Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Power Couple Pleading Guilty; Pistorius' Lawyer Grills Police; Court Eyes Campaign Contributions; Too Fat for Massage?

Aired February 20, 2013 - 11:30   ET

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

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: Welcome back, everyone.

A natural gas leak is being blamed for the explosion that leveled a popular Kansas City restaurant late yesterday. The blast injured 15 people. One woman is missing. A search for her is under way. City officials are holding a news conference at this moment and we will bring you any new information.

Winter storms are rolling across much of the country today. Up to a foot of snow is expected in the Great Plains. Arkansas is under ice storm warnings through tomorrow afternoon.

So we are in between court hearings for a one-time Chicago power couple. Former U.S. Congressman Jesse Jackson Jr. and former Seventh Ward Alderman Sandra Jackson. The former congressman is pleading guilty in federal court in Washington to (INAUDIBLE) campaign funds. His wife is due in the same court this afternoon to admit filing bogus income tax returns.

A lot to talk about here. Let's bring in our experts.

Darren Kavinoky is a trial lawyer and host of the program "Deadly Sins" on the Investigation Discovery Network. Carrie Hackett is a criminal defense attorney in Atlanta.

Darren, let's start with you. You know, I've covered campaigns for a long time. I've seen a lot of transgressions. The amount of money we're talking about here and the lavishness, if that's a word, of the spending, I don't think I've seen before. We're talking furs, we're talking children's furniture, we're talking about Rolexes here. Pretty big.

DARREN KAVINOKY, TRIAL ATTORNEY, HOST OF ID'S "DEADLY SINS": Yes. I'll go with lavishness as a word and to tie it to "Deadly Sins." This is pure unadulterated greed that we're seeing here. Basically Jesse Jackson Jr. used his campaign accounts as his personal piggy bank for seven years according to the documents there on file here to the tune of about three quarters of a million dollars.

And, you're right, this was for some pretty lavish items. We're talking about the watch, we're talking about memorabilia from some famous folks. I like the Bruce Lee memorabilia, too. Clearly a reality show can't be too far away for this formal power couple. As much as we love to see people fall from grace, we love to see them resurrected. So I think we've not heard the last from this couple. BERMAN: We'll see. It is a staggering list of stuff.

Carrie, the maximum prison time he could get is five years. But what's the likelihood he'll see that much and what are the factors involved here?

CARRIE HACKETT, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: I don't think he's going to see a lot of prison time actually because he has cooperated with federal authorities. He has expressed extreme -- he's very remorseful. He feels terrible about this. He wants to put this behind him. He has cooperated, he has moved forward with this case very quickly, provided prosecutors with all the information that they need to move forward with this case against him.

I think that because of his cooperation, despite the amount of money that's involved here, he's not going to see a lot of time in jail.

BERMAN: And, Darren, what about the fact that it's both --

(CROSSTALK)

KAVINOKY: You know I --

BERMAN: Go ahead.

KAVINOKY: Well, I just want to jump in. I agree with Carrie completely that the early admission of guilt is a mitigating factor here as is the notion that he's got some long-standing mental illness and some legitimate things he's been grappling with.

HACKETT: That's right.

KAVINOKY: That said, it seems the only thing he's legitimately sorry for is getting caught, given the long term nature of this -- of this (INAUDIBLE). I have a hard time believing the judge is going to be really moved by any notion of now being contrite over this.

BERMAN: You brought up mental illness. He was being treated for bipolar disorder for months and months at the Mayo Clinic. Will that factor into the judge's sentencing?

HACKETT: I think so. I think it will --

KAVINOKY: Well, certainly it could.

BERMAN: Go ahead, Darren.

KAVINOKY: I'm sorry, Carrie -- yes. Certainly his mental state can be an important factor for the judge to consider and a judge in a federal court has a massive amount of discretion. As Carrie pointed out he's looking at a maximum prison term of five years. And the judge could go anywhere from no jail time, just a straight grant of probation, all the way up to the maximum of five years.

And of course since his wife is also facing up to three years in prison the real victims in this case could be the kids. If both of them end up getting prison time it's really unfortunate to think about what's going to happen to the family there.

BERMAN: Carrie, let me put that to you. Not just the mental illness, but the idea that we're talking about both Mr. and Mrs. Jackson who will be sentenced for something today. Will a judge consider that? Will he consider those kids, Carrie?

