Return to Transcripts main page
Nancy Grace
Federal Judge Greenlights Sex Offenders Living Near School Bus Stop; Breaking News in Natalee Holloway Investigation
Aired June 27, 2006 - 20:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
NANCY GRACE, HOST: Tonight a federal court judge green lights convicted sex offenders living just feet away from school bus stops.
Federal Judge Clarence Cooper, you are in contempt! This Atlanta federal judge is more concerned about the sex offenders` so-called rights than those of elementary school children.
People, wake up and head to the courthouse!
And tonight, breaking developments in the Natalee Holloway investigation. The 17-year old Alabama beauty disappeared on her high school senior trip to Aruba. Aruba police seem to have bungled the case from the very get-go.
But, tonight, is the man now in custody telling the truth? He claims he saw the judge`s son Joran van der Sloot with Natalee on the beach the very night she disappeared. And tonight we are taking your calls.
But first tonight, to Georgia. Now children riding school buses have even more to worry about -- sex offenders.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You never know when your child might get snatched from you. You never know when you might not see your child again.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GRACE: When I was in Atlanta trying cases, I actually practiced a little bit in front of a Judge Clarence Cooper. He`s made his way up to the federal bench and with a stunning blow to victim`s rights today, declares that convicted -- repeat -- convicted sex offenders may now live within 1,000 feet of school bus stops.
School buses, first graders, second graders and third graders. What`s next? Pre-K?
Straight up to Kevin Miller with WPTF radio.
Kevin, tell me I`m wrong?
KEVIN MILLER, WPTF RADIO INVESTIGATIVE REPORTER: No, you`re correct about that, that temporary restraining order will deal with over 10,000 registered sex offenders in Georgia, pretty much prohibiting the law to go into effect, which was supposed to happen, Nancy, July 1st.
Now, the deal with Georgia, there are over 150 bus stops. What this law would have done was prohibit any registered sex offender from living within 1,000 feet of places where children congregate, like playgrounds, like public or private parks, and most notably, the real hard-hitting edge on this case has to come with bus stops.
GRACE: To Caryn Stark, psychotherapist, this is like sending an alcoholic to the liquor store and asking them to bring back a lime. Not good idea.
CARYN STARK, PSYCHOTHERAPIST: Not at all, Nancy. And you`re absolutely correct. If you think about it, these are people that cannot stop their acts. They can`t help themselves. This is what turns them on. They can`t change their orientation; and here they are, being to be close to children and it`s abominable.
GRACE: Here in the studio with me, a veteran former prosecutor that tried cases throughout that jurisdiction, practiced in front of Judge Cooper as well. Keith Lindsay is with us.
Now, Keith, in this case, eight, specifically, eight convicted sex offenders are at issue contesting this. In a nutshell, what are their grounds?
KEITH LINDSAY, FORMER PROSECUTOR: Well, their grounds are several. The first of which is that they are worried that it`s an ex post facto law. And that means that it`s a law that made what was legal for them to do previously, now makes it illegal. And in general, ex post facto laws are unconstitutional.
The additional grounds have to do with their accessibility to churches. Essentially, tat the law not only prohibits them from living within 1,000 feet of a school, but also within 1,000 feet of a church. And what they have pointed out in their brief...
GRACE: Does the law specifically state churches?
LINDSAY: Yes, it does.
GRACE: So they are saying this infringes on their right to religion?
LINDSAY: Well, not only their right to religion, but as you may well know...
GRACE: But it says live. Why do they have to live beside the church? Why can`t they take the bus to the church? Why can`t they take their car to the church? Why do they have to live there?
LINDSAY: Well, part of the point that has been brought up in the brief in the plaintiffs, is that many churches also operate residential treatment facilities within their confines. And so they feel it`s in fact counterproductive to move these people away from the church and those are the points they have raised.
GRACE: OK. Got it.
Back to Kevin Miller, investigative reporter.
Exactly who filed this? Is it the ACLU?
MILLER: It`s the ACLU of Georgia and the Southern Center for Human Rights in Georgia, Nancy.
GRACE: Take a listen to this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We feel that it would be inappropriate for them to throw people out of their houses come Saturday. And the judge has stated that he`s doing so because the act is likely unconstitutional and because and I can quote, "it would result in a greater difficulty in monitoring sex offenders."
Many people on the registry simply cannot find anywhere to live. This law is counterproductive and irresponsible. It makes absolutely no distinction between people who have been convicted of serious crimes, such as rape, and people who have violated the law when they were teenagers by engaging in consensual sexual activity with other teenagers of like age.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GRACE: Correction. All the people that are affected by this law, which states that convicted sex offenders may not live within 1,000 feet of a school bus stop. They are convicted. They`re not just accused. They stand convicted under the law of sex offenses.
