Return to Transcripts main page

Out in the Open

Presidential Front-Runners?; Why Do Illegal Immigrants Come to America?

Aired December 18, 2007 - 20:00   ET

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

RICK SANCHEZ, CNN ANCHOR: This is going be an OUT IN THE OPEN exclusive. And here's the question. Why are so many immigrants in record numbers coming to this country from Mexico?
So, if we're going be criticizing them, which we are, maybe we should know what is actually driving them here. I am going to show you what I have found. I traveled to Mexico City. This is an amazing place. I found a place that is called The Lost City. (SPEAKING SPANISH), that's what they call it down there. And this is going provide us some answers to those questions that we were posing moments ago.

Nobody that we know of has been there. And because I mix in with the language thing, this is real inside stuff.

Also, take a look at this video. And they're about to say that they're going to shoot him. He's behind that jail cell. No one has been inside this particular prison for 22 years. And now there's a huge controversy over how these guards treat some particular inmates. You will see this all play out on camera.

We're going begin tonight though with two prisoners who have broken out, literally broken out of jail. They meticulously scratched through a wall until they loosened a concrete block. And then they jumped to their freedom over a barbed wire fence. What a story.

Here's Jason Carroll.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JASON CARROLL, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Jose Espinosa was looking at 17 years for manslaughter. Otis Blunt was facing robbery and weapons charges. Together, they hatched a plan to chip their way out of doing hard time.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I'm angry that two prisoners would escape a secure facility and not even know when they did it.

CARROLL: Guards noticed both inmates missing from their high- security cells at the Union County Jail at 5:15 p.m. Saturday. They found this metal wire and say they believe Blunt used it as a tool to chip away a hole into Espinosa's adjoining cell.

Then they used it to chisel an 18-inch-wide hole from Espinosa's cell to the outside. The holes were concealed with pinup posters. If their plan sounds a little familiar, that's because that's basically what a character in the critically acclaimed film "The Shawshank Redemption" did to escape.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I really prefer not to compare it with any movie, although I can understand why you might, because it does -- to a certain degree, it does look very similar to some of them, except I think, in "Shawshank Redemption," they had a better poster on the wall.

CARROLL: In the movie, the character crawls through a sewer pipe to freedom. Blunt and Espinosa took a different path. The hole they created opened up to third-floor landing. And once outside, authorities say they presumably took a running jump 15 feet out, clearing a razor-wire fence and landing 30 feet below. The duo left a note to a guard reading: "Thank you, officer, for the tools needed. You're a real pal. Happy holidays."

It was marked with a smiley face.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SANCHEZ: What an amazing story. And Jason is joining us now.

So, they're essentially chipping away at the wall, scratching off, what, the concrete, right?

CARROLL: Correct, the mortar that is surrounding these cinder blocks. That's what they used that thick wire tool for, a makeshift tool, to chip away.

SANCHEZ: This must have taken them a long time.

CARROLL: You know, what the authorities are telling us, probably anywhere between a couple of weeks in order to get this all done.

SANCHEZ: Here's what I don't understand. If they're chipping this stuff away, you have got to be left with some residue.

(CROSSTALK)

CARROLL: Absolutely.

SANCHEZ: What do you do with the residue?

CARROLL: Well, here is what they were doing, Rick.

They were taking all that dust and powder that was left over and hiding it in a footlocker. But the question becomes, right, why wasn't anyone searching these cells in this high-security section of this facility?

SANCHEZ: And here's another question. When you're doing something like this in a very closed environment, where everybody talks to each other every day, wouldn't you think somebody would find out, somebody would say something? CARROLL: You would think. And actually an investigation is under way, Rick, to find out whether or not this was an inside job, in other words, whether or not these guys, these inmates had some help.

SANCHEZ: What a great story. And you told it so well, by the way. Jason Carroll, good job, as usual.

Now some of the most dramatic pictures you will see from inside any prison or jail. This is from Cincinnati, Ohio. And nobody has seen these pictures from this place since this place was built some 22 years ago. Now it's at the center of a very serious controversy with allegations of sadistic behavior on the part of guards.

Now, I should tell you, this is a little tough to watch.

Here's Deborah Feyerick reporting tonight from Ohio.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

DEBORAH FEYERICK, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): The standoff happened at the Hamilton County Justice Center in Cincinnati. Five inmates each in solitary (AUDIO GAP) jammed the doors to their cells and stuffed their toilets, causing water to gush from the top tier of what is called L-41 A Pod.

The on-duty captain issues a code red and mobilizes the correctional emergency response team.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Go down. Put your feet against the door. Face the back.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You still going to shoot me?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, unless you do that.

FEYERICK: The eight sheriff's deputies in full riot gear go cell by cell, firing pepper stray, a mace-like agent, and rubber bullets from a shotgun, forcing the inmates to open their doors.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Kneel down. Put your hands through the pass- through, or I am going to shoot you. Put your hands through right now. Five, four, three...

