Return to Transcripts main page
Rick's List
President Obama Sells Health Care Reform in Maine; Scott Roeder Faces Sentencing; Boy Killed at Disney World
Aired April 01, 2010 - 16:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
RICK SANCHEZ, CNN ANCHOR: OK. I got Jessica Yellin. She's standing by. I got Dan Lothian as well. They were both there. They were watching the president's speech. And an interesting speech it was.
Some would ask, who was that guy that was giving that speech in Portland, Oregon -- Portland, Maine -- pardon me -- and what did he do with the president of the United States? Even Tom Price, who was sitting here with me, Republican Congressman, was saying, that's a fired-up president. It looks like he's out on the campaign.
He was so fired up, in -- as -- as a matter of fact, let's -- let's -- before we even go to you guys, I want to show a little bit of what the president was doing, maybe theatrics. Whatever it was, it seemed effective.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: There's been a lot of fear-mongering, a lot of overheated rhetoric. You turned on the news, you'd see that those same folks who were hollering about it before it passed, they're still hollering about how the world will end because we passed this bill. This is not an exaggeration.
John Boehner called the passage of this bill --
(BOOING)
OBAMA: No need to -- we don't -- we don't need to boo. I just want to give the facts -- called this -- passage of this bill "Armageddon." You had others who said this is the end of freedom as we know it.
So after I signed the bill, I looked around and --
(LAUGHTER)
(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)
OBAMA: -- I looked up at the sky to see if asteroids were coming.
(LAUGHTER)
OBAMA: I looked at the ground to see if cracks had opened up in the earth.
(LAUGHTER) OBAMA: You know what? It turned out it was a pretty nice day.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: mean, he's playing that act to the hilt.
Dan, did you expect that?
(LAUGHTER)
SANCHEZ: Heard it before. And maybe I should just ask you, because you're in the room, did you see another Barack Obama somewhere around there, or was that the real deal?
DAN LOTHIAN, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: I'm -- I'm telling you, it was -- it was pretty stunning. You're right. I have not seen, you know, Barack Obama like this since the campaign days, the president very animated, certainly pumped up.
And, you know, as you -- you just pointed out there, the president going after those who said that there would be Armageddon after this was passed, and even, you know, going after the reporters and all the polls out there when he talked about how people want immediate results, and he used that example of, you know, if -- if reporters were farmers, they would put seeds into the ground and the next day come back and say, where's the plant?
(LAUGHTER)
LOTHIAN: You know, where -- where are the crops?
So, yes, it was a very, very animated president. But he did the two things that we talked about going into the speech, Rick. First of all, he wanted to knock down any of the myths or the criticisms out there to the health care law. And he also wanted to point out some of the immediate benefits of this, not that you will have to wait.
Yes, there will be some things that will be phased in over time, but immediately, if you're a small business owner. And he pointed to some of them in -- in the audience and said, listen, these are people who will be able to benefit right away --
SANCHEZ: Hmm.
LOTHIAN: -- through these tax incentives. So, that's what he wanted to do, is to knock down the myths, and also say, this is how you can benefit right away.
SANCHEZ: By the way, Jessica Yellin is standing by, too.
And you -- you know that I really love to engage Jessica Yellin in political discourse.
(LAUGHTER)
SANCHEZ: And I'm going to do that in just a little bit. But, first, I got some legatory (ph) discourse, as in legalities.
Vinnie Politan is here with me, too. And he's going to be joining me in just a little bit, because this case of the death -- or murder of Dr. Tiller is at the point now where's it's about to reach a critical point.
This is a clinical psychologist who is on the stand right -- right now in the Scott Roeder case. And Scott Roeder is the man who's charged in -- no -- pardon me -- convicted in the death of Dr. Tiller.
Now we're going to decide whether he's going to spend the rest of his life in jail, prison, or 25 years in prison, or 50 years in prison.
And that's really the -- the crux of the matter here, right, Vinnie?
VINNIE POLITAN, COURT TV: Oh, it is.
But what's interesting, from this guy's testimony, this clinical psychologist, who spoke to Scott Roeder, who's supposed to be helping the defense, he started to bring up some of the other things that came up in his conversation with Scott Roeder, like his interaction with explosives before he got involved in the abortion --
SANCHEZ: Hmm.
POLITAN: -- or anti-abortion movement, and the fact that he was somehow perhaps linked to some terror groups.
So, as soon as that started happening, his attorney quickly changed the discussion back to the abortion issue.
SANCHEZ: Oh.
(LAUGHTER)
POLITAN: But, you know, it --
(CROSSTALK)
SANCHEZ: Wow.
POLITAN: And -- and what I told you about Scott Roeder is, this is a guy who was a drifter, a loner. He was looking for something to latch on to. Before abortion, it was taxes and license plates.
SANCHEZ: Well, let me tell you this. We expect that Roeder is going to take the stand any moment now.