Elizabeth, let`s go out to our star chamber.
Three veteran trial judges who have faced these cases like molestation, rape, sex offenses of all nature, and murder.
Out first to Congressman Joe Carter. He`s a former district court judge. He`s currently a Congress person from Williamson County, Texas.
Judge Carter, what do you make of this and what do you think of Clarence Cooper`s ruling?
JOE CARTER, FORMER DISTRICT COURT JUDGE: Well, I read the ruling. I read the ruling of the court. Quite frankly, I think that the court`s ruling is correct in that although I honestly wish that this was something that would be possible to do.
However, it would be almost impossible first and foremost for someone to comply with this law because school bus stops can change. I mean, it depends on where the children are as to where they establish school bus stops. So it would become almost impossible for someone, if they wanted to comply with this law, to comply. And that would be a concern that you`d have to look into.
And then in light of the ruling that the Georgia courts had previously made about ex post facto, they`re saying that making it onerous to where it resulted in banishment, would be ex post facto. I can understand why the court ruled this way.
We do need to take care of these kids. And I am concerned about that. But unfortunately, I don`t think this is a workable solution to that problem.
GRACE: With us, Judge John Carter.
Let`s go out to Judge Gino Brogdon. Also, a former veteran trial judge. He was sitting on the Fulton Superior Court bench.
Now, Judge Brogdon, please don`t tell me you`re siding with Cooper because you both once sat on the same bench.
GINO BROGDON, FORMER JUDGE, FULTON SUPERIOR COURT: No, not at all.
GRACE: And I`m a little surprised at Judge John Carter, because he`s usually tough on criminals. And there is more than one way to skin a cat.
Convicted sex offenders do not have to live 1,000 feet -- for Pete`s sake -- 1,000 feet. You could throw a softball that far from a child`s school bus stop. You know, please tell me you`re on that side Judge Brogdon.
BROGDON: Well, Nancy, I am. And here`s why. Judge Cooper is not giving a big vote for sex offenders. He`s a lover of the law. And a lover of the law first. And that`s what the opinion reads that he is adhering to the law. We would hope that judges would do that.
Regardless of what the result is. You know, without law, we live in chaos. And what Judge Cooper has said is regardless of what the result of this is, it`s his responsibility to make sure that the law is followed. If this...
GRACE: Well, Judge Brogdon, let me respond.
BROGDON: OK.
GRACE: If that is the law, then the law is an ass to allow convicted child sex offenders to live near a school bus stop is just plain crazy.
And you all can twist and turn the law any way you want to, but this is not right. This is an effort to protect innocent children.
Now, I know you say that Cooper loves the law.
BROGDON: Absolutely.
GRACE: Well then find a legal way to do it. That is my response.
Now, to Judge Margaret Finerty, former trial judge as well. All three of these judge, well respected judges that left the bench -- Judge Finerty.
MARGARET FINERTY, FORMER CRIMINAL COURT JUDGE, NEW YORK STATE: Nancy, I think it`s important to point out that the only issue that Judge Cooper is taking with this law is the part that says the sex offender can`t reside or work within 1,000 feet of a bus stop.
He has no problem with the portion that says they can`t live or work near a school, they can`t live or work near a playground, they can`t live or work near a recreational center. It`s just the bus stop. And that`s because of potentially that could banish these sex offenders from living in several counties in the state of Georgia.
So, the judge has issued a temporary retraining order. He hasn`t struck the law down as being unconstitutional, but he said, whoa, let`s put the brakes on. I`m going to hold a hearing and I`m going to do it fast. He hasn`t issued a preliminary injunction. Both sides are going come into court and they`ll have a chance to have their say in front of the judge.
GRACE: And again, while I am disagreeing with our judges` star chamber tonight, that`s what is great about this country. We can speak our mind and differ on the law if we wish.
And to all three if you, you`re all wrong! All right? And I never got to say that when I was practicing in front of you, Judge Brogdon, but I can say it now.
Let`s go back to Kevin Miller, investigative reporter.
Kevin, what I don`t understand is now the deputy sheriff in DeKalb County says I`m not going to enforce it anyway. I`m too busy. Has he lost his mind?
MILLER: Well, Nancy, he says that logistically it would be a problem. He couldn`t get his deputies out doing it. There are 90 warrants outstanding right now in DeKalb County, Georgia, for registered sex offenders that have not filed where they live or filed a false address. He says to do this...
GRACE: Well, how is this going to effect -- well, you know what? Hold on, Kevin.