HACKETT: I think so. I think the judge is going to consider the kids. And I think it's also important to look at, as Darren discussed, the duration of the mental illness. Because Mr. Jackson has had mental illness for some period of time now and this has been an ongoing thing for him, during the entire duration of these actions, of taking these campaign contributions and misappropriating them.

BERMAN: All right, guys. Darren Kavinoky, Carrie Hackett, stay with us right now. We will come back and talk about some more issues coming up.

Olympian Oscar Pistorius remains in a South African jail this hour. His bail hearing is extended for one more day. That is the case our legal duo will examine. Coming up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BERMAN: New developments now from that natural gas leak and explosion in Kansas City. We have just learned that a body was pulled from the popular restaurant that burned late yesterday. That blast injured 15 people.

We will bring you more as it comes in.

Meanwhile, the Oscar Pistorius murder mystery has riveted the world. Is he a lover caught in a tragic circumstance? Or is he a cold, calculating killer?

Darren Kavinoky, host of Investigation Discovery's "Deadly Sins" and criminal defense attorney Carrie Hackett. They join me now.

Carrie, let me start with you here. Explain to me how the South African legal system works here because there are differences. I mean, how long does a trial take and who gets to decide if Oscar Pistorius is guilty?

HACKETT: Well, in South Africa trials are very slow usually but because of the high profile nature of this case we think that this case will proceed a little bit more quickly and by more quickly I mean in about four to six months we think that the case could be concluded.

In South Africa it's different than the American judicial system in that a judge will decide Oscar Pistorius' fate. A judge usually sits on the bench with two magistrate judges and together they decide whether the defendant is guilty or whether they're innocent and are acquitted of the charges.

BERMAN: Darren, today was the day we saw a lot of energy from the defense. And one of the things they were doing is poking some holes in the case of the prosecution, really holding an investigator on the stand, holding his feet to the fire.

Does that make it more likely, you think, that Pistorius could get bail tomorrow?

KAVINOKY: Well, to give this some context, what the defense team is trying to do here is to get the judge to downgrade the seriousness of the offense so that it increases the likelihood of bail. Ultimately when we're talking about release from custody, the overriding concern is flight risk. And here, of course, given the international scrutiny and focus that's on this case and on Oscar Pistorius, I don't think that Oscar poses much of a flight risk.

All of that said, I also think it's highly unlikely that Oscar is going to be released from bail unless it's under very stringent conditions. If he were released I would expect him to be subject to electronic monitoring so that his whereabouts are known at every moment. And frankly I think it's very politically risky to release him from custody and candidly he may even be in some physical danger based on the very public outcry that's happened here.

BERMAN: Carrie, I wonder if I can ask you about some of the information that came to light in court today. The defense again trying to poke some holes in the prosecution's case saying that the testosterone that the prosecution claimed was there was not testosterone, it was an herbal supplement, they say. The defense saying there were no marks or any signs of self-defense on the body of Reeva Steenkamp.

What's to gain for that defense laying that case out there right now in the bail hearing as opposed to the ultimate trial?

HACKETT: Well, I think going back to what Darren said, I think that they are trying to show that this case should be downgraded from a case involving premeditation to something less than that. A case not involving premeditation. So I think that the defense is trying to show that Mr. Pistorius actually was not an aggressive person and that this wasn't something planned, premeditated, and that he didn't have a history of prior acts of violence or aggression and that that testosterone or lack of testosterone would go to that point.

BERMAN: And, Darren, is it a problem then that the defense is poking holes in the case or is it sort of a map for how to handle the trial? Is the defense showing their hand giving the prosecution an opportunity for down the line?

KAVINOKY: Yes, I think this is one of the very, very risky, high stakes maneuvers that the defense is engaged in.

BERMAN: All right, hang on. I got to jump.

(CROSSTALK)

KAVINOKY: Generally speaking --

BERMAN: I got to cut you -- Darren, I got to cut you off for one second here. KAVINOKY: Yes.

BERMAN: Because we've got another story going on right now.

Reid Weingarten, the attorney for Jesse Jackson Jr. speaking about that case right now. Let's listen.

I'm sorry. We're waiting to get audio from Reid Weingarten who again is the attorney for Jesse Jackson Jr. We will bring you his words as soon as we get them in here.

