defense perspective, I think what they want more than anything is to be able to put even one person on that jury that might see fit to spare Muhammad's life. Really the case is very strong and I think the defense strategy is aimed only at sparing his life, which means finding some measure of sympathy there.

And I know that we have a few members of the jury that are from the military, and on the one hand, you think that's tough, likely to be tough for the defense, military jurors tend to be more willing than others to find death an appropriate sentence, but Muhammad himself served in the Gulf War and this might create a kind of kinship or some degree of relationship, some measure of sympathy that might spare his life.

KOPPEL: One focus for the defense, I've read, is to try to spare Muhammad from being tried under the terrorism -- a conviction rather under the terrorism act. Why is that?

MURPHY: Well, Andrea there is no question about it. If they get a conviction under the anti-terrorism act, the possibility of a death sentence is much better than if they win a conviction under the other theory of murder.

Under Virginia law, it's possible but very difficult to win a death sentence if all you prove is that he participated as a kind of getaway driver in the murder. You could do it, but it's tough. In fact, under Virginia law, you have to show that Muhammad was the instigator and moving spirit not just the getaway driver. That's a pretty high standard.

So, under the anti-terrorism law, again, as yet untried in this jurisdiction, they can win the death sentence, still have to let the jury figure out whether death is appropriate, but you win under a more lenient standard.

And we know that it would probably sell here. Because all they really have to show is he put the civilian population in fear and I don't think there's any doubt the government can make that showing.

KOPPEL: Well, certainly for the prosecution's side of things, it would seem as if this is pretty much of an open/shut case irrespective of what they decide is the penalty should be, but what do you think the challenges will be for the prosecution?

MURPHY: Well it remains to be seen, because we're speculating that this is a really strong case for the prosecution based on the stories we've read, but really, the media lately has been quiet about exactly what they're going to say and exactly what the defense might be.

On the one hand, this is the case of case you'd expect Muhammad's lawyers to point the finger at Malvo. Because there's a great deal of forensic evidence connecting Malvo to the crime itself but to actually having his fingerprints on the weapon that shot this man dead.

In another kind of setting, it might work well for someone like Muhammad to say look, I didn't know what was going on. I was the getaway driver. He did all of the bad things and I was an unwitting participant.

But I think, you know, it's very difficult given the massive amount of harm they caused and the fact this they were found together, the fact that they really seemed to be working together over a long course of time. And a lot of that evidence is going to come in.

I really think that the prosecution is probably exceedingly confident at this point in time, because I, frankly, can't think of a defense that would really sell with the jury. I really can't.

KOPPEL: Wendy Murphy, joining us again, just a reminder, CNN of course, will have wall-to-wall coverage on the trial which gets under way tomorrow for John Allen Muhammad. Wendy thank you for joining us.

MURPHY: Thank you Andrea.

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 19, 2003 - 16:35   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
ANDREA KOPPEL, CNN ANCHOR: Opening statements in the trial of sniper shooting suspect John Allen Muhammad begin on Monday. Twelve jurors and three alternates have been selected. Muhammad's alleged partner in the killings Lee Boyd Malvo may also be present in the courtroom. Prosecutors cannot compel him to testify, but they can require that he be present.
With us live to look at the legal week ahead is former prosecutor, Wendy Murphy, who joins us from Boston. So Ms. Murphy, we know that jury selection concluded Friday. What kind of jury were both sides looking for and what kind do you think they got?

WENDY MURPHY, FORMER PROSECUTOR: Well, one thing for sure is the prosecutor really didn't worry too much about jury selection. This is just such a compelling story, a compelling national tragedy. I don't think the prosecution was worried about too much, except perhaps putting in one or two jurors who might have a strong anti-government sentiment. But in terms of this case, I don't think that kind of bias would hurt the prosecution's gas case.

From the defense perspective, I think what they want more than anything is to be able to put even one person on that jury that might see fit to spare Muhammad's life. Really the case is very strong and I think the defense strategy is aimed only at sparing his life, which means finding some measure of sympathy there.

And I know that we have a few members of the jury that are from the military, and on the one hand, you think that's tough, likely to be tough for the defense, military jurors tend to be more willing than others to find death an appropriate sentence, but Muhammad himself served in the Gulf War and this might create a kind of kinship or some degree of relationship, some measure of sympathy that might spare his life.

KOPPEL: One focus for the defense, I've read, is to try to spare Muhammad from being tried under the terrorism -- a conviction rather under the terrorism act. Why is that?

MURPHY: Well, Andrea there is no question about it. If they get a conviction under the anti-terrorism act, the possibility of a death sentence is much better than if they win a conviction under the other theory of murder.

Under Virginia law, it's possible but very difficult to win a death sentence if all you prove is that he participated as a kind of getaway driver in the murder. You could do it, but it's tough. In fact, under Virginia law, you have to show that Muhammad was the instigator and moving spirit not just the getaway driver. That's a pretty high standard.

So, under the anti-terrorism law, again, as yet untried in this jurisdiction, they can win the death sentence, still have to let the jury figure out whether death is appropriate, but you win under a more lenient standard.

And we know that it would probably sell here. Because all they really have to show is he put the civilian population in fear and I don't think there's any doubt the government can make that showing.

KOPPEL: Well, certainly for the prosecution's side of things, it would seem as if this is pretty much of an open/shut case irrespective of what they decide is the penalty should be, but what do you think the challenges will be for the prosecution?

MURPHY: Well it remains to be seen, because we're speculating that this is a really strong case for the prosecution based on the stories we've read, but really, the media lately has been quiet about exactly what they're going to say and exactly what the defense might be.

On the one hand, this is the case of case you'd expect Muhammad's lawyers to point the finger at Malvo. Because there's a great deal of forensic evidence connecting Malvo to the crime itself but to actually having his fingerprints on the weapon that shot this man dead.

In another kind of setting, it might work well for someone like Muhammad to say look, I didn't know what was going on. I was the getaway driver. He did all of the bad things and I was an unwitting participant.

But I think, you know, it's very difficult given the massive amount of harm they caused and the fact this they were found together, the fact that they really seemed to be working together over a long course of time. And a lot of that evidence is going to come in.

I really think that the prosecution is probably exceedingly confident at this point in time, because I, frankly, can't think of a defense that would really sell with the jury. I really can't.

KOPPEL: Wendy Murphy, joining us again, just a reminder, CNN of course, will have wall-to-wall coverage on the trial which gets under way tomorrow for John Allen Muhammad. Wendy thank you for joining us.

MURPHY: Thank you Andrea.

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