Everybody remembers the girl in the pink hat. Jessica Lunsford. Unbeknownst to all of us, including her own father, a convicted sex offender lived catty corner to her. And I might point out, just a few yards from her school bus stop. She`s dead now. According to prosecutors, he killed her. This is what her father had to say.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Our children are the weakest of our group and they depend on their parents to keep them safe and we depend on lawmakers for tougher laws.
It`s pretty sickening that they can live that close to us where they can reach our children. And I mean, that`s not the way it should be. We`ve got good lawmakers and they need to tighten this stuff up because it`s not fair. It`s not fair to us and it`s not fair to our children. Our children are our future. Don`t you think we need to hang on to them and protect them?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GRACE: Well, obviously, there are many judges that don`t want to protect them. And that are not trying to find alternative methods to protect them.
To our producer, Clark Goldband, what can you tell me about the number of sex offenders in the state of Georgia?
CLARK GOLDBAND, NANCY GRACE INTERNET REPORTER: Well, Nancy, you probably wouldn`t -- you know what? You would believe it. We have some stats of a few states around the country. And then we`ll show you what`s happening down in Georgia.
Let`s start in California. Almost 90,000 registered sex offenders. That`s larger than the size of a Super Bowl stadium.
Take a look at Texas -- 46,000. Larger than when you`d go see the Yankees play.
Take a look up here in Michigan -- 39,000.
And where we`re speaking about this evening, Nancy, that`s Georgia -- 10,755. A large amount of registered sex offenders. And as you know, not all sex offenders register.
GRACE: And those that register don`t always stay where they are registered.
Back out to Kevin Miller, investigative reporter with WPTF.
Kevin, what kind of sex offenders does this law apply to?
MILLER: It applies to all of them.
GRACE: OK. Be specific.
MILLER: Well, I -- look, I can tell you...
GRACE: Misdemeanors and felonies?
MILLER: Felonies, people -- I can tell you the people that were registered as far as the plaintiffs in this case.
GRACE: OK. All of these stand convicted, correct?
MILLER: Right.
GRACE: Of sex offenses, yes?
MILLER: Yes.
GRACE: OK. Back to you, Kevin.
When does this go back to court?
MILLER: It goes back to court July 11th, Nancy.
GRACE: And what`s going to happen on July 11?
MILLER: Well, the judge will hear from the plaintiff. He`ll also hear from the state. And you`ll also hear the cases of these individuals that are mentioned in this lawsuit and some amazing things when you look at this temporary restraining order and the people that have been done things that have allowed them to become register sex offenders.
GRACE: To Richard Herman. One of the legal arguments is this will be hard to enforce, keeping registered sex offenders from living just a few yards, 1,000 feet from elementary school bus stops, school bus stops.
What is harder about enforcing that than enforcing the already in existence registry of sex offenders? I don`t see the difference.
RICHARD HERMAN, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Well, Nancy, it`s not only living within 1,000 feet, it`s working also. They can`t live or work within 1,000 feet of bus stops. There`s 150,000 bus stops in Georgia, and the locations are changing almost on a monthly basis, some of them.
So it`s going to be -- the deputies, the sheriff`s office, they`re involved with transporting prisoners, they`re serving warrants, they`re looking to arrest people. This law gives 10 to 30 years incarceration. It`s going to be virtually impossible to effectuate.
GRACE: To Keith Lindsay, a veteran trial lawyer.
Keith, you have tried a lot of child molestation cases, a lot of rape cases. Do you really believe that a sex offender can be rehabilitated?
LINDSAY: Whether they can be rehabilitated completely, I do not believe. It`s my understanding from the research that they`ll always have the urges. Some will suppress the urges through treatment, through family support, through church support, through their religion. Others will not. But my concern with the law as it stands now, is that it stands the potential of driving these people underground. It`s going to undercut...
GRACE: Think they`re already not going where they say they`re registered. How will is this going to affect that?
LINDSAY: Well, I have to disagree to some extent because the statistics have just shown that there are a number of people that are registered and we`ve got the statistics to prove that.
(CROSSTALK)
GRACE: I agree with you, but there`s a number that are not registered, and then move.
LINDSAY: That is very true.
GRACE: So, if you already have those people refusing to register and follow the law, how will this make that any different?
LINDSAY: Well, I think the difference is this, and it`s been pointed out by those that are critical of the law from the logistical point of view, that it will force more of them to move underground because they can`t comply with the law and stay in the state and keep their jobs.
(CROSSTALK)
GRACE: They can`t find another place in the state to live, except 1,000 feet from a school bus stop. I`m not buying it.
Let`s go out to Robert in California.
Hi, Robert.
ROBERT, CALIFORNIA (on the phone): Hi Nancy.
