Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Continued Coverage of the Aftermath of the Connecticut School Shooting; Gov. Malloy Speaks to the Press; More Talk of Gun Control; What Size Should the Government Be?

Aired December 17, 2012 - 15:30   ET

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

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BROOKE BALDWIN, CNN ANCHOR: This is Newtown, Connecticut.

And this is the week the funerals begin. In fact, one is beginning just across the street. This is the only undertaker in this town of some 27,000 people. He's been quoted as saying this is a week from hell. He's faced with the daunting task of masking some of the wounds from Friday's shooting.

And we're told -- think about these tiny caskets -- some will be open, some will be closed.

What's happening all around me is the firefighters here at Sandy Hook Fire and Rescue, they're unwrapping wreaths from all the way across the country in Portland, Oregon.

(INAUDIBLE) told me through tears there are 20, 20 for the little lives lost.

Just driving around Newtown, you really get the sense of community and you see these memorials popping up, like this one. "We love you, Sandy Hook Elementary. Honk if you love us, too."

Signs -- "God bless our town, pray for a town."

We even noticed in the middle of part of town a flag, the big flag is now flying at half-staff.

This is the firehouse here where a lot of those families huddled Friday morning, learning the fates of their little sons and daughters. We can't cross the street. You can see the sign here -- "No media beyond this point." We can't get inside the firehouse.

Many of these first-responders still very much so reeling over what they saw, what they responded to Friday.

I want to read you a quote. This is from a volunteer firefighter, 39 years here, and he said, "I've seen some horrendous things in 39 years as a firefighter. This is the first time I went home and cried."

I did manage to talk to two younger firefighters here and they told me really the priority, beyond the community, the grief counselors, to help them cope with what they saw. (END VIDEO CLIP)

So, that was just a look around the town.

Don Lemon joins me. You've been here for a couple of days. I just can't -- all of it, the angels in people's front yards and the balloons and the Christmas trees and the ribbons, it's everywhere you turn, obviously, in memorial of a lot of these little lives lost.

But you want to talk a little bit more about the gunman, about his mother. What are you learning?

DON LEMON, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, it's not that -- you know, every time there is something like this, you want to shy away from making that person famous, but there are some clues to his actions, possibly, and to find out why ...

BALDWIN: Why? Why?

LEMON: Why, which is what everyone is asking. You have to go to the people who knew him.

So, his mother's friends, I talked to them about the mother because they want to talk about her, but then I asked them about him.

What was he like? Were there any warning signs? Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: You knew Adam?

RUSS HANOMAN, FRIEND OF NANCY LANZA: Yeah.

LEMON: What about him?

HANOMAN: He did have Asperger's syndrome. He, like many kids that have that, he was very withdrawn, emotionally, but he had -- he was an organic vegan and nobody seems to know that.

And he took that stance because of a moral stance about animals providing his food. He didn't want to require them to make that sacrifice. He believed that nothing should have to die so he could live.

So, it makes the enormity of this tragedy even more bizarre because he was not violent. He didn't have a problem with anybody.

He was very reclusive and he was very private in terms of how he viewed himself and he didn't -- he was always trying to be very inconspicuous, even in public.

He didn't want to make them -- himself the center of attention. He never was -- always a very quiet kid.

LEMON: He wasn't a bad kid, you say?

HANOMAN: No. Not at all.

LEMON: So then how do you explain this?

HANOMAN: I don't. I think we're all down here looking for answers.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: So, he's quiet.

BALDWIN: Inconspicuous in public.

LEMON: He's a loner, reclusive.

BALDWIN: That's interesting.

LEMON: Those are the signs of, you know -- I mean, they're not mutually exclusive, but those are the signs that psychologists and that profilers will tell you that might lead people to -- so they -- there were some warning signs there, but they didn't think there were any warning signs there.

And, also, they said, they don't believe he had any connection to the elementary school. But he did go to Sandy Hook High School, so -- but no connection, they believe to the ...

BALDWIN: Talking to an expert a moment ago and his point was that, if you get to a point, you do not distinguish children versus adults -- perhaps, in this case, he didn't. No one will really fully understand why.

But I want to talk a little bit about this new poll. Take a look at some of these numbers here. There's this new poll. It was taken after Friday's shootings and you can look at the numbers here in a moment.

Here they are. Forty-four percent of Americans say they strongly support stricter gun control laws. That is up just a little bit from 39 percent back in August. That was after the Aurora theater shootings in Colorado.