FEYERICK: The last cell belongs to 25-year-old Michael Jackson (ph), a career criminal who has been in and out of jail since he was 12 years old. Records show he has a history of getting into fight with other inmates and causing problems. As he is carried from his cell, pepper spray burning his eyes, he makes a racial slur directed at the deputy holding the pepper spray gun.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (EXPLETIVE DELETED)

FEYERICK: Like the other inmates, he's placed in a restraint chair, his hands tucked behind his seat.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You're choking me. UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Nobody's choking you.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: If you were being choked, you wouldn't be able to speak.

FEYERICK: Seconds later, the sergeant fires three pepper spray pellets into Jackson's chest at point-blank range.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Relax! Sit down!

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Do not move!

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Move again and (INAUDIBLE)

(CROSSTALK)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Say that statement again. Please say that again. Please say it one more (EXPLETIVE DELETED) time, please, please, pretty, pretty please.

FEYERICK: Sheriff Simon Leis Jr. defends his deputies and says, except for the foul language, they in no way crossed the line subduing Jackson, because he was not secure. The sheriff says his deputy was only trying to frighten Jackson when he threatened to stun him with 50,000 volts.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: These people are not rational human beings. And when you're dealing with people like that, you have got to handle them accordingly.

FEYERICK: I met Jackson's mom, Jennifer (ph), outside the Justice Center. And together we visited her son. I asked him whether he was restrained when he was shot. And he says, without a doubt. His hands were cuffed, his feet shackled, and a strap tied around his legs.

He showed me the marks on his chest, still visible four months after the incident.

(on camera): The sheriff says this was a justified use of force.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: No, I don't feel it is justifiable. I live here in Hamilton County, Cincinnati. You cannot tie up a dog and shoot it. Even if you don't kill that dog, you can't shoot it.

FEYERICK (on camera): So, the fact they did it to your son is more horrifying to you?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes. Oh, definitely yes.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SANCHEZ: What a story.

And Deborah Feyerick joins us now.

Deborah, I have to ask about Michael Jackson, this prisoner. Why was he being so forceful? What was his agenda?

FEYERICK: His agenda -- well, first of all, the whole thing started, he says, because apparently they weren't being fed. One of the inmates on that ward had apparently thrown feces or urine at one of the corrections officers. And so he says that their food was being withheld.

He was very defiant. And this is where the whole issue starts. He says that he admits he is not an innocent man. He admits he's been in trouble all of his life. But he says even he did not deserve this. He did not deserve to be shot point-blank range by these pepper ball pellets. He says did not deserve to have a stun gun held to his chest with a threat of 50,000 volts.

The sheriff, though, on the other hand says, look, his corrections officers did exactly the right thing. He says, Michael Jackson's feet were not restrained, and, therefore, they had to do exactly what they do in order to tie him down.

That's the issue. And that's the big question. Michael Jackson alleges that he was being restrained. The emergency response team says, no, he wasn't. So, there are a lot of questions. Right now, the only allegation is really coming right now from the inmate, Michael Jackson.

SANCHEZ: Interestingly enough -- we should let our viewers know this -- you're about the only reporter that we know of who has actually talked to Michael Jackson. Did you go in the prison to talk to him or did you do it over the phone? How was that?

FEYERICK: No, I actually went in.

I met his mom. She was here visiting him. I was brought in as a guest to talk to him. And he laid out the series of events, and how they played out and why all of this happened the way it happened.

He has an explanation for everything. And that's sort of the interesting part. Everything that happened on that tape, he explains why it happened the way it happened.

But the sheriffs say he was causing a disturbance, he was leading this sort of riot with the overflowing of the toilets, the dripping of water down onto the other floors, and that it was a real problem. The sheriff also points out that this emergency response team, this is the first time that they actually went into this jail just behind me to quell a disturbance involving five inmates. So, this was a new situation for the ream.

SANCHEZ: Let's talk about the process now, though.

Deborah Feyerick, great reporting, as usual. Job well done. Thanks for hanging in there for us and really going inside even the prison.

Now let's bring in a couple of other people, someone who spent a year as a rookie guard in New York's Sing Sing Prison, Ted Conover. He wrote about this experience, by the way -- pardon my hand -- it's called "Newjack: Guarding Sing Sing." There's the book. And also with us now on the phone is a former corrections officer who has been here and experienced stuff like this. His name is Michael Naylor.

Michael, I hear you in the background. Can you hear me?

MICHAEL NAYLOR, FORMER CORRECTIONS OFFICER: Yes, I can hear you.

SANCHEZ: All right. I'm going to start with you, Michael, since you're out there.