POLITAN: Yes.
SANCHEZ: In fact, we thought he was going to take the stand about a half-hour ago.
POLITAN: Yes, but --
SANCHEZ: And -- .
POLITAN: -- the doctor keeps talking.
SANCHEZ: -- the doctor's talking. We're not going to go to the doctor.
But, as soon as Roeder takes the stand, you will see it live right here on CNN, all right? We -- we promise.
Meanwhile, as I go to the break, I want Jessica to help me with this tease, because, when we come back, remember the TARP funds and remember what President Bush and President Obama continued by giving this bailout to the big guys on Wall Street?
Remember, we thought it was a certain amount of money? That certain amount that we thought is actually so much more. And it's really in the Fed's hands. And there's questions about accountability.
Jessica, you do this tease and take us to break.
JESSICA YELLIN, CNN NATIONAL POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: I got a surprising number for you ahead. If you thought the U.S. spent only $700 billion bailing out the banks, you will be stunned to hear what's on the other side of this commercial.
Come back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: Welcome back.
Because of all these live events, our whole show is kind of jumbled up. So, because I made this promise to you a little while ago, and because I think this is possibly the most important story in the news today, I want to bring you Yellin's list now.
(MUSIC)
SANCHEZ: Whatever you're doing right now, I need you just to stop and listen. I'm serious. Stop and listen to this, because it's going to freak you out.
(LAUGHTER)
SANCHEZ: I'm going to bet you didn't know that that massive bank bailout funded by you and me, the taxpayers, may have actually been many, many, many times larger than we have all been led to believe. I mean many, many, many times larger.
It was a mind-boggling number to start with, right? But we all kind of swallowed, took a big gulp. Seven hundred billion dollars is what we paid to get these guys out of their situation that they created. Well, now it turns out that it may have been as much as -- you ready for this, Vinnie?
POLITAN: All right. Drum roll. SANCHEZ: Four-point-six trillion dollars.
POLITAN: Whoa.
SANCHEZ: Four-point-six trillion dollars, your money, OK? You watching? Your money, America -- largely carried out in secret.
Now, I want you to know that our national correspondent, Jessica Yellin -- and that's the reason I was just using her a little while ago through this -- is the one who tipped me off to this story today. She knows this stuff backward and forward. She's standing by to help us.
Let me just lay it out one more time, because I want to make sure people at home understand what I just said. Seven hundred billion dollars, that's the money that Congress approved back in the fall of 2008 to put out the fire that threatened to spread through Wall Street to every hollowed-out mattress in the country where people put away their last dollars, dimes, and nickels.
Now, I want you to keep that in mind. Whether we liked that thing or not, it was -- it was TARP. It was money approved by our elected representatives, our elected president at the time, George W. Bush, continued through -- through President Obama. You see the president, former president, right there, the day that he actually signed it.
OK. Now I want you to read from a report released today by a group called the Center for Media and Democracy. All right?
Quote: "CMD's" -- Center for Media and Democracy's -- "assessment demonstrates that, while the press has focused its attention on the $700 billion TARP passed by Congress, the Federal Reserve has provided by far the bulk of the funding for the bailout in the form of loans amounting to $3.8 trillion" -- $3.8 trillion.
So, now take the $700 billion which we know was passed, which is already a lot of money, which is really only the tip of the iceberg. To get the real total of the bailout, you have got to take that $700 billion, and then you've got to combine that on top of the $3.8 trillion. There it is.
And I will quote it again together. "Four-point-six trillion dollars of your taxpayer money have been disbursed in the form of direct loans to Wall Street companies and banks, purchases of toxic assets, and support for the mortgage and mortgage-backed securities markets through federal housing agencies. That's -- that's an astonishing 32 percent of our GDP. It is 130 percent of the 2009 federal budget" -- 130 percent of our 2009 federal budget.
Jessica Yellin, good reporting. Take us through this.
YELLIN: Isn't it amazing?
(LAUGHTER)
YELLIN: Because, Rick, we all focused on what -- what we saw Congress working on. That was in public. But so much of this has been going on behind the scenes, not by ill-willed people who just want to hand over cash to bankers, by very well-intentioned people at the Federal Reserve, at the FDIC, all these acronym organizations that just want to, you know, keep the banks stable.
But all that money out the door, and a lot of Americans are asking, what have they seen for it?
SANCHEZ: I will tell you what some have seen for it. Let me -- let me show you what's going on. And this is the part that would make a grown man cry or scream.
(LAUGHTER)
SANCHEZ: I'm not sure which one.
I mean, if I were Glenn Beck, I would cry, I guess. Watch this.
(LAUGHTER)
SANCHEZ: Watch this.
These are hedge fund people, right? These are the Wall Street guys. These are the guys who are doing really well up there as a result of what this, our money, is being used for, you could argue. Look at these guys. This is "Business Day," "The New York Times."