The ABC/"Washington Post" survey finds that 32 percent strongly oppose stricter gun control laws. That is down from 37 percent in August.

And the push for new gun control laws already in the works. California Senator Dianne Feinstein actually plans to reintroduce her assault ban -- assault weapons ban legislation. We've talked so much about that.

Also, New Jersey Senator Frank Lautenberg plans a bill that would ban the sale of high-capacity magazines. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DANA BASH, CNN SENIOR CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Why do you think this moment may be different?

SENATOR DIANNE FEINSTEIN (D), CALIFORNIA: Because I think it's a logical continuum.

If there should be a safe place in America, it's an elementary school and here in this elementary school, look what happened. Six-year-olds with 3-to-11 bullets from this Bushmaster in their body, 20 of them.

Is this America? I don't think so. And I think these incidents are going to continue until we do something to change the supply mode of these weapons out in our society.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BALDWIN: It's a gruesome image to think about, but how she said, "This is America? I don't think so."

Here you have the president here in town, just last night, speaking at the high school, and, you know, if you listen to him, he didn't go into specifics, but he certainly said that gun violence, killing America's youth must stop.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: We can't tolerate this anymore. These tragedies must end and to end them we must change.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BALDWIN: So, supporters of gun rights, they seem to be saying, you know, yes, we need more guns, but I don't know how that momentum is really shifting.

LEMON: Here's the thing. Can we go back to what ...

BALDWIN: Dianne Feinstein.

LEMON: Dianne Feinstein.

BALDWIN: How about what she said?

LEMON: Here's the thing.

BALDWIN: Yeah?

LEMON: If you ask -- listen, we're coming off of 20 kids being shot. These are six- or seven-year-olds. These are kids who, as I've been saying, going to bolt down the stairs in a few days to see what Santa brought them.

BALDWIN: Right.

LEMON: Think about that.

BALDWIN: Right.

LEMON: Does your right -- do you believe your right to own a gun or an assault weapon -- we're not talking about taking away people's guns. If you own an assault weapon or an automatic rifle, does that trump the right, my right, to be in a movie theater and feel safe, a six- or seven-year-old to sit in a classroom and feel safe? I don't think so.

And, so, that's the conversation we need to have. And when someone says, oh, well, people who say we need to look at the gun laws are trying to take away the Second Amendment right, not at all.

But in the wake of children being slaughtered in an elementary school, if we're not going to talk about it now, when the heck are we going to talk about it? It is disrespectful not to do it at this point. I think it would be disrespectful, not only of the victims, but of the families.

BALDWIN: Some people are frustrated we're having this conversation at all and trying to politicize it or that members of Congress are trying to politicize it, but I absolutely agree.

LEMON: Brooke, we're very good at lighting candles and saying all the right things, and then we're on to the next tragedy. It will be another shooting, a hurricane, or a twister.

BALDWIN: I don't want to cover another one of these.

LEMON: Right. And we -- thank you. There you go.

BALDWIN: I don't want to cover another one of these. Don Lemon, thank you.

LEMON: Thanks, Brooke.

BALDWIN: Coming up, Connecticut's governor, Dan Malloy, set to give a news conference here any moment now from Hartford, Connecticut. We're watching that. We will bring it to you live, coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ALI VELSHI, CNN CHIEF BUSINESS CORRESPONDENT: From New York, I'm Ali Velshi. This is "Your Money."

How big should government be and what are you wailing to pay for it? There are 15 days left to avert the fiscal cliff and Republicans are finally offering to increase tax rates on the wealthy.

Speaker Boehner proposed an increase on families making a million bucks or more. The White House says it's not enough, but it is a step in the right direction. Boehner was back at the White House today to talk about it some more.

Now, Republicans might be bending slightly, but generally oppose more revenue because they feel government already spends too much. So, the question is not really about whether millionaires or those making more than $250,000 a year will pay higher rates, the real conversation boils down to the role of government.

Fareed Zakaria and I were discussing my contention that we should be less concerned with actual rates and be having more of a discussion about the value that Americans get for their tax dollars.

FAREED ZAKARIA, CNN'S "FAREED ZAKARIA GPS": Here's the problem with that. Americans like government, so what we have for the last 30 years done is say we're going to have low taxes, but we still want lots of government.

And we've made up that difference by borrowing.