I was kind of wondering, how come if they want to live near the population, how come they don`t fight for their living in the general population in prison?
GRACE: Oh, I see. Special protections, I understand. I think that`s a very different issue. And I believe, Robert, the reality is that very rarely do sex offenders get taken out of general population. Agree or disagree?
LINDSAY: I disagree -- or I agree, rather. Excuse me.
GRACE: Yes. As much as they may be or tormented behind bars, that is the story of what happens behind bars. They`re very rarely given preferential treatment and taken out of GP, general population.
Take a look at this. And imagine a convicted sex offender living just 1,000 feet from your child`s school bus stop.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MARK LUNSFORD, DAUGHTER WAS ASSAULTED AND MURDERED BY A REGISTERED SEX OFFENDER: We need a tough piece of legislation that`s going to protect our kids and give our states the minimum of guidelines of what to do. This is crazy for us to have to go back and forth like this. What`s it going to take? I mean, why won`t these legislators trade places with me. You come sit in this chair and you tell me what you would do to protect your child if you lived where I lived.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GRACE: Mark Lunsford speaking out after his daughter, Jessie Lunsford, just 9 years old, commonly known as the girl in the pink hat, was assaulted and murdered by a registered sex offender that was then living catty corner to her home and her school bus stop.
Mark Lunsford asked for legislators to act to protect children. Well they have in Georgia. But now, a Federal Court Judge Clarence Cooper has put a temporary restraining order on a new law that goes into effect July 1. That law would stop convicted sex offenders from living 1,000 feet or less to a school bus stop.
Let`s go out to Marcy in Georgia.
Hi Marcy.
MARCY, GEORGIA (on the phone): Hi, Nancy.
GRACE: What`s your question, dear?
MARCY: My question is, how come sex offenders in Georgia are allowed more rights than children are?
GRACE: That`s a really good question -- Caryn.
Caryn Stark, psychotherapist, do you believe that judges, especially federal judges who face no term limit, they`re in for life. Once they`re in, they can do whatever they want to do. Their biggest fear? They may get exposed on reversal. Do you think they`re just not able to relate to regular people anymore?
STARK: Well, there seems to be some truth to that. Nancy, let`s take a look at it. I mean, we`re talking about the possibility that they will have treatment in a church, in that`s what they`re saying. And we know that these people really can`t be treated. For the most part, sexual orientation is fixed. That means it can`t be changed. So you weigh that against the fact that a child`s life is ruined. Possibly they`ll be killed. And it doesn`t make any sense at all. Take a look.
GRACE: I still say, Caryn Stark, there`s more than one way to skin a cat. Why do sex predators, sex offenders, convicted -- these are not accused sex offenders. Convicted sex offenders. Why do they have to live 1,000 feet from a school bus stop?
If they want to go to a particular church, please, I would be mad if you didn`t. But do you have to live on top of it? I don`t think so.
Let`s go to the lines. Kenny in Kentucky.
Hi Kenny.
KENNY, KENTUCKY (on the phone): Hello.
GRACE: Hi, dear. What`s your question?
KENNY: I have a question about, OK, if something happens to one of these children and it`s proven that the person that done this to the children lived within 1,000 yards of this, how is that judge going to feel? And is he going to be held reliable just as much as the person that done the crime?
GRACE: I can give you a quick and easy answer. The judge will not think it`s his fault. I guarantee you. Hard, but true. Promise you.
Very quickly, to tonight`s case alert. Millionaire FBI Fugitive Darren Mack`s first court appearance.
First order of business for the defense? Change of venue. Mack, in Washoe County, Nevada, facing charges he stabbed his wife to death and shot a family court judge, sniper style.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You never know when your child might get snatched from you. You never know when you might not see your child again. They don`t need to be at this park. They don`t need to be at no park. Around no kids, period.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GRACE: Welcome back. Victim`s Rights Advocate Mark Lunsford lost his daughter to a registered sex offender. He called on governments across this country to do something to protect our children.
Well, Georgia legislature has done something. They have passed a law to prohibit convicted sex offenders from living 1,000 feet from a school bus stop.
How close to Jessie Lunsford`s bus stop did her killer live, Clark.
GOLDBAND: Well, it was about 350 feet, Nancy, according to her dad, who we spoke to this afternoon.
GRACE: 350 feet.
Back out to Kevin Miller, investigative reporter. I know this will be back in court. But so far, what has been the response across the country now that they`ve heard of Clarence`s ruling?
MILLER: Well, Nancy, across the country, it`s shock and outrage. You do have Mark Lunsford, and I spoke with him today about Jessica`s Law. He`s very adamant about getting people and raising awareness. And when people find out just how many times laws don`t protect their children, they are outraged and they are concerned about what`s going on in Georgia.