David Tepper, $4 billion a year.
Vinnie Politan, how would you like to make four billion bucks a year?
POLITAN: Not bad.
SANCHEZ: George Soros --
POLITAN: Not bad.
SANCHEZ: -- $3.3 billion.
I got to put my glasses on. I'm getting old.
James Simons, $2.5 billion, John Paulson, $2.3 billion. These are -- these are annual salary, folks, you guys that are watching us at home? Steve Cohen, $1.4 billion. Carl Icahn, $1.3 billion, and on and on and on.
YELLIN: Amazing.
SANCHEZ: Tell us more about this, Jessica.
YELLIN: OK. Two things, Rick.
One, we should point out, none of those guys works for any of the banks that got direct money from the government.
SANCHEZ: But? YELLIN: So, they're -- they're a step removed.
But would they have been making this money had Wall Street crashed? Absolutely not. And, so --
SANCHEZ: Yes.
YELLIN: -- there's a big debate going on right now whether or not it was necessary to spend just that much money on rescuing all these firms.
And the other thing you have got to remember is, Congress is about to come back in session and decide whether or not they're going to put new limits on these same firms. And it's not at all clear that they have the political will to do anything now --
SANCHEZ: Nor does this --
YELLIN: -- because we just spent all that --
SANCHEZ: But -- but -- but can't you argue that nor does this administration? I mean, how can we expect an administration -- just a fair question out there, as a citizen and as a reporter -- how can we expect an administration that has tied itself, tied its rope to the wagon, completely, with nothing but economists and members of the Cabinet that all come from Wall Street to be able to put the kibosh on any -- any of the shenanigans that Wall Street was doing?
I mean, it -- it --
YELLIN: I think they want to rein in the shenanigans.
SANCHEZ: I think -- I think there's con -- there -- but there's -- but -- but isn't there a -- isn't there a conflict of interests there?
(CROSSTALK)
YELLIN: Well, there -- there are limits on what they're willing to do.
There's another school of thought that would have said, let the banks fail, let the playing field be completely leveled, and see what happens.
So, these -- this administration wasn't there. And they're -- they wanted to support the current system and reestablish it. They did. Now they want some checks and -- and limits on it. And there are another group of people, and a lot of Republicans, who are saying that's going to actually rein in business development altogether, and --
SANCHEZ: But --
YELLIN: -- it will be a disaster.
SANCHEZ: -- but they -- but they have given them the money. But you could also make the argument, have they put Glass-Steagall back in? Have they come up with something to stop credit default swaps? Have they done --
YELLIN: The -- the other --
SANCHEZ: -- any of the things that were done that created this mess?
YELLIN: No. No.
And the other --
(LAUGHTER)
YELLIN: -- very compelling argument is, a lot of people say, maybe they would have done better if they had given some of this money directly to homeowners who have mortgages they can't afford --
SANCHEZ: Yes.
YELLIN: -- and let them pay that money back to the banks.
Then the banks get the money eventually, but the homeowners have their home in the end. Why didn't they give some of this money --
SANCHEZ: Yes.
YELLIN: -- directly to the people, instead of to the banks?
And --
SANCHEZ: Why -- yes, why -- why --
YELLIN: -- there will be a lot of history written on whether that was a mistake not to do it.
SANCHEZ: Why was it top-down?
YELLIN: Yes.
SANCHEZ: Why wasn't it bottom-up?
YELLIN: Yes, exactly.
SANCHEZ: Well, because the people who were putting the plan together, it would seem -- and this goes back to the question I -- I asked, just an inquiry -- because the people who were putting the plan together weren't from the bottom. They were all from the top. Call me crazy.
YELLIN: Well, they have a scholarly answer that's different. But they -- yes, this is the debate.
SANCHEZ: Jessica, you're fantastic. Good stuff, as usual.
YELLIN: Good to see you.
SANCHEZ: All right, we're going to be back in just a little bit with Vinnie Politan, who has been sitting there carefully taking notes about that Wall Street discussion.
POLITAN: Yes, I was thinking, I would be happy with Rick Sanchez's check.
(LAUGHTER)
POLITAN: I don't need $2.2 billion.
(LAUGHTER)
SANCHEZ: Yes. You would have to fight for -- with my wife for most of that, by the way.
(LAUGHTER)
SANCHEZ: We're going to be -- and kids.
We're going to be back in just a bit. And we expect that Roeder might be taking the stand. So, when he does, you will see it here live, only on RICK'S LIST and CNN.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(LAUGHTER)
SANCHEZ: We got a tweet from Joe Wilson that we have picked up on, because we follow Joe Wilson. He's on our list.
I want -- I -- let me show you this. This is -- this is fascinating. And I want to -- you know, we bring you stuff as it happens here. And I think that's what attracts so many of you to the show.