You have seen the process here. We're going to start talking about the breakout first in New Jersey that was reported to us by Jason Carroll a little while ago.

We know that, in that case, one of the people who has broken out that they're looking for right now has tried to break out before. Shouldn't they have had a better eye on this guy?

NAYLOR: Well, absolutely.

I think you have got to have a good eye on him. And I can't explain how that could happen in a maximum security prison. From the footage that I see, I don't see a lot of gates. In our maximum security prisons here in Rhode Island, you have a series of fences. I only saw one there.

SANCHEZ: All right. Let's talk now about what is going on in Ohio. And this is the story that Deb Feyerick is talking about.

And, Will, if you get a chance, show a little bit of that video once again. Let's go to cut one. Gentlemen, this is where police are first going confront this guy. He's behind the cell as they start yelling at him. He doesn't want to come out. He's causing a disturbance. And they go in. Let's watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Please say that again. Please say it one more (EXPLETIVE DELETED) time, please, please, pretty, pretty please.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: That wasn't the cut I was talking about, but it doesn't matter, because I think that's really important.

And I'm going to go to you.

It looks like they're taunting him. Should they be doing something like that, no matter how bad this guy is?

TED CONOVER, AUTHOR, "NEWJACK": No. If you're a professional corrections officer, you use force to the point where resistance has stopped. And it looks fairly clear that, at that moment, resistance has stopped there. That inmate is under control.

SANCHEZ: But what they're doing in and of itself is probably OK?

(CROSSTALK)

CONOVER: You mean to restrain him like that?

SANCHEZ: Yes, to restrain him and even if they have to use -- if he's resisting and they have to use either pepper spray or whatever the new technology offers them, it's OK?

CONOVER: Well, they were threatening to zap him with a stun gun as well.

No, he's been restrained. You can see he's totally restrained. There's no need for further...

(CROSSTALK)

SANCHEZ: At the point that they continue to do this, Ted, you would say, is what, sadistic?

CONOVER: You could use that word.

But let's put it in a context. A prison is a very unusual place. These guys start what they call a riot. They block their doors in an administrative segregation unit. These are inmates who misbehave. They're trouble inmates. And they intentionally anger the correction officers.

Now, they have water flowing out on the floor. The correction officers get angry. I have been part of a cell extraction. And officers get almost unreasonably angry and excited. They want to go in there and show who is boss.

SANCHEZ: Sure, toilet water all over the place. They're doing this on purpose. It's an interesting question.

(CROSSTALK)

SANCHEZ: Yes. Sorry about that Mr. Naylor.

I did want to bring you in right now and ask you about that. And I think the word you used was -- what did you say, inexplicably angry or...

CONOVER: You can get angry beyond what is necessary to control the situation.

SANCHEZ: Let me stop you right there.

Michael -- and I guess that is the key here. Do guards need to compose themselves under any circumstances?

(CROSSTALK)

NAYLOR: What I see is, when we did cell extractions back in the '90s, this is something that the inmate gets to dictate how much force is used.

If he complies, the de-escalation of force starts there. At no point in this video do I see him complying. Their goal is to restrain his neck, his head, neck, his mouth. He's still fighting right to the end.

SANCHEZ: But do you have to give him a chance to comply? I have seen so many times with police officers and sometimes guards where they give a command, but they don't give a reasonable time for compliance. Do you see a reasonable time for compliance here?

NAYLOR: Well, I think they are giving him a reasonable time for compliance. And he's not complying.

As he was saying that -- the officers are heated up. They're nervous. This is a very tough time. The reason that you...

(CROSSTALK)

NAYLOR: ... cell extraction is so people don't get hurt.

(CROSSTALK)

NAYLOR: ... used to go in there swinging sticks and people would get hurt.

SANCHEZ: I will tell you, it's a tough call, because these are not good guys. And they're doing some horrible things. I mean the prisoners. And then the guards come in with an equal amount of force and then they look like the bad guys as well.

We will stay on top of it. And as new information comes out of it, we will talk about it. Ted Conover and Michael Naylor, my thanks to both of you for joining us during this conversation tonight.

An exclusive story that we're going bring you, one that all Americans should see if they care about the immigration crisis. I traveled to Mexico. And I'm on going to take you to a place called the Lost City.

Also, who is this woman? Why is she crying? You're going to want to see the answer to that question. We will bring it to you.

And then who is winning the race for both party's presidential nominations right now? Not when, not then, now. It comes down to four states. And we're going to break all of them down for you.

Stay with us. We will be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: All right. I want you to look at this now.

These pictures are part of the answer to the biggest question about illegal immigration. Why are so many of these people, record numbers, continuing to come here? I found part of the answer to this in a place called the Lost City. It's an amazing journey. It's an exclusive story that I'm about to share with you.