GRACE: To Rita in California.
Hi Rita.
RITA, CALIFORNIA (on the phone): Hi.
GRACE: What`s your question, dear?
RITA: OK, since we can`t keep them from living around our children, why can`t we put some kind of a tracking device on them when they`re in prison and plant a microchip or something so they can be followed so our children can`t be harmed?
GRACE: You know, Rita, you are right on. And as a matter of fact, part of this law addresses that, right, Ellie?
ELLIE: That`s right. This bill goes into effect on Saturday and it says that convicted sex offenders would have to wear an electronic monitoring device for the rest of their lives after they get out of prison.
GRACE: And Rita, this is not apply, the electronic monitoring device does not apply to all offenders. It applies to offenders that have been designated as dangerous felons. Correct, Ellie?
ELLIE: Right. I believe the term they use is dangerous sexual predator.
GRACE: So, especially dangerous predators, Rita, will be wearing the anklet for life. And that is not unusual to the Georgia law.
Wisconsin recently passed a similar law. And there are tracking laws all across this country.
We`ll be right back with our star chamber. When we get back, what do you think? The Georgia legislature tries to stop sex offenders from living near school bus stops and now Judge Clarence Cooper has put the kibosh on it.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Even if a child survives an abduction, rape, they and their families are given life sentences with no parole. They are left trying to put their lives back together again, knowing that none of them will ever be the same as before.
Wealthy or poor, we all feel the same despair and helplessness when our children are in harm`s way. We ask that the playing field be leveled, the sexual predators be held accountable, that all the system has responsibly and the laws reflect the desire of the people to keep all of our children safe.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GRACE: That was the mother of murder victim Drewso Jean (ph) speaking from the heart. That was in Washington, D.C., when she and other victims and victims rights advocate called on Washington to pass the Child Safety Act of 2005.
Her daughter was murdered by a repeat sex offender, as was this girl, Jesse Lunsford, as was this girl, Samantha Runnion, just five years old, and this girl, Polly Klaas. And this girl, Danielle Van Dam, was murdered by a next door neighbor. Here you see Dylan Groene murdered by a sex offender. There`s Sarah Michelle Lunde, and again Jesse Lunsford.
All of these children suffered at the hands of molesters that became murderers.
Straight out to the lines. Sonny in Ohio. Hi, Sonny, what`s your question?
CALLER: Hi, Nancy. My question is: Why is it still, in this day and age, these violent sex offenders can continually get slaps on the wrists every time they offend?
GRACE: You know, interesting question. It seems as if certain judges are more concerned about their rights than the rights of victims. And part of that may be, truthfully, because of the Constitution.
Check it out, Sonny: The Constitution lays out all the rights and privileges for the accused, as it should. But nowhere are victims mentioned. Well, if we don`t like this law, what`s the alternative?
Let`s go out to veteran defense attorney, Kathleen Mullin. Kathleen, I`m sure you`re opposed to this law. Tell me why, and tell me what`s your best alternative?
KATHLEEN MULLIN, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Nancy, the problem here is that we are using the term "registered sex offender" and "sexual predator" interchangeably. They are not interchangeable. This law affects equally a "jump out of the bushes, snatch them up, rape them up, and murder them" vile predator, compulsive sexual offender the same as it treats a 17-year- old who has his or her first sexual encounter with their 15-year-old boyfriend and never again has another criminal incident.
The problem is that all registered...
GRACE: Wait, wait, wait, just one quick correction.
MULLIN: Go ahead.
GRACE: That 17-year-old was an adult under Georgia law and law pretty much across this country when it comes to felonies and was found guilty of a sex offense, a felony sex offense.
MULLIN: But, Nancy, how is that 17-year-old, who never before and never since has had any criminal record or any criminal activity, any brush with crime, a risk of jumping out at a bus stop and offending some children?
(CROSSTALK)
GRACE: Let`s put your idea to the star chamber. Liz, can you bring up our star chamber tonight?
Let`s go straight back out to Congressman John Carter, out of Texas. Judge Carter, what would you think about a law that more clearly or more carefully defines sex predators? Would that suit you, or do you still have the problem that school bus stops may change and a sex offender may be pushed out of their home?
CARTER: Well, I mean, if you`re trying to comply with the law, let`s assume -- first, let`s give them the benefit of the doubt and think that they`re trying to comply with the law. And this is a floating target. Then, quite frankly, that`s why the judge is saying it results in the ultimate banishment.
Because today there may be no bus stop in front of your house, but tomorrow there could be one. So you`ve got to have a workable solution.
GRACE: Well, my...