VELSHI: Speaking about value for your taxes, take look at this list of countries rated on a 1-to-10 life satisfaction scale. Denmark tops the list at 10. Canada comes in at a 9, the U.S. at 8, France at 7 and Japan a measly 4.

Now, look at the top tax rates in these countries. Americans pay 41.7 percent when you factor in federal, state and local taxes. Danes are happier, but they pay a bit more, 48 percent. Why? Because, in part, because their taxes get them free health care and post-secondary education.

So, perhaps a more constructive conversation should center on how much we expect to benefit from government services and how much we're willing to pay for those services.

Now, on the weekend negotiation between Speaker Boehner and President Obama have given us a new term over which to obsess, chained CPI. Now, simply put, it would change the way the federal government calculates inflation and those benefits that are tied to it.

Normally, every year both wages and prices go up. The consumer price index, or CPI, measures how much prices go up by tracking a basket of goods that Americans typically buy.

Now, this is important because it's used to calculate cost of living adjustments on Social Security. Checks pay a little more each year as prices for what we need go up.

One potential flaw in the system is that CPI assumes people don't change the things in the basket if, for instance, the price of meat goes up. In other words, if you're eating more chicken because the price of beef has shot up, CPI doesn't account for that.

Chained CPI creates a chained baskets of goods to measure inflation more accurately. It is measuring how people actually react to price changes, not simply the fact that prices have changed.

Now, chained CPI would account for the fact that you are buying more chicken when beef becomes too expensive. Now that could result in a slower rate of inflation over time, saving the government money on those cost of living adjustments and on raising tax brackets on what people earn.

So, why is chained CPI suddenly so vital to the fiscal cliff negotiation? Well, it isn't a spending cut or a tax hike, but it will effectively cut spending and raise taxes on some, saving the government an estimated $300 billion over the next decade.

From New York, I'm Ali Velshi. I'll talk to you same time tomorrow.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BALDWIN: Back here live in Newtown, Connecticut, where people, days after the shooting on Friday, are just beginning to wrap their heads around this grief.

We are now about to hear from -- in fact, here he is, the governor of Connecticut here, Dan Malloy, speaking at the state capital. Take a listen.

GOVERNOR DANNEL MALLOY (D), CONNECTICUT: ... although I would ask if they are questions directly and specifically related to the investigation of the incident that you refer those questions to Lieutenant Paul Vance, who, by the way, I think is doing an outstanding job, in keeping you all appraised of the circumstances that took place at the school.

The lieutenant governor and I each attended a funeral service today. I attended Noah's funeral in Fairfield and the lieutenant governor attended Jack's funeral in Newtown.

There really are no words to describe what it's like to see these parents as I did on Friday, last night, going from room to room, and then again with respect to Noah's parents today.

It's tough to see relatives and friends of these little children who died and as well as to see some of the teachers who have been so adversely impacted.

The reality with respect to the relatives is you try to feel their pain, but you can't. You try to find some words that you hope will be adequate, knowing that they'll be inadequate and you see little coffins and your heart has to ache.

So, you tell them you grieve for their loss. You give them a hug and you tell them that their community, their state and their nation, dare I say the whole world, stands with them and you hope that that makes some difference.

The past few days have obviously been very difficult ones for anyone living in the state of Connecticut or aware of these particularly heinous circumstances. As I said in my televised remarks on Saturday night, you see these tragedies play out in other places and you hope and you expect that it will never happen in your home, but clearly it did in Connecticut.

I will repeat something I said on Friday and Saturday. The families of those victims, their families, their relatives, the brave teachers and administrators at the school who survived and the children who survived, to all of them, let us -- let me say on behalf of the state of Connecticut that we stand ready to assist you in any way possible, in any way needed to help you heal.

So many resources already being -- so many resources are already being brought to bear, but we will bring more, whatever is necessary, and do whatever has to be done to help our state and the community of Newtown and the specific neighborhood of Sandy Hook heal.

To that end, and this is for all of our citizens, not just on a geographic basis, anyone who is hurting in the state of Connecticut, call 211. It's a crisis line. It's available on a state-wide basis.

It's available 24 hours a day to connect families with resources that they need to get through these circumstances. And it is staffed by people who it is staffed by people who are trained specialists in handling these kinds of situations.

We have used the United Way and 211 to help coordinate the many offers of services that are pouring into our state and we will use many of those resources I'm sure.

I want to again thank the president for having come to the state and having pledged to provide on behalf of the federal government the presence that we needed in Newtown and any additional services that we might need.