But, before I do that, I just want to point something out to you that you should probably keep in mind; 13 years ago, a policy shift took place. It took effect between the United States, Canada, and Mexico. And it was called NAFTA. I know you have heard a lot about it, kind of.

For many Mexicans, it's been an absolute disaster. I'm not going to bore you with the minutia about NAFTA at this point. We will talk a little bit about it in a little bit.

Just watch this piece now, if you would, about a people who have taken over a mountainside. This is just outside Mexico City, where I found them.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

SANCHEZ: Where you come from, there are no jobs? There's just not enough money. You can't live?

(voice-over): This is Graciella (ph), a product of the Mexican countryside, where business has dried up. No one buys what farmers grow. Desperate, they come here, in droves to this peculiar place they call the Lost City.

(on camera): You built your house. Other people come. They build their houses. It almost looks like it's one house on top of another.

(voice-over): Once a beautiful national park enjoyed by families, this mountainside is now a shantytown. Plywood, plastic, whatever they can find becomes building material near a big city that offers few jobs and no housing.

(on camera): So, you have no running water. You have no electricity, no electricity. Drainage? How do you go to the bathroom? So, you just -- public latrines? You use public latrines.

(voice-over): She misses home. But life in the countryside is no longer viable. Her husband grew crops that no one would buy. He couldn't compete with cheaper produce coming in from abroad.

(on camera): So, you tried to -- you tried to grow corn, but you can't make any money. Nobody will pay you for it. You can't compete with the other corn.

(voice-over): Government-subsidized corn from the U.S. Mexican farmers say they can't compete with the cheap prices, so they give up and are forced to abandon their rural life for this.

Graciella's husband now struggles to bring home only $90 a week. It's not enough, not enough to feed her family, she tells me, as she shows me her kitchen and what little they have to eat.

(on camera): So, when you have no money, you have no food, just beans for lunch and beans for dinner. (voice-over): I duck under a web of improvised cables for a tour of Graciella's home, two small rooms for a family of six.

(on camera): Two boys here and the little girl over here, so three children here. And the little one sleeps with you upstairs. So, your husband built this.

(voice-over): Thousands arrive, more each day, to build homes like the one Graciella's husband carved out of a mountainside.

(on camera): You made these walls?

(voice-over): No permits, no infrastructure, no help from a government that doesn't even know they're here.

(on camera): Wow.

(voice-over): The mountainside is filling up. Newer arrivals stack their homes above the others. Graciella points up and tells me, those people are worse off than me.

(on camera): And they keep coming. They keep coming.

(voice-over): They keep coming, not by choice, but out of need. And if things don't work out here, then Graciella's family says they will do what others have done in desperation, leave the city, and go even farther north, across the Rio Grande.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SANCHEZ: Isn't that amazing?

I want to talk now about what is causing this poverty and what could be driving Mexicans like Graciella into the hills and into the U.S. as they then try to survive. Think about it. It doesn't stop at Mexico City. It continues north into the United States, people like her.

And that brings us -- up this controversial issue that many Mexicans point at with anger. It's NAFTA. NAFTA stands North American Free Trade Agreement. And it took effect at the start of 1994. It was supposed to make it easier for people in the United States, Mexico and Canada to business with each other. That was the intention.

It was supposed to lower prices for consumers, for example. It was supposed to create jobs for every country. But in reality -- and here's the truth, folks -- it's destroyed good-paying jobs. It's created a flood of desperate, unemployed refugees from the south to the north into our country.

Joining me now is a man who can kind of point this into context for us, Marcelo Suarez-Orozco. He is a co-director of immigration studies at New York University. And he's good enough to join us.

SANCHEZ: Take our viewers through what has happened to make so many people who used to live in the countryside go, as this woman says, into the city, leaving everything they had behind, and then eventually coming to the United States. Why?

DR. MARCELO SUAREZ-OROZCO, NEW YORK UNIVERSITY: NAFTA has had a very uneven effect in terms of which sectors of the Mexican economy have benefited and which sectors have been hurt.

SANCHEZ: Let's talk about the ones that have been hurt, because I'm reading your facts here, OK, because we did some research on what you have written.

You say -- let's start with this -- agriculture has been the industry hardest hit in Mexico. Point two, all right, the current migration from Mexico is the largest movement of people in Mexican history. You can put that one up as well, if you see that, the largest movement in Mexican history. And then point three you make is U.S. jobs pay 10 times more than a job in Mexico.

That's all a trend that's developed since NAFTA. Why?

SUAREZ-OROZCO: Right.

Because the cultural sector in Mexico has shed millions and millions of jobs. Jobs that once served as the safety net for Mexican economy, for the Mexican society, have really been extremely vulnerable to what NAFTA has brought into the Mexican...

(CROSSTALK)

SANCHEZ: All right. Let's talk about that concretely, all right?