CARTER: There are workable solutions. And, by the way, the rest of this Georgia law is very upholdable, established locations that you can identify, playgrounds, ballparks, all those things that are in the Georgia law, they`re perfectly all right. We do them everywhere, and it works.
GRACE: So it`s just the bus stop that you`ve got the problem with?
CARTER: Well, I want a fixed target, not a floating target.
GRACE: OK. OK.
Let`s go to Judge Finerty, Margaret Finerty, also a veteran criminal court judge. Judge Finerty, what about having the law as stated but allowing a right to appeal on an individual basis, if you have a home, if a school bus stop, after you buy the home, is then erected within 1,000 feet, which I have a really hard time believing that they`re going to erect a school bus stop 1,000 feet from your home, but then you can appeal having to move. What about that? Would that allay your fear?
FINERTY: I think that would certainly help, Nancy. I think the problem with this law, as Kathleen mentioned earlier, is that it`s overly broad in the population it targets. I mean, you mentioned earlier about an electronic monitoring bracelet for the violent sexual predators, which I think is a fabulous idea.
But you have in this population that this law is targeting, I believe, from what I`ve read, a mother whose 15-year-old daughter got pregnant and she was convicted of being -- the mother of being a sex offender, because she didn`t supervise her daughter. Now, I`m not condoning that. I`m not condoning that.
GRACE: Wait, wait, wait, wait, before you rely on that, Judge Finerty...
FINERTY: That was a different situation.
GRACE: ... that was the set of facts advanced by the defense, all right? That doesn`t necessarily make it so.
But I`m gathering, Judge Finerty, that you would want a further delineation between who has to move and who doesn`t?
FINERTY: Absolutely. I think most states do have different degrees of seriousness when it comes to registered sex offenders, and we don`t see that here, and I think that`s a problem.
GRACE: I`m working up to my grand finale of Judge Gino Brogdon. And now, before Judge Brogdon speaks, remember he sat on the same bench, the same bench, as Clarence Cooper, who has gutted this protective law for children.
OK, Judge Brogdon. Hit me.
BROGDON: All right. There are two issues, Nancy. One issue is: Do we all agree that sex offenders should be watched and should be controlled and should be monitored? All of the judges, including Judge Cooper, would agree with that.
The second is, which goes to his ruling is that: Is this law consistent with the Constitution? And his ruling is not yet. It is not where it`s supposed to be. He`s a protector of the law. He`s not endorsing sex offenders.
GRACE: Well, there have been a lot of laws -- no offense, Judge...
BROGDON: Sure.
GRACE: ... that have been struck down for being wrong, for being absolutely unacceptable. So just because it`s the law doesn`t mean it`s OK. I mean, did you know there was a time when women couldn`t vote?
BROGDON: That`s right.
GRACE: Did you know that?
BROGDON: Yes, I sure did.
GRACE: Did you know we were the last group to get the right to vote? Oh, yes, so? Just because this is the law? I mean, just because that was the law, does that make it right?
BROGDON: No, I think it`s just a matter of being fair to Judge Cooper in that he`s not endorsing sex offenders. What he`s doing is enforcing the law as he sees it, and that is his job, and that`s something we should celebrate. We want judges to interpret, to enforce, to uphold the law regardless of what the consequence...
GRACE: What if they`re wrong? What about that? Isn`t it true, Judge Brogdon, that federal judges have no term limits? They`re in for life. All they have to worry about is what they`re getting down at the federal cafeteria.
BROWN: Well, that`s one of their worries, I`m sure. And they`re in for life, and that`s just a fact of life. But I don`t think that that really has a bearing on this ruling.
GRACE: Let`s go out to the lines. Alyssa in California, hi, Alyssa.
CALLER: Hi.
GRACE: What`s your question, dear?
CALLER: I want to know why a sex offender, a child molester, is able to live in the same home with their family and children?
GRACE: You know, that`s a completely different issue. And we have recently have covered a case where the sex offender`s wife got pregnant and he was not allowed to be around children anymore, and he absolutely had to get a different home.
But very quickly to Keith Lindsay, Keith, you`re a veteran trial judge. You know Judge Cooper. And I know you still practice in front of him. My question is: What`s an alternative?
LINDSAY: Well, I think the electronic monitoring device was a good alternative. Again, I think that the idea of staying, you know, not necessarily outside of 1,000 foot from a school bus stop that is a moving target, but within a fixed location, where children congregate, all of that is acceptable. And there may be other ideas.
GRACE: I don`t know why you keep saying a bus stop is a moving target. The bus stop where I caught the bus in the first grade is still right there. I mean, has your bus stop moved? Is it a moving target?