(LAUGHTER)
SANCHEZ: You ready for this? This is Joe Wilson.
This is a shocker, Vinnie Politan. You know Joe Wilson.
POLITAN: Yes.
SANCHEZ: He's the one who said "You lie" to the president.
POLITAN: Exactly.
SANCHEZ: Very Republican, very staunch anti-Obama.
"Just realized the wisdom of the government health care takeover." He's -- he's going on television with this tweet and announcing that he will now -- Joe Wilson, Congressman Joe Wilson is now supporting President Obama.
POLITAN: Must have a preexisting condition.
SANCHEZ: Well, April Fool's.
(LAUGHTER) SANCHEZ: This is from Congressman Joe Wilson, a little trick for RICK'S LIST.
POLITAN: Yes.
SANCHEZ: What do you think of that?
POLITAN: Fooled me.
SANCHEZ: Changed his mind.
All right, this video is just in --
(LAUGHTER)
SANCHEZ: -- from outside Orlando, Florida. This is a story we have been following for quite some time. It's really bizarre.
It's just outside Fort Wilderness, as I understand -- video coming to in to us now. We're just starting to get some details. We have been trying to figure out from officials there how or why this happened. But, as we understand it, it's a 10-year-old boy who was in Disney World in one of those -- I think he was in the Fort Wilderness site there. Many of you have been to Disney World. You know it has a lot of different sites.
But there's big main roads that cut through those parks. And for the most part, they're divided by forests and canals. But, somehow, a 10- year-old boy was hit by a Disney bus while riding bikes with a friend on a two-lane road. The exact circumstances are still not known, friend OK. No one was -- on the bus, we understand, was hurt.
A Disney World spokesperson is saying -- saying: "We wish to extend our deepest sympathy to the boy's family and loved ones for their loss. We are currently providing the necessary resources and care to help the family with this situation."
So, there you have it. That's the situation there in Orlando, Florida.
Wow. What a -- what a tough -- imagine a family on vacation and, suddenly, they're dealing with something like this. Expect to hear more about this story.
Meanwhile, let's reset what's going on. We understand now, in Wichita, they have taken a quick recess. This is the case of an abortion provider, who provided late-term abortions, who has been murdered by that man.
That's Scott Roeder. Scott Roeder says he did what he did because of the Bible and because he wanted to save the lives of other children.
Meanwhile, the court and the state are calling it a heinous, atrocious murder. And we expect, at any moment now, he's going to be taking the stand.
What do you expect when he takes the stand, just before we go to break?
POLITAN: I expect the potential for fireworks inside that courtroom, because this is a guy who did this for a reason, for something he believes in. And -- and he's been quoted as saying: I -- I know what I'm doing is against the law. I know I'm going to be punished for it. But I need to do it anyway. I have been stalking this guy for 10 years. Now I have taken action.
And he's got to know that this is it for him --
SANCHEZ: Hmm.
POLITAN: -- because, after today, there will be no more public statements by Scott Roeder.
SANCHEZ: Yes.
POLITAN: So, if he wants to make a point, wants to move his so-called cause forward, this is it.
SANCHEZ: That's --
POLITAN: This is it, Scott Roeder.
SANCHEZ: That's a -- that's an interesting point. I hadn't thought about that.
Vinnie Politan, that's why we got you here. Thanks so much.
Stay there. Hopefully, when we come back, we will start to see the court come out of recess, Roeder will take the stand, and you will see it live right here on CNN.
We will be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: Welcome back. I'm Rick Sanchez.
This is RICK'S LIST. And you're talking.
(LAUGHTER)
SANCHEZ: You're talking a lot to me.
Let's go to your tweets now. We have been checking with some of the politicos' tweets. Look at this. "When will we learn trickle-down is a big fat fail?" -- that in response to the story we just shared with you moments ago about all the money that's being given to Wall Street.
"We need a 0.2 percent tax on all stock transactions. Is down in the noise compared to fees, but gives government piece of the action."
That's one guy's opinion. And then: "The politicos are not going to do anything against corporatocracy, not since the SCOTUS ruling."
So, there you go -- a lot more of this.
And, apparently-, you are outraged, as we are surprised, to see this report that seems to indicate that TARP wasn't what we thought it was. In actuality, if you include the money from the Fed, which some say is a loan, nonetheless, it's an awful lot more.
Also, this: one list that has been too long every month, the list of job losses around the country. But could that finally be starting to change? Well, the new unemployment rate comes out tomorrow. And economists are predicting a gain of about 190,000 jobs. That's only a prediction, though.
If it happens, that would only be the second month since December of 2007 with an increase. Now, they caution, don't get too excited about this. I know. We're at a time when small increases are good.
(LAUGHTER)
SANCHEZ: Decreases would be better. A lot of people got hired to carry out the census. And when all those bad storms hit last month, it forced a lot of workers to miss unemployment opportunities.
Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner told "The Today Show" things are improving, but even he warns don't expect a quick end to this continual high unemployment rate.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP, "THE TODAY SHOW")
TIMOTHY GEITHNER, U.S. TREASURY SECRETARY: Well, I think the key thing that's going to happen is, the economy is going to start creating jobs again. You're going to start to see businesses across the country start to add to payroll again. That's going to come.
The economy is growing now. That's the first step. But with growth, more jobs will come. But the unemployment rate is still terribly high. And it's going to stay unacceptably high for a long period of time.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: We're obviously going to have all the angles covered on this tomorrow with Poppy Harlow and the CNNMoney team to try and make sense for you of some of these new numbers that we now see coming out.
Also, I need to give you the very latest now on -- I got -- I got to give you the latest on Republican chairman Michael Steele and what appears to be a challenge to his leadership.
Now, this is interesting. We have all heard the complaints about overspending, the Republican Party funds being lavishly spent on private jets, on limos, nights in Four Seasons, et cetera.
We have had Michael Steele here, and we have asked him about that. And he told me: Look, I get a lot of requests. I'm a guy who's the voice right now of the Republican Party. That's what he said. Some donors, though, have gone as far as to call for Steele's resignation now. Then came the reports of a party paying the tab for -- or the Republican Party, I should say, paying the tab for this staffers' night out at this pricey sexual bondage club -- a sexual bondage club in Hollywood, California.
Now we have this from conservative mover and shaker Tony Perkins. He's head of the Family Research Council, a very influential part of the Republican Party -- quote -- "I have hinted at this before, but now I am saying it. Don't give money to the RNC. Don't give money to the RNC."
This is from Tony Perkins.
"Give it directly to candidates who you know reflect your values."
That's a dish -- I mean, that's a dis. Folks, it -- it is getting very difficult for them in -- in this regard. I will talk about it tomorrow with Tom McClusky, who, like Tony Perkins, is a leading official with the Family Research Council, to find out how serious an impact this might have on the GOP, if at all.
That's at 4:00 right here on RICK'S LIST.
Meanwhile, this:
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SUSAN SMITH, PARENT: The administration needs to resign. It's -- it's despicable.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: A parent expresses outrage at her son's high school for not doing enough about bullying. Now it's on the teachers and the principals. It's a concern affecting many of you with kids in school.
Alina Cho has been doing remarkable work on this story. She presses the school's principal. We're going to show you that report so you can see it for yourself next. It's next on THE LIST.
Also, look at this. This is an algae-covered minivan pulled out of a canal along Florida's Alligator Alley. This is just really a couple of miles from where I grew up and my parents still live. Folks in Florida, they pull these out of canals every day. Not a big deal, until you look and find out what's in this particular van.
It's shocking. It's next. Stay there.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: All right. Just to check in, we're not forgetting the promise that we made to you. When Scott Roeder takes the stand -- this is one of the most followed court cases in the country -- we're going to let you hear what he has to say. This is not him. This is a clinical psychologist who's on the stand right now in the case of Scott Roeder who will soon be sentenced to life in prison. The question is, will he get 25 years max or will he get 50 years max? Obviously, that would mean after 25 years he might be able to get probation based on a lot of other things that go into this, but there's a big argument going on about this right now.
The key is he's going to speak, we expect. And when he does, you'll see it.
And we've got Vinnie Politan standing by here, and he's going to be helping to take us through this case which he's been following diligently now for weeks on end.
Meanwhile, high on the list of questions that we've been hearing from you, why didn't anybody stop the bullying that prosecutors say amounted to torture so brutal, it caused a 15-year-old girl, Phoebe Prince, to kill herself? The district attorney is saying that the harassment was right out in the open, right there in school, and that some teachers had to have known about it.
The school superintendent is telling us that two kids who insulted Phoebe were punished, but listen closely to what he tells us about how long the school knew about this bullying.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GUS SAYER, SUPERINTENDENT, SOUTH HADLEY SCHOOLS: She didn't reveal to people what she was being subjected to. And, unfortunately, until January 7th, we were not aware of what she was being subjected to. So there was very little way we could have intervened in the bullying that took place.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: All right. Did you hear that? He said January 7th. Phoebe Prince killed herself on January 14th, one week later.
He said 7th. She killed herself on the 14th.
Now, there's a school press release that's got some parents upset about this. Let me take you back through this. In fact, let me have one of our best correspondents who's been all over this story, Alina Cho, bring you up to date.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ALINA CHO, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): This is the press release that some are calling a slap in the face. In the wake of 15- year-old Phoebe Prince's suicide, and immediately following the indictment of nine classmates who allegedly bullied her, South Hadley Public Schools announced: "We have taken additional disciplinary action with an additional group of students. And they have been removed from the high school."