Folks at home, you're watching these products, right? I don't know what that is. What is that, yuca? That's a cactus. Let's suppose it's a tomato, for the lack of an argument. Will, I don't know if you got a picture of a tomato.

So, the guy in Mexico has this little ranch where he's growing tomatoes and he's selling them to his neighbors. And he's been doing that for 100 years, him and his father and his father's father. Along comes NAFTA and now a tomato is coming from the United States, subsidized by U.S. taxpayers. So, it's so cheap that the Mexican farmer can't sell his tomato and make money, because he's got to compete with the 50 cent tomato. He has got to charge a dollar for his tomato. Is that it?

(CROSSTALK)

SUAREZ-OROZCO: That's it.

The real tragedy is, think corn. Corn was once the engine that drove the great civilizations of Mexico. Today, Mexico cannot produce competitively enough corn to feed its people.

SANCHEZ: So, they have to feed the people in Mexico American corn? SUAREZ-OROZCO: Correct.

SANCHEZ: Even though Mexico built an entire country out of corn?

SUAREZ-OROZCO: Mexico built an entire civilization out of corn. And today there's not enough corn to feed the Mexican population.

SANCHEZ: Because they can't compete with the subsidized corn that comes from the United States. Their farms dry out. They go to the city. They come to the United States.

SUAREZ-OROZCO: Exactly.

SANCHEZ: So, NAFTA is creating the very immigration problem that we castigate on Lou Dobbs' show and on so many other shows even on this network.

SUAREZ-OROZCO: Rick, this is part of a global dynamic.

The insertion of Mexico into this globe arrangement, like NAFTA, is very similar to what is going on really today in every region of the world. Today, in India, for example, roughly 30 villagers per minute arrive in an Indian city because of the insertion of India into the global system of production.

SANCHEZ: That's interesting, because you're right. It's happening in big cities all over the world. I recently went to Lima, Peru, saw the same thing with these shantytowns there.

We're out of time. You're a smart man. Thanks so much for taking us through that. We really appreciate it.

(CROSSTALK)

SUAREZ-OROZCO: Thank you.

SANCHEZ: Marcelo Suarez-Orozco.

Ready or not, voters for both parties are about to start picking their presidential nominees to deal with questions like the one we were just talking about with NAFTA and immigration. Who is winning? We're going to break this down for you, folks.

Also, what's going on here? Stay with us to see why the guy in the boat is trying to push away the people in the water and what dolphins have to do with all of this.

Back in two and change.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: All right. Here we go. Just one week until Christmas and just over two weeks to the start of the presidential caucuses and the primary. So who's winning? Let's show something for you.

Among Republicans, Rudy Giuliani leads with 27 percent. Mike Huckabee has 16 percent. John McCain, Fred Thompson, Mitt Romney all have 14 percent. Switch over to the Democrats.

Hillary Clinton leads with 41 percent. Barack Obama has 22 percent, and John Edwards, 13 percent. All right. Now, I got tell you something that you probably, you maybe know maybe you don't know.

National polls like the one that we just shared with you, they're a lot of fun to look at but at this point, folks, you know what, they're meaningless because the primaries are state by state by state. And we're going to go through the order. All right. You know, it's Iowa then it's going to be New Hampshire then South Carolina and then Florida. So let's go over the wall and break them down for you.

First, let's tell you what's going to happen first. Iowa is where it starts, right? That's going to be January 3rd. Then we're going to go to New Hampshire. And in New Hampshire, it's going to be January 8th. Then we're going to go to South Carolina, and in South Carolina, the GOP primary is the 19th. The Democratic primary is January 26th.

And then what they call Giuliani turf this days, that's Florida, and that's January 29th. OK, so who's winning?

New Republic senior editor Michael Crowley is going to be helping us with this. Michael, you're there. We need your expertise on this. You're ready to go?

MICHAEL CROWLEY, SR. ED., THE NEW REPUBLIC: Yes, glad to be here.

SANCHEZ: All right. Thanks. Let's come on back then and now let's talk about the states state by state. Obviously, we are going to start with Iowa because this is where this is going to begin. And in Iowa what we have now -- look at this.

This is the Huckabee factor. Everyone in the country is fascinated by how much -- the rise of Michael Huckabee, we should call it. These are the very latest ones. We want to break this down for you one by one.

Huckabee, Romney, Fred Thompson, Giuliani and John McCain. And I guess the story here is the rise of Huckabee, Michael, and now, you got Romney really going after him. Here's an ad we want to show you.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, ROMNEY CAMPAIGN AD)

ANNOUNCER: Huckabee granted more clemencies than the previous three governors combined, even reduced penalties for manufacturing methamphetamine. On crime, the difference is judgment.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: Who would have thought, Michael, that at this point, we would have Romney doing an attack that's critical on Huckabee? Would you have figured that out?