LINDSAY: Not my (INAUDIBLE) bus stop, but school bus stops are being designated as we speak. All of the school bus stops in Georgia have not yet been decided. And so, quite frankly, a sex offender cannot even know where a bus stop is going to be in order to comply with the law at this point.
GRACE: Well, there you`ve heard all the sides. I still say, Judge Clarence Cooper, you`re in contempt.
To tonight`s "Case Alert." A California jury is barred from hearing the truth: painful 911 calls made by a high-profile defense lawyer who found his wife dead in her own home. Judge Barbara Zuniga says the calls from Daniel Horowitz, a friend of this show, are disturbing and therefore they could prejudice the jury. Hello, Judge, all of the state`s evidence prejudices the jury.
Horowitz`s 17-year-old neighbor, Scott Dyleski, on trial for the brutal 2005 murder of Pamela Vitale.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BETH HOLLOWAY TWITTY, MOTHER OF NATALEE HOLLOWAY: We want justice, and we have to recognize the fact that, you know, this crime has been committed on the island of Aruba and we know the perpetrators.
JORAN VAN DER SLOOT, LAST SEEN WITH NATALEE HOLLOWAY: I only knew her for one night. I should have just stayed home and this wouldn`t have happened to me. It would have happened to another person.
DAVE HOLLOWAY, NATALEE HOLLOWAY`S FATHER: There are some statements out there that one of her friend`s alibis does not match up. Both things lead me to believe that he knows more than what he`s telling us.
TWITTY: We just have to, though, keep going. The only way we will get justice for Natalee is if we do keep going.
VAN DER SLOOT: I just hope that the truth coming out.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GRACE: Well, Joran Van Der Sloot, maybe it will. Apparently, there is yet another witness now behind bars in Aruba that claims he observed the murder of Natalee Holloway. Can he be trusted? Is he for real?
Joining us right now is Natalee`s mother, Beth Twitty. Beth, thank you for being with us.
TWITTY: Hi, Nancy.
GRACE: Beth, every time you discover that there is a new witness, does your heart jump and think maybe there is an end to this?
TWITTY: Well, you know, I was thinking about that just a while ago while I was listening to your show. And, you know, for the first six to nine months, I didn`t believe anything. I always knew and was able to remain guarded.
But I`ll be honest. The longer it goes on, I think that I`m a lot more vulnerable now to just latching onto things that I hear when I know if, I can really stop and keep myself grounded, that, you know, it`s not true. And it`s probably leading nowhere with this new witness. But I just can`t help but let myself go the longer the time passes.
GRACE: Well, recently, Joran Van Der Sloot, the chief suspect earlier named by the Aruban police, who seemed to have botched the case from the very get-go, was in New York and was served with legal papers. Take a look at this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Back off. Back off. It`s official. Keep walking, bro. Just keep walking.
(CROSSTALK)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: These are legal papers.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Please don`t touch me. Please don`t touch me.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Don`t you put your hands on me. Don`t you put your hands on me, pal.
(CROSSTALK)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: These are legal papers, you understand? You understand me?
(CROSSTALK)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is a legal process, and you`ve been served.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Fine.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GRACE: That is private investigator Bo Dietl trying to serve legal papers on Joran Van Der Sloot, the Aruban judge`s son, who was once named the prime suspect in the disappearance of an American girl, Natalee Holloway.
With us, Natalee`s mom. Beth, you seem to me like you are not be putting a lot of credibility in this new witness, Carlos from Colombia`s, statement. What is his statement? What does he claim to have seen?
TWITTY: Well, I think what he was conveying to some of the persons that have interviewed him was that he`s actually an eyewitness as to what happened or what transpired that night. And I think that he was describing a tall male. And the young lady he was with, he thought at the time, could have been Natalee.
And I think he had some pretty detailed accounts as to what happened. And it even led to the recovery -- I believe John had mentioned earlier -- a recovery of a cable that was from the location where this witness described that he had seen this activity transpire between these two individuals.
And I think that was sent to the forensic institute in Holland. No, we have not heard back, though, any results as to, you know, what they found from this piece of cable.
GRACE: To the Holloway Twitty attorney joining us tonight, a veteran trial lawyer himself, John Q. Kelly. John, thank you for being with us.
JOHN Q. KELLY, HOLLOWAY FAMILY ATTORNEY: Sure, Nancy.
GRACE: John, tell me about the cable that was found as a result of Carlos, the witness`s story, the alleged witness?
KELLY: Well, Carlos took the Aruban police to the location. He indicated that he had witnessed certain events. He had indicated that he saw the male take a female body, dispose of it at sea, and dispose of it by weighting it down with some steel cable.
They actually had Aruban divers go into the sea at that location, recovered steel cable matching generally the description given by the eyewitness. So that was a form of corroboration.