I also want to comment that he was eloquent, he was moving, he was healing and he was powerful. I think I can speak on behalf of everyone when I say we're grateful for his leadership and obvious -- it is obvious that he is concerned about our state and our people and I'm most appreciative of that.

I want to thank the first-responders. It's pretty clear now that their very quick response saved lives. We are grateful to them. They put their lives on the line every single day and then there are days like Friday when they put their lives on the line and they actually save lives as they clearly did on Friday. As a result, children went home and continued their preparations to celebrate Christmas or will celebrate Hanukkah in the future.

And I'd like to thank the adults in the school, the teachers, the administrators, all of the adults. Those who died trying to save their students are heroes. They gave their lives so others could live. And there are those teachers who in a calm, quick-thinking action saved many lives. They are heroes, also.

There are a lot of heroes in Connecticut today and I'm grateful to all of them.

I said in my remarks Saturday night that I thought there would be a time for public discussion and that discussion would inevitably occur as it does every time when a tragedy like this takes place.

And I think some people interpreted that to mean that I thought it was inappropriate for those discussions to take place. I do not think it's inappropriate for them to take place. In fact, it's quite appropriate.

The point I was making was that no more than 36 hours after the event, my job, my personal job as governor at that moment, was to speak to the people of Connecticut about the fears they're feeling, the damage that's been done and my job was to help and continue to help Newtown and the entire state to recover. But we know in our state we have some of the toughest gun laws of any state in the nation. But when the investigation is over and all of the information is in, I'm going to ask a few questions.

Is there a law, a policy or a procedure we could have had on the books that might have prevented this tragedy? It turns out quite clearly that the answer is yes and -- I believe it is yes -- and we should pursue that strategy.

We are -- are we doing enough from a mental-health perspective to reach out to kids and families who are obviously in trouble? My sense is we are not and we need to look at that within our own state and within our own nation.

Finally, do I think Washington, D.C. needs to get its act together and enact stricter gun control laws at the federal level? You bet I do. I'm confident, especially after hearing the president at his address today that perhaps -- and, by the way, the comments of our own Connecticut delegation that perhaps this debate will be renewed in Washington and lead to a different result, one other than the result that allowed the weapons -- assault weapons ban to have expired.

The public policy debate is already playing out at the national level and, if Connecticut or I can be a voice of assistance in that matter, we are, as Connecticut citizens, I as the governor, prepared to enter that debate, as well.

But my focus right now is on helping our community and our state get through this very terrible and difficult time.

I said there were some announcements, so I'll make those now.

First, offers of financial assistance, generous offers, are literally pouring into Connecticut. I've asked my staff to put together a process to handle all of this in an organized fashion and I expect to have something further to announce about this in the next day or two.

I know that the community of Newtown is working with United Way on this very subject, as well, and has set up a fund there.

Second, I want to inform you that I've signed an executive order that will permit Monroe and Newtown to enter into an agreement concerning the use of a Monroe extra school that they have, a surplus school, that will allow that school to be used immediately and suspends some of the public notice aspects of entering into that agreement. Obviously, this is an emergency.

I'm doing that under -- I was prepared to declare a separate emergency, but the reality is that we're still under Hurricane Sandy emergency so I used that as the basis to execute that executive order.

And, third, I'm asking that Friday, December 21st, at 9:30 a.m., exactly one week after the horror began to unfold in Newtown, that the entire state observe a moment of silence.

And I'd like to ask those houses of worship or other buildings that have the ability to play bells to do so, as well, 26 bells for the beautiful children and six wonderful adults who were killed at the school on that day.

I'll be sending a letter of notification to all of the other governors through the NGA, asking them to ask their citizens to observe that occasion, as well.

And now I'm happy to take your questions.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Governor, while the federal assault ban has expired, the state ban here in Connecticut remains in effect, has been since 1993. Seems unclear whether or not this weapon that was seized at this incident was covered by it or not.

We also have a unique law on the books that was enacted a couple of years after the lottery shootings, which allows you to report someone who you think is dangerous and has weapons in the house. I think it's called the Weapons Seizure law. Some people call it the "report your neighbor" law. You know the one I'm talking about.

Those are two of the toughest laws on the books in the country, yet neither one of them helped here. A man shot his way into the school. Is there really anything else that could be done ...

MALLOY: Sure.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: ... to stop thing like this?