CROWLEY: No. Nobody saw this coming. You know, all those political prognosticators think that we've got it figured out and then the Mike Huckabees of the world come and, you know, you are at a loss to explain it. But Romney is clearly very alarmed by what's happened and he feels like his only opportunity now is to hit Huckabee hard and stop his rise because Romney looked like he was coasting the nomination, and Huckabee is threatening to burst that balloon pretty hard.

SANCHEZ: Let's talk about something else. Jeff, follow me. Let's stay on Iowa. We'll get to the Democrats and then we'll go on to New Hampshire. Let's put up the board for the Democrats, and this is interesting.

If you look at Iowa, from a Democratic standpoint, yes, we know, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and then we got the Edwards' surprise, which is what many people say he's probably worked the hardest in this state. Bill Richardson is 9. Joe Biden is third.

I'll tell you what. I'll tell you what the experts like Michael will tell you about John Edwards in Iowa. Look for a win from Edwards if it snows and nobody can get to the polls but his supporters because they're the ones who might be the most strident because he's been working with them the longest.

But let's go on. Let's go on to New Hampshire now. And in New Hampshire, we're going to start talking about the Republicans. Let's switch over to the Republicans. All right. Thanks, Will.

Mitt Romney is at 33 percent. John McCain is at 20 percent. Rudy Giuliani is at 16 percent. Michael Huckabee at 16 percent. Ron Paul is at eight at this point. You know, this again, is this Romney- McCain surge. It has to take place. Let's go back to Michael. How do you see New Hampshire for the Republicans, Michael?

CROWLEY: Well, you know, Romney, again, it looks like he had New Hampshire sewn up. It's his backyard. The governor of Massachusetts, he was cruising along but he's really -- his fortunes have taken a turn. Huckabee has made him look bad. He's punctured the inevitability that Romney was starting to build up this sense that he had momentum and that he was winner.

And John McCain now is stealing his thunder. McCain has had a string of great endorsements there.

SANCHEZ: Yes.

(CROSSTALK)

CROWLEY: New Hampshire union leader, "The Boston Globe," Curt Schilling --

SANCHEZ: And you know what -- you know what's interesting about New Hampshire is New Hampshire is an independent state. They want to go in the direction that nobody else is going so we could get a surprise there.

I think we're back in New Hampshire. We're going to go with the Dems now. Is that right? Let's put it up if we possibly can. Here we go. Dems. Hillary Clinton, 34 percent. Barack Obama, 25 percent. That's tight. John Edwards, Bill Richardson and Joe Biden. Now, this is one that's really -- what would -- Michael, would you say this is Hillary's to take?

CROWLEY: Well, it was for a really long time. That's been changing as Barack Obama has been doing better, showing a little more spunk, taking some shots and landing some blows on her. He's been closing the gap in New Hampshire. People were saying that New Hampshire was Hillary's firewall.

SANCHEZ: Yes.

CROWLEY: But I don't think that's the case anymore. I think that if she loses to Obama in Iowa, she's in big trouble in New Hampshire. She can't -- she doesn't have that buffer to count on anymore.

SANCHEZ: And you know what else in interesting? Go ahead and do South Carolina. We'll get through those real quick, Jeff. In South Carolina, we got on the Republican side, we got Huckabee at 24. Thompson at 17. Giuliani at 16, Romney and then McCain. But look at Giuliani.

Until we get to Florida, Giuliani, at this point, wouldn't be winning anything unless things change. And on the other side, the real surprise here is Edwards, I think.

Let's go to the Democrats. Edwards is a Carolinian. He's in third place in South Carolina. Thirty-four for Barack Obama. Looking up 42 for Hillary Clinton.

Michael, thanks so much for being with us. We appreciate it. We're out of time. But it's always fun to go through some of the numbers.

CROWLEY: Thank you so much.

SANCHEZ: OK. We broke the story here last night. Is Fidel Castro finally getting ready to give up power and what will it mean for the United States?

Also, she's an actress but those tears are real. Why is she so upset? We're looking into this, and we'll have it for you.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: We welcome you back. There's incredible news from Cuba. For the first time in almost 50 years, hints that Fidel Castro may actually been getting ready to step down. Castro's ruled Cuba since 1959.

So let's take you over here and show you the big mugs as they say. He's been there through the administration of 10 different presidents. He doesn't have that sneaky smile for no good reason, by the way, but here's what's going on. This is the guy who probably will be taking over for his big brother over there. That's Raul Castro. This is important stuff. He's the younger brother of Fidel. Fidel is 81. He's 76 years old. He's in charge of the military. He's really been the only guy that Castro has trusted for a long time ever since there was an execution of a very famous general in Cuba, by the way.