They`ve x-rayed the cable. They`ve sent it to the Netherlands forensic institute for further testing. And, you know what, Nancy? It`s been two months, and we haven`t heard anything about the results of that testing, which is sort of par for the course, but we`d like to hear something.
GRACE: Well, according to Beth, as well as Natalee`s dad, they never tell them anything. Why do you think this would be any different, John?
KELLY: Well, you know, I`ve had a line of communication with Karen Janssen, the prosecutor. And, you know, everything just takes so long. Remember, the search in the sand dunes took six months. You know, I`ve been waiting on the results of the cable examination for a month and a half now. And they just sort of move at their own pace and don`t realize, you know, you`ve got a family that`s very anxious, going through hell here, and lot of other people who want to see some justice done and get some answers here.
GRACE: Let`s go to our producer, Eric Marrapodi. Eric, what else does this guy, Carlos the Colombian, as he`s referred to, what else does he say he saw?
ERIC MARRAPODI, NANCY GRACE PRODUCER: Well, this young man says that he saw the murder of Natalee Holloway and the disposal of her body, as John was explaining. And what`s important is to how much detail he gave in that statement. And that`s really what`s at issue here and whether or not those details can be corroborated.
Nancy, a source very close to the case tells me tonight that the devil is in the details, that some of those details that he`s claiming to have seen, the investigators believe are just too detailed for him to have seen from his vantage point.
GRACE: Right. Let`s go to Kelly in Texas. Hi, Kelly, what`s your question?
CALLER: Yes, I would like to ask Beth Holloway how does she deal with every day of not having her daughter and how does cope with...
GRACE: OK, thanks, Kelly, for calling in.
To Beth Twitty, response?
TWITTY: Well, I mean, we really rely on the supporters. And it`s just been amazing, their endless support for the family. And I mean, days are difficult. Some days, especially, you know, when it gets quiet for a couple of weeks. You really begin to get discouraged that, you know, that this will just be forgotten and Aruba will not be accountable for any action that, you know, had taken place on their island.
And, you know, it`s difficult to have that hope that, you know, we will get to the bottom of it. But, you know, we just rely on the supporters to continue to keep us going.
GRACE: And, Keith Lindsay, what do you do as a prosecutor when you`ve got a witness that has credibility problems but also has some valid points? How do you deal with that?
LINDSAY: Well, I think that the more points of corroboration that you can place in front of a jury in a visual manner that has been corroborated by the investigators, by the physical evidence, of course, will also bolster his credibility. But if you can`t corroborate his testimony, and if he`s got a motive to lie, then, of course, you have real problems.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
GRACE: Breaking news. We have just learned that the U.S. Supreme Court has rejected an appeal by Angel Maturino Resendiz, we know connected to 15 murders, facing the death penalty in Texas tonight.
And, tonight, we remember Massachusetts 16-year-old Molly Bish. Tonight is the six-year mark of the disappearance from her lifeguard post at a local pond. Her remains discovered bit-by-bit 2003. To this day, no arrest. Her parents spoke to us here at NANCY GRACE.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GRACE: Our culture calls it sweet 16, that time in your life when you have the world by the tail, your whole life before you. Molly Bish`s parents dropped their 16-year-old girl off at her lifeguard job on a summer afternoon.
They watched her. She walked away. Then, they never saw Molly again. Three years later, Molly Bish comes home, bone by bone.
MAGI BISH, MOTHER OF MURDERED DAUGHTER: It`s been five long years, you know? When you think about it, when Molly first went lost, you think, "This can`t be possible." You know, you can lose your keys and you can lose your glasses, but how in America do you lose your child?
The police came and the district attorney to our home to tell us that they found a piece of bating suit, and we had to wait some more for the DNA. We had waited for three years to final Molly. Every day they came and they told us first they found a shinbone. Then they found her skull. The next day, they found her ribs.
And only 26 of Molly`s bones were returned to us. And we buried her, and then we had to wait some more to confirm that. And then we buried her on her 20th birthday, our 16-year-old.
Molly was feisty and full of fun and love. And it has to stop. We have to be strong and get these bad guys who are taking our children and our women. We were five, and now we`re four. And we love her with all our heart and we miss her tremendously. And this has to stop.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
GRACE: We here have been on case of Molly Bish for a year and a half, and we have that full investigation for you here, Monday night.
Tonight, we remember Kristian Menchaca, 23, killed Iraq, Houston, Texas, loved the military, leaving behind a grieving widow. Tonight, John Kristian Menchaca, American hero.
Thank you to all our guests and to you for being with us. Nancy Grace signing off. Good night, friend.
END