MALLOY: Of course there is. Number one, we do use the latter of the two statutes you've referred to. I think we've removed thousands of guns using that statute.

Secondly, with respect to the expiring -- what was otherwise the Brady Bill or the assault weapons ban, under that legislation, clips were limited to 10. We know that, in this case, clips were used with 30 cartridges and multiples were used.

That one difference could very well have been significant and I suspect it would have been.

You know, these guns aren't used to hunt deer and, you know, I'm a big believer in hunting rights, big believer in supporting the Second Amendment, but there is a reality that this stuff has gone too far and is too easy to own.

And then your -- the whole point of your question is that Connecticut has these laws. In the absence of a federal framework in which we limit, really, the explosive nature of the weapons and ammunition that's used, no state would ever be safe based on simply its own laws.

That's why the Brady Bill, that's why the assault weapons ban was so very important. Politics played a role in allowing that to expire. Politics should play a role in having it be reinstituted.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (INAUDIBLE)

MALLOY: Yes?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (INAUDIBLE)

MALLOY: Well, we can't build a building any faster than they can build a building and, you know, that's a local issue to be discussed and we'll certainly sit in consultation on that matter with them.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (INAUDIBLE)

MALLOY: You know, if I had been asked, I would have supported it. I support the Brady ban.

I was quite active with mayors on the gun issue at the time that the assault weapons ban was expiring and have been -- was quite active with Mayor Bloomberg on other issues around guns.

I've been told someone submitted that someone submitted that. I'm not sure that that was an actively discussed item last year. I don't have a memory of it.

QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)

MALLOY: I don't -- I don't believe so.

We get a lot of letters in the office. Most of them never get to me, quite frankly. So I can't tell you that that didn't happen. I can only tell you that I support a person's opportunity to hunt and to meet the strictest definition of the Second Amendment.

But beyond that, I think this thing has gotten way out of control. And the idea that assault weapons are as plentiful in the United States with a capacity as large as they're available in the United States, including in Connecticut, is not something that I support.

QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)

MALLOY: I think this whole issue of assault weapons and weapons that can easily be converted to assault weapons is a question that we really need to have in this country.

Obviously, the discussion can begin about the size of the magazines, and I think that that's a good discussion to have. I would love to hear the people argue that we need 30-round magazines and that's somehow tied to the right to bear arms.

QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)

MALLOY: Sportsmen.

QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)

MALLOY: Right. And they say that because they know that they can prevent...

QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE) MALLOY: That I'm not talking about basic weapons or weapons that are used in hunting. To the best of my knowledge, if anyone uses an assault weapon in the hunting with a 30-round magazine, I would be quite surprised by that. And, by the way, if they do, and because of public safety, that should go away, then I believe that should go away.

QUESTION: Public policy didn't see to be a particular focus of yours during the first half of your term here. Well, I was wondering if you agree with that observation and if so, why now?

MALLOY: I think gun safety is -- has been important to our administration.

And the fact is that we are ranked as having the top five toughest laws on guns in the nation. But I will go back to what I said earlier. Absent a federal framework -- actually, to even drill down further into my own personal history, as mayor of Stamford, we came to understand that a good percentage of the handguns that work their way to Connecticut work their way up from I-95 in states in which there are substantially easier gun laws and guns in some cases sold under exceptions to the rule for gun shows.

Those guns work their way up I-95 and get to places like New York City or cities in our state. And I have always and will continue to say that those exceptions in the absence of a tougher federal legislation is not good for Connecticut, not good for our cities and, again, I also have firmly believed that these high-capacity magazines are extremely dangerous.

Having said that, being in the top five, I think there have been people who have previously thought they have done enough in Connecticut. I'm not saying I was one of those. I doubt that there is one of those left.

QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE) regardless of what happens at the federal level? Do you think it needs -- this state law, our state laws need to be addressed?

MALLOY: It's been pointed out, and I have taken the time to point it out, that we could be compliant with the previous assault weapons ban limitation by going from a 30 magazine to a 10 magazine. I think that's a commonsense piece of legislation that could be taken up in the next session.

QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE) have enough information to say that mental illness played a part in this situation, and how would you go about improving what seems to be a very fractured mental health system?

MALLOY: The -- with respect, I don't have a diagnosis.

Although it's possible that the criminal investigation may have turned that up, I don't have personal knowledge of it. My comments about it are in large part based on the nature of the crime, how it was carried out, the fact that he killed his mother first, the fact that he drove himself to the school, he brought numerous weapons with him, and a reported history of alienation and behaviors that would be consistent with that.