Many would say he has less of an ego than his big brother does. Considered to be a little more workman-like by some of the insiders, actually even less feared, maybe even more respected by some of the insiders in Cuba, the generals and some of the other people at the second layer of the Cuban politics.

Joining us now, Andres Oppenheimer to talk about these two individuals and what's going to happen in Cuba in relation to Fidel Castro's statement yesterday.

You know what, Andres? Let's start talking about the statement itself. When I read it, I know there's always an urgency and certainly in Miami where you are, for people to say, well, you know, the king is out and long live the queen. I'm not sure I heard this in Castro's statement. I'm not sure he's really bowing out.

Let's let the viewers at home see what the statement is. This is what Castro said yesterday.

He said "My basic duty is not to cling to office much less to obstruct the rise of younger people. My basic duty is not to cling to office much less to obstruct the rise of younger people."

Andres, do you think the king is out?

ANDRES OPPENHEIMER, SYNDICATED COLUMNIST, "MIAMI HERALD": No, Rick, I think you're right on the mark. This is a cosmetic humbleness. I mean, Fidel Castro, I said many times, that he's sacrificing for the Cuban people, that his job is up to the Cuban people, et cetera, et cetera.

But the proof of the pudding, Rick, is that he's running for the national assembly in January's elections and that, of course, is the stepping stone to be reelected as president of the council of state, which, in other words, means king of Cuba.

SANCHEZ: And by the way, we should mention one of the reasons we have Andres on is because I personally have read all his books. His recent book is "Saving the Americas: The Dangerous Decline of Latin America and What the U.S. Must Do." He works with the "Miami Herald." I grew up in Miami, so I read his columns. He also wrote, I believe it was Castro's last stand or "Castro's Final Hour," pardon me, which was also an interesting book about this.

Since you know Castro as well as anybody and have documented him for so many years, would his ego allow him to not be in charge with his last dying breath?

OPPENHEIMER: I doubt it, Rick. I think this guy will be, you know, giving orders right in there, micromanaging the country right out of the emergency room. This is a man who has been in power for nearly 50 years, who has micromanaged the country like nobody else. It's not in his nature.

SANCHEZ: OK. Let's just -- let's do the hypothetical thing, OK. Let's suppose that Castro bows out. How would you see the rule of Raul vis-a-vis the rule all these years of Fidel Castro?

OPPENHEIMER: Raul, as you hinted a minute ago, Rick, is more pragmatic than Fidel Castro. This is a military guy who in recent years has been running the tourism industry. He's more hands on, administrative type, less idealistic. He understands the world a little bit better. He's traveled to China many times, to Vietnam. He knows that to grow, Cuba has to attract investments and sort of open up a little bit economically at least.

SANCHEZ: Well, that's interesting. That's it. Hold on. That's interesting, Andres, that you use the word "open up." Words that people will tend to read into when talking about Cuba, here in the United States and certainly in South America and in Miami.

Would Raul be more malleable for the U.S. to be able to work with than Fidel has been?

OPPENHEIMER: Well, that's a good question, Rick. It's not clear whether he will be political, more malleable. I personally doubt it because first of all, this is a dictatorship and the first order of the day for any leadership is to stay in power. And they know that if they open up a little bit politically, they'll be swept away. So I would say that they are going to try sort of a Chinese model, opening up the economy but not the political system.

SANCHEZ: That's interesting, and something a lot of people are going to be watching. A lot of business interests watching this situation. Andres Oppenheimer, as usual my friend, thanks for being on with us.

OPPENHEIMER: Thanks, Rick, I appreciate it.

SANCHEZ: All right. Water, blood red. Now, what does that mean to some major animal rights issues? Folks have been following and has two governments now involved in this. We're going to tell you what's happening.

Also coming up, a major development in the case of Natalee Holloway. That's the Alabama teenager who's been missing for two and a half years now. We're going to have it for you. Stay with us. We'll be right back with this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: Welcome back to OUT IN THE OPEN. I'm Rick Sanchez. There is news on the Natalee Holloway case that we've been following. Authorities in Aruba are dropping the case against the three men suspected in her disappearance. Once again, they were rearrested last month after new evidence emerged in this case. The statements from prosecutor's office says that there's no final breakthrough in the case. A statement says if the three were put on trial, the suspects would probably be acquitted, thereby, they're letting the charges go. But the statement also say, investigators still believe it's highly unlikely anyone else was involved in her disappearance.

Holloway vanished. There she is two and a half years ago on a graduation trip with her high school classmates. And police say they've got enough information to believe now she is definitely dead.

"LARRY KING LIVE" coming up in just a little bit. He's going to be talking to us now about what he's got, coming up in just a little bit. Larry, what you got?

LARRY KING, HOST, "LARRY KING LIVE": Hey, Rick. Want to know what it's like to be almost eaten alive by a great white shark?

SANCHEZ: Ooh!