It looks like a proactive move on the school's part. But guess what? The students they're talking about are not the nine students who have been charged in Prince's death.
That's because the school hasn't taken any disciplinary action against them. So, is the school now trying to look like it's on top of the problem that some say it completely missed?
"Keeping Them Honest," we went to the school, looking for answers.
(on camera): Hi there, sir. My name is Alina Cho. I'm with CNN.
DANIEL SMITH, PRINCIPAL, SOUTH HADLEY HIGH SCHOOL: We don't -- we're not allowing any media on the property--
CHO: OK.
SMITH: -- at this point.
CHO: You're the principal, right?
SMITH: I am the principal.
CHO: Yes.
(voice-over): The same principal who many say has been avoiding questions about what happened inside his school, why multiple faculty members allegedly witnessed Prince being bullied and did nothing to stop it.
This is his first television interview since the indictments against the nine teens were handed down. We asked him about the anti- bullying task force created following Prince's death.
SMITH: We're working through and revising our procedures and policies and so forth, yes.
CHO (on camera): And are you encouraged by the results so far? Do parents seem to be encouraged by the results?
SMITH: So far, I think we -- we are. I mean, we're working on that.
CHO (voice-over): On local talk radio--
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Rock 102. Good morning. Who is this?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Hi. My name is Al.
CHO: -- callers say that is not enough.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I just want to make a statement that, I mean, I think the administrators should be held accountable for what's going on.
CHO: Not likely. Even though the district attorney called the inaction by school administrators troublesome, failure to act in the Prince case did not amount to criminal behavior.
But don't tell that to parents in this tight-knit New England community.
SUSAN SMITH, PARENT: They haven't apologized to this family. They haven't apologized to this community.
CHO: Susan Smith's son, Nick (ph), was a close friend of Phoebe Prince and a pallbearer at her funeral. She says parents have been complaining for years about bullying by students, and that the district didn't listen. Now it needs a fresh start.
S. SMITH: We have been saying from early on that the administration needs to resign. It's despicable.
CHO: The school district says it is conducting its own investigation, plans to meet with the district attorney, and will take disciplinary action based on any new evidence.
Back at South Hadley High School:
(on camera): But what do you say to all the parents who are outraged and who are calling for your resignation?
D. SMITH: At this point, I'm not going to talk any further.
CHO: Will you resign when your contract is up?
D. SMITH: I have no comment at this point.
CHO: And your contract is up in May, sir?
D. SMITH: I have no comment.
CHO: I hope you understand, we just--
D. SMITH: If I need to, I will call the police, because there's no media on the property.
CHO (voice-over): Alina Cho, CNN, South Hadley, Massachusetts.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
SANCHEZ: She was tough, wasn't she?
By the way, we're going to expect to get some shots inside the courtroom any moment now, as we told you, when Scott Roeder takes the stand.
Still have that clinical psychologist on, as we mentioned. Vinnie Politan is here. He's going to join me to take us through it.
It's taking a little longer than we thought, huh?
It is. We thought this whole thing today was going to take maybe an hour or so. And now it's an all-day affair and we still have not sight of Scott Roeder on the stand.
SANCHEZ: Also, who's on the list of the "Most Intriguing Person" in the news today? We're going to take you through that when we come back.
Stay right there. I'm Rick Sanchez. This is RICK'S LIST.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: Anybody who knows me knows I can tell you I live on the cutting edge of music and pop culture, right? No.
Rap, hip-hop, rock, Hollywood, whatever it's called, I'm all over it. OK, that's not true. Someone had to write this for me and pretend that I did know about all that stuff.
But someone did have to also tell me who this guy is, rapper and actor and, yes, he's a concerned citizen. Really. He's helping the United States Census reach people who are harder to count -- single moms, older Americans, the poor, the underprivileged. He says that these people can't be helped if nobody knows who they are.
His words, "It's important that we all stand up and be counted so that we can help create potential financial opportunities for our dying communities."
Truth bombs. Who is it?
It's this guy. His mom named him Christopher Bridges, but he's really called Ludacris. And he's been doing door to door in Atlanta, D.C., New Orleans, and maybe your town today, as National Census Day, the day that you should have your returned Census forms.
Do it. Ludacris will be disappointed, he says, if you don't.
I knew who he was.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MIKE JACHLES, BROWARD COUNTY SHERIFF FIRE RESCUE: We need to find out, number one, how many human remains are inside that vehicle or in the canal. And, number two, how they got there, whether it was something accidental or something more sinister.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: Whoa. This is an amazing discovery. It's a minivan with human bones inside, pulled from a Florida canal.
Could it explain what happened to a woman and her two kids who disappeared nearly 11 years ago? Suddenly, everything's starting to make sense there.
That story is big on our list, and it's coming your way next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: Listing stories in the news today.