But do I have a diagnosis? The answer's no.

QUESTION: How do you then go about addressing it on a statewide policy basis?

MALLOY: You know, I think that mental illness has long been delegated to a different discussion than physical health, for instance.

It is a distinction that I think in many ways has not served our country well. And I think that first and foremost we need to begin in earnest the process of removing that distinction. Now, over the last 20 years, there has been some gradual change, for instance, with respect to coverage under insurance plans and access to some mental health services.

But we haven't gone far enough there as well. I think we all suffer with the presumption -- not all, but I think many in the country suffer with the presumption that a mental illness cannot be recovered from. And of course, that isn't the case. There are -- just as there are untreatable or uncurable physical diseases, there are cases where people do not recover from mental illness, but there are far more physical maladies that people recover from and there are far more psychological or mental illness maladies that people recover for.

There really is no basis to speak about and treat these things differently and we need to move well beyond that.

QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE) by closing so many mental health facilities in the state that helped contribute to some of these issues (OFF-MIKE)

MALLOY: No, I don't think that that's the issue. I don't think that's the issue at all, to tell you the truth.

In fact, I want to say just the opposite. I'm a big believer that a group home or alternative placement is a far better way to assure positive outcomes in treating mental illness, drug addiction, and other maladies than trying to confine people to large institutions where they were generally -- actually, not generally -- where they were historically underserved in our country.

QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE) budget deficit deal that apparently is in the works?

MALLOY: I think that there were discussions last week and discussions continued on Friday. There are I think tentative understandings with the caucus leaders, the four caucus leaders, but that's tentative.

They have not shared it with their members, to the best of my knowledge. And it's capable of being adjusted further. But I think we're on a road to having an agreement. Whether, you know, where exactly that is, I have got to tell you, I have been busy with a couple other things. So Ben Barnes continues to have meetings with leaders. He will continue to do that. I'd like to do it on a bipartisan basis. So, I think we should do it on a bipartisan basis.

I will get you next. OK. Go ahead.

QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE) assault weapons ban to be renewed or perhaps even extended?

(CROSSTALK)

MALLOY: Let me just be very clear. That's been my position since well before the ban.

QUESTION: Yes, yes, I know that.

MALLOY: OK.

QUESTION: What about some sort of federal rules or regulations regarding violent video games, which it's been reported this young man was either addicted to or was very enthusiastic about, where you actually do shoot people in a simulated manner?

MALLOY: Let me assure you, I have never played one.

And I think parents have to think about those games and whether anyone should be exposed to them or at what age they should be exposed to them. Until I know more about -- I have read some of the stuff you're commenting about, about this assailant. We will know more, but do I think encouraging violence to be played out in such a realistic fashion is good for people? The answer is, no, I don't.

QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE) on the investigation and what they're learning?

MALLOY: I get briefed on it, but I'm not -- I certainly don't want to say things that would in any way impede our operating theories absent someone deciding that that operating theory is in fact now a conclusion.

So I'm aware of theories. I'm aware of physical evidence and how it's being interpreted. But I choose to await the final interpretation of that by the folks who have done this on a more regular basis than I have. \

Yes, right here.

QUESTION: On Friday, you found yourself in an unimaginable position of informing these people about the death of their family members. Is that something you were a victim of circumstance? Did you tell the state police I will do that? Can you give us some detail on that (OFF-MIKE)

MALLOY: Yes, I was -- it was evident to me that there was a reluctance to tell parents and loved ones that the person that they were waiting for was not going to return.

And that had gone on for a period of time, well after there was any expectancy that families would be reunited. So I made a decision that, rather than relying on traditional investigative policies, that you actually have a child or an adult identified as the particular victim before you inform someone, or at least give them the information by which they could formulate for themselves that their loved one was not going to return, I made the decision that to have that go on any longer was wrong.

I did.

QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)

MALLOY: I'm going to attend whatever number I can attend.

Today, we had a conflict, for instance, two funerals at the same time. So Nancy did -- although Nancy was able to get down to Noah's wake beforehand, she then went up to Jack's funeral, and I stayed at the funeral in Fairfield.

So I don't think I'm going to get to all of them. But I would be -- but I think one of us will -- one of us will do our utmost to attend any funeral that we're welcome at.

OK. Thank you very much.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Thank you, Governor.