KING: We got a show for you. Imagine being struck by lightning or falling through the sky with a parachute that doesn't open.

SANCHEZ: Oh!

KING: We got amazing -- good luck. We've got amazing survival stories. Actually, it all sounds like stuff that belongs on your show, Rick. I don't know why they put it on this one because this is right up your alley. Of course, you'd go up in a parachute and test it.

SANCHEZ: You know what it is. We had too much material. They said give it to Larry. He'll do it.

KING: But it's a Rick show. It's a Rick show. I'll do my best. I'll try to be like you.

SANCHEZ: If you need to take a day off, give me a call, I'll come out there and I'll cover you.

KING: You got it baby.

SANCHEZ: Larry King, appreciate it.

All right. What's this TV star doing? She's crying. She's devastated. She's on a Japanese beach. Find out about this in just two. Stay with us. We'll have it for you.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: All right. There's an update. All right. There's an update on the story as I was trying to say. Why is this woman crying? Now, we've got some shocking pictures here. The woman is in a wet suit. Her name is actress Hayden Panettiere. She's from a television show called "Hero's," extremely popular. But here off the coast of Japan that you saw in those pictures, she was trying to be a real life hero, part of a group from Save the Whales. They were trying to stop Japanese fisherman from hunting dolphins. Since that tape was shot, Japanese authorities have issued an arrest warrant for Panettiere, an arrest warrant for interfering with international commerce. And, by the way, the update is that the Japanese officials are now issuing other statements.

Before we do anything else, let's get right to Jeff Pantukhoff. He's the founder of Save the Whales Again Campaign. Jeff, thanks so much for being with us. Let's cut right to the chase.

The Japanese officials are essentially now saying, look, leave us alone. You guys eat cows. You guys eat pigs. You guys eat chickens. We eat this animal that may seem strange to you. Why are you coming over here and getting involved in our affairs? How would you respond?

JEFF PANTUKHOFF, SAVE THE WHALES AGAIN CAMPAIGN: Well, there's a couple of points there. I mean, the main thing, there's no humane way to kill a dolphin or a whale. But more importantly, though, on human consumption side of it, yes, we eat cows and we eat beef and we eat those other animals you talk about...

SANCHEZ: Right.

(CROSSTALK)

PANTUKHOFF: ... but that meat isn't toxic. It's not containing high levels of mercury, PCD, DDE, dioxins --

SANCHEZ: So you're doing this -- you're doing this from a safety issue? You're doing this because you want to protect people from eating this kind of meat?

PANTUKHOFF: No, I mean, to me we're doing this because it's a cruel, barbaric way of hunting and there's no reason to be killing these beautiful animals.

SANCHEZ: But just to play devil's advocate and it really does look absolutely atrocious. It's horrible. It's tough to watch. If we were to bring some Japanese people over here and take them to a meat packing plant and we showed them cows being killed or pigs being killed, wouldn't it be just as difficult as what we're watching right now for them?

PANTUKHOFF: No, because with cows and pigs and chickens, we've found ways that we can pretty much kill them instantly. Dolphins and whales sometimes will take up to 15 minutes, a half hour sometimes, even hours before they die. They die an excruciatingly agonizing death. And, you know like I said at the beginning, there's no humane way to kill a dolphin or whale.

SANCHEZ: I got it. Listen. This arrest warrant against Hayden, what's her reaction? Is she concerned about this?

PANTUKHOFF: No, Hayden's reaction was bring it on. I mean, she went there to take part in this, to bring worldwide attention to this and, you know, if you look at that footage of her out there and the guys are threatening them with the propellers from the outboard motors there. They're hitting them with sticks. They're trying to knock them off the boards. I mean, they put an arrest warrant out for the peaceful protesters that are there, you know, trying to protect these animals.

SANCHEZ: Yes.

PANTUKHOFF: I mean, those guys should be arrested for assault and battery. It's just ludicrous.

(CROSSTALK)

SANCHEZ: What would you -- what would you say if they said, look, we're doing our jobs here. We were hired to do this, and somebody showed up and stopped us from doing our jobs and we had to get them out of the way? What would you say to that?

PANTUKHOFF: Well, I would say that there's easier ways to get them out of the way than, you know, trying to threaten them with propellers and then hitting them with sticks. I mean, you know, it's just ridiculous that they've got charges against them, and these people that were very aggressive do not have any.

SANCHEZ: Well -- hey, Jeff, you know, you hold down your position very well. I thank you for coming on and explaining this. You're right. I mean, it's tough to look at and it's got a visceral effect on anybody who sees it.

All right. Keep up the work. We appreciate it. We'll be right back.

PANTUKHOFF: Yes, thank you.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SANCHEZ: Thanks so much for being with us. I'm Rick Sanchez. "LARRY KING" starts right now.

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