Number one, if you're from south Florida like I am, you probably know about canals, hundreds of miles of them running along most roads and highways. So many that there's no way they can barricade or keep the cars from the canals. And sometimes horrible things happen.
People drive into them. It happens all the time. Divers pull cars out of them all the time.
But there's only one in 100 chance of actually finding what they found today during a training session. They pulled two cars and a van out of a canal along a highway known as Alligator Alley during this training session. Inside the van, they found human remains.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JACHLES: We need to find out, number one, how many human remains are inside that vehicle or in the canal. And, number two, how they got there, whether it was something accidental or something more sinister.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SANCHEZ: Actually, there is some hope that they've solved a mystery, a mystery that goes back to 1999. That's when a mother and her two young daughters just disappeared off the face of the earth.
People have been wondering for more than a decade what happened to them. Investigators aren't commenting yet, but the woman's family says they've been told the van they found is hers. A full police report is expected soon.
This video just in from outside Orlando, Florida. This is near the Fort Wilderness Resort in Disney World.
We're getting details on the accident that has killed a 10-year-old boy. He was hit by a Disney bus while riding bikes with a friend on a two-lane road. The exact circumstances are not known.
His friend is OK. No one on the bus was hurt.
A Disney World spokesperson is saying, "We wish to extend our deepest sympathy to the boy's family and loved ones for their loss. We're currently providing the necessary resources and care to help the family with this situation."
You see that bridge right there? It's in Coventry, Rhode Island. Better look now, because it might not be there tomorrow.
There is a real danger it could collapse into the river. That's right.
The last few days of rain and the flooding have washed away the bridge supports. About 200 people living down river have been told to get out of their homes. Parts of Rhode Island got more than eight inches of rain in this deluge that hit the Northeast this week.
Here's a tip for pirates. If you see this ship in the Indian Ocean, don't attack it. This is a naval frigate, the USS Nicholas, part of the 6th Fleet. It was off the Seychelles Islands just after midnight this morning when a skiff with three guys on it, pirates, started shooting at it.
Bad move. The Navy ship fired back and chased the pirates, they captured three of them.
The Navy crew did not stop there. They then went after the pirates' mother ship and captured two more.
Pirates from Somalia have made tens of millions of dollars by holding merchant ships for ransom. Going after the U.S. Navy, not to mention wearing that peg leg thing, not a good idea.
Also, who's on "The List U Don't Want 2 Be On?" Making the news today, hint, he's a congressman who thinks that having too many people on -- he's a congressman that thinks that having too many people on an island might actually make it tip over.
He shows you with his hands as he takes you through it. This is remarkable, folks. Watch this if you watch nothing else.
And then, tomorrow, the jobs report comes out. And we're going to be all over it.
Poppy Harlow, our friend over at CNN Money, is going to a town that's actually seeing a jobs boom, no matter what the numbers show tomorrow. And she's going to show us how they're doing it.
We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
SANCHEZ: All right. We're back.
To Wichita we go. This is Scott Roeder. He's just starting to speak now. I want you to hear it live.
(JOINED IN PROGRESS)
SCOTT ROEDER, DEFENDANT: -- who had perished at their hands, at the hands of abortionists in this country. But yet, they're out of sight, out of mind.
So, Judge Wilber (ph), with all due respect, if you could help me understand just one question, I would be most appreciative.
How is it in today's system of jurisprudence, when indeed a man's very life and liberty are at stake, he is allowed to speak openly and freely at his sentencing, but he's not allowed to speak openly and freely at his trial? What is the court so determined to keep hidden that a man would not be allowed to speak every aspect and give every last detail so as to let it be fully known why he took the action that he did?
Why is it that a man's defense has to fit into a preconceived statutory box before he's allowed to proclaim it? And what a miscarriage of justice it is when that man is told, sorry, your defense doesn't fit into one of our categories.
Having said that, in pretrial hearings you gave me and my attorneys the impression that I'd be able to tell a jury of my peers the reasons why I shot George Tiller. In classic duplicity, you said one thing and did another. I'm taking this opportunity to put on record what you have denied me at my trial.
You told me that I would be able to testify as to how I came to form the beliefs I hold concerning the unlawfulness of George Tiller's late-term abortions, although when I called Phil Klein (ph) to proffer to you, you ruled that you did not want him to speak because he would "bolster" my beliefs concerning these late-term abortions.
This is why I called him, to proffer, to testify, to show why and how I formed those beliefs. It's almost as if you ruled he was too credible of a witness when you did not allow the jury to hear the entirety of what Phil Klein (ph) had to say. Isn't this a trial by judge instead of a trial by jury?
Unfortunately, I was unable to subpoena one of my witnesses. If I would have been able to call her, I was going to have her testify as to what she witnessed at George Tiller's clinic.