Darren, I'm sorry, I cut you off. We were talking about Oscar Pistorius. We're talking about the the prosecution and the idea that they've had some holes poked in their case today and whether it will matter ultimately at the time of the trial.

KAVINOKY: Yes. And what I was saying here, John, is I think it's a very risky move on the part of the defense team to be so particular about their case. Generally speaking when you are defending a case you don't -- you don't want to commit. You like the flexibility of a defense to speak to the evidence that comes out because oftentimes when these things play out in court, they play out differently at trial than they would appear at the beginning, at the outset of the case.

And so it is a very risky high stakes kind of maneuver to be this clear, this explicit, not just about your theory of the case --

BERMAN: OK.

KAVINOKY: -- but about the particular of the case.

BERMAN: Darren, with that -- with that, we will try to go back to Reid Weingarten, the attorney right now for Jesse Jackson Jr.

REID WEINGARTEN, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: To his present predicament. That's not an excuse. That's just a fact. And Jesse has turned the corner there as well, I think. Optimism here, too. Jesse has gotten great treatment and I think he's gotten his arms around his problem. Time will tell but we are optimistic.

And finally, I would say we're hopeful and we expect that there will be fairness in the process. A person who has contributed so much to his community, done so much for so many people, will and should get credit for it.

And finally, of course, his primary concern, Jesse is many things, including being a terrific father. He has two small children and we are hopeful that in short order or at least in reasonably short order, Jesse, again, will be a full time, wonderful, caring, devoted dad.

Thank you very much.

(CROSSTALK)

BERMAN: Weingarten right now. Reid Weingarten, attorney for Jesse Jackson Jr., calling for fairness in the process of sentencing. Jesse Jackson Jr. pleaded guilty today on charges of skimming really a huge amount of money from his campaign coffers and spending lavishly on personal items, everything from Rolex watches to furs, to items like signed Bruce Lee memorabilia.

Again, pleading guilty, his attorney Reid Weingarten pleading for fairness in sentencing. We will find out what the judge says about that maybe later today or tomorrow. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BERMAN: It's been a little over three years since the Supreme Court gave corporations and labor unions the right to spend unlimited amounts of money on political ads and independent expenditures. And whether you like that decision or not, you will agree it definitely changed the game.

Well, more changes could be coming. Justices have agreed to hear a case from Alabama that challenges some longstanding limits on direct contribution to candidates and groups by ordinary citizens.

So let's get to our lawyers. Darren Kavinoky in Los Angeles and Carrie Hackett in Atlanta.

Darren, the question a lot of people are asking right now is, is this some sort of Supreme Court sequel to the Citizens United case which allowed for that unlimited independent expenditures?

KAVINOKY: Well, the law in general is supposed to change and to evolve and to be responsive to the changing circumstances in society. And since that fundamental case came down with the limitations to campaign contributions, obviously things have changed. The dollar is worth a different amount than it used to be. Sadly, it's a heck of a lot less.

And so the law is now apparently open to some flexibility here. Ultimately, though, the concern is that if you don't have some sort of limitation in place then only the truly wealthy will be able to have influence in how the government is -- the business of government is done. And so that's -- that's the tension that the court is going to be wrestling with, and it will be fascinating to see how all of that plays out.

BERMAN: Carrie, legally the issue for the court, for many years now, has been the difference between contributions and spending. They have distinguished between the two, and contributions have been more regulated, spending less regulated. Can you explain from a legal standpoint why this is?

HACKETT: Well, I think that they're trying to prevent corruption from occurring. I do think, though, that that line is becoming more blurred and I think that what will ultimately happen, if the Supreme Court comes down and says, in this recent -- this current decision, that individuals can spend in greater amounts or there may be no limit. I do think that that line is going to become nonexistent.

BERMAN: But, Darren, the Supreme Court has said --

KAVINOKY: Well, if you think about --

(CROSSTALK)

BERMAN: I was going to say they have said there is a difference between a corporation writing unlimited checks on an independent expenditure and a big rich business guy giving a check for $1 million to a candidate. They have said there is a difference there.

KAVINOKY: Yes, and I may -- personally, that sounds to me like a distinction without a difference because generally those corporations are owned by actual people. So it certainly is possible for a corporation to carry out a particular agenda or a mandate just as well as an individual has.

I guess the thing that I'm hung up on here is how much Bruce Lee memorabilia and gold plated Rolexes will those million-dollar campaign contributions make in light of some of the other stories that are garnering attention today.