She was there to be with her daughter while she underwent -- while her daughter underwent an abortion. One of George Tiller's methods to kill was to locate the baby's heart on a sonogram and inject dioxin, a poison, into the baby's heart, causing a heart attack. This particular time, Tiller missed the heart and the baby was born alive.
The mother of the woman then witnessed George Tiller reach down and snap the baby's neck. I wanted her to testify to show the extent that George Tiller would go concerning unlawful abortions at this clinic. And if I know anything about legalities, the baby was born and that was a murder. This grandmother of the baby has never been the same since that day.
It is no secret that George Tiller killed unborn babies for a living. He did this with the blessing and permission of the highest laws of our land.
Baby murder is an accepted practice in Kansas performed by George Tiller under a color of law, under a pretense of medicine and choice. George Tiller dismembered living children with a nod of approval from the state, and he did this with the blessing of his church.
Abortion was illegal in the state 37 years ago. It was murder then, and it is murder now. We do not change reality by changing the law.
God commands thou shall not murder. Killing a baby in the mother's womb is the cold-blooded, premeditated murder of a helpless, unborn child.
George Tiller was not an innocent person, nor was he helpless, although the people whom he killed were innocent and helpless. This court stifled my testimony, preventing me from reminding the jury of their humanity.
The people of Kansas and of this nation are at the height of denial of the preborn's humanity and worth. If I were allowed to display pictures of aborted babies as you were allowed pictures of George Tiller lying in -- as you allowed pictures of George Tiller lying in a pool of blood, some of the jury, if not all, might have been persuaded to find me innocent of murder.
George Tiller's victims have been conveniently silenced. You stopped me from testifying and speaking on their behalf because I'm not a medical doctor. But you do not have to be a medical doctor to see the humanity and suffering on each child's face, and you do not have to be a judge or lawyer to understand that this is wrong.
And just what are these procedures which the unborn is subjected to every day? From a pamphlet written by Melanie Green (ph) titled "Children: Things We Throw Away," she describes abortion techniques. The following are the most commonly used abortion techniques. Keep in mind, these children have no anesthesia whatsoever.
Dilation and curettage: The cervix is dilated with a series of instruments to allow the insertion of a curette, or sharp scraping instrument into the uterus. The developing child is then cut into pieces and scraped from the uterine wall.
Bleeding is usually profuse. A nurse must then reassemble the parts to make sure the uterus is empty, otherwise infection will set in.
Suction curettage: The cervix is dilated, then a tube is inserted into the uterus and connected to a strong suction apparatus. The vacuum is so powerful that the baby is torn to bits and sucked into a jar.
Dilation and evacuation: At 12 to 20 weeks, a seaweed-based substance is inserted into the cervix causing dilation. The next day, forceps with sharp metal teeth are inserted and parts of the baby's body are torn away and removed piece by piece.
I might add, this is done slowly so as not to injure the mother, so that the baby experiences an excruciatingly slow, torture death. At this age, the head is usually too large to be removed whole and must be pressed and drained before taken out. These types of abortions are promoted by abortion advocates because, unlike other second trimester methods, they ensure the baby's dead.
Salt poisoning, saline injection, used after 16 weeks, or four months, when enough fluid has accumulated. A long needle is inserted through the mother's abdomen to the baby sack. Some fluid is removed with a strong salt solution, and a strong salt solution is injected.
The helpless baby swallows this poison and suffers severely. He kicks and jerks violently as he is literally being burned alive. It takes over an hour for the baby to die.
His outer layer of skin is completely burned off. Within 24 hours, labor will usually set in and the mother will give birth to a dead baby. Quite frequently, these babies are born alive. They are usually left unattended to die. However, a few have survived the ordeal due to the mercy of the hospital staff.
SANCHEZ: He's doing, Vinnie, essentially what we expected, down to the end of the show here.
VINNIE POLITAN, RADIO TALK SHOW HOST: Well, this is actually more than I expected, because this is a guy who's going to be sentenced, so he attacks the judge and attacks the victims, the two things you don't do if you care about your sentence. He doesn't care about his sentence. He just wants to make a speech.
SANCHEZ: Make a speech about abortion, which he's opposed to.
POLITAN: That's it.
SANCHEZ: And he's doing it in very graphic detail, but that doesn't surprise us either.
POLITAN: No. He wasn't allowed to do this during the trial. That's why he's doing it now.
SANCHEZ: So he's going to do it now.
So the question now is, will it be 25 years or will it be 50 years?
POLITAN: Oh, I'm leaning towards 50 right now. You attack the judge, you attack the victim, you're not remorseful, you're showing nothing to the court, expect 50.
SANCHEZ: He'll get a real life sentence then.
POLITAN: Yes.
SANCHEZ: Which is 50 years given his age.
Wolf Blitzer standing by. "THE SITUATION ROOM" starts right now.
I'm Rick Sanchez. We'll see you tomorrow.