BERMAN: Darren Kavinoky and Carrie Hackett, it is, in fact, interesting that this is happening on the day when Jesse Jackson Jr. pleading guilty to misusing $750,000 in campaign funds.

Thank you for pointing that out.

Carrie and Darren, stay right here. There is a women -- we have an interesting case we want to talk about here. A woman turned away for being too fat for a massage. Is that possible? We'll explain next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BERMAN: So imagine you're being -- you're told that you are too fat for a professional massage. A Colorado distance runner had booked a therapeutic massage after a race, and then this happened.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I had planned it specifically for the day after my marathon because I knew I'd be hurting. She -- the doctor comes out, and she says, I'm sorry, but you're too fat for our tables. You're going to probably break a table, and you'd have to pay for it. And I was like in shock, like I'm hearing this?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: So let's bring in trial attorney Darren Kavinoky in Los Angeles, host of "Deadly Sins," which airs Saturdays on Investigation Discovery. And criminal defense attorney Carrie Hackett in Atlanta.

So the owner of the massage center denies calling the woman fat. She says she used the word large. She also says that one of her massage tables recently broke under a client who weighed much less than this woman.

So, Carrie, what's the legal issue here? Is it one of discrimination or I supposed liability?

HACKETT: Well, I think that the owner was thinking about it from a liability standpoint. And with respect to discrimination, obese people or heavy people are not a protected class with respect to discrimination. So individual businesses like this business owner can deny people services if they are heavy or obese, as they see fit.

So in this particular scenario, I think that the owner was concerned about liability. And that certainly there's no discrimination issue here.

BERMAN: Darren, it doesn't seem like particularly good business. I mean, I guess the woman was 6'4", 250. It seems to me that there've probably been people bigger than that who went in there and tried to get a massage at some point.

KAVINOKY: Yes. Let's put aside all the legal niceties. And I agree with Carrie in terms of the legality of all of this, but from a PR standpoint, this one is a nightmare for the -- for the owner of the massage studio. And frankly, if you're in that business, buy the reinforced tables. I mean, at the end of the day, we're talking about a woman that was an athlete. That was -- she had just completed a half marathon.

This is somebody who legitimately needed that therapeutic massage. You've got to be set up for that stuff. And maybe I'm personalizing too much as a recovering former fat kid myself, but I have a massive amount of respect for people who are large. And by the way, let's get rid of the euphemism as if we're talking about fat, we're talking about large, it doesn't matter. Whatever it is, if you're -- if you're large, better to be out there at the gym, better to be doing that half marathon.

At least she's out there doing something and I'm just offended at this massage therapist who would turn this woman away. I would take that case in a moment. I think 12 large jurors would give this woman a lot of money and punish that -- that massage therapist owner. It's terrible.

BERMAN: And, Carrie, do you think that the store has any responsibility to put up a sign or something that says, you know, there's a weight limit here? You go to a -- you go to a roller coaster and they put up the little -- you know, the height measurements there for kids. So do they need to start putting a scale in before they allow people to come in the door to order a massage?

HACKETT: Maybe they should. I think this is just a PR nightmare for them. And I agree with Darren. I think this is -- this is a woman that's really a pretty average sized person, 250 pounds, that's not excessively large. They need to work on their tables and get adequate facilities to be able to take care and give massages to a person of that size.

It's not -- 250 pounds is pretty average in this day and time, and I agree with Darren that 12 jurors may be just as big as she is or bigger. This would be a great case to take to trial. BERMAN: Quickly, Darren, 10 seconds or less. If the table did break under her, could then she have sued the massage place?

KAVINOKY: Yes, maybe, but look, we wouldn't tolerate this kind of bullying if it happened in our schools, kids taunting each other for being large, we should not tolerate this in business either.

BERMAN: All right. Darren Kavinoky and Carrie Hackett, thank you for being with me all day today. A lot of interesting stuff to discuss.

Thanks for watching, everyone. "NEWSROOM INTERNATIONAL" comes up next.

SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN ANCHOR: Welcome to NEWSROOM INTERNATIONAL. I'm Suzanne Malveaux.

MICHAEL HOLMES, CNN ANCHOR: And I'm Michael Holmes.

MALVEAUX: This hour we're talking you around the world in 60 minutes. We begin in South Africa.