Return to Transcripts main page


North Korea Amps Up Crisis; Two Men Sought in Connection with Tom Clements' Death; Tom Clements' Family Speaks About Their Loss; Family Says Tom Clements Would Want Forgiveness; Remembering Roger Ebert; Texas Offers Reward In Prosecutor Killings

Aired April 4, 2013 - 20:00   ET



MATTHEW WEINER, "MAD MEN" CREATOR: I am going to try --


WEINER: -- to use the machinery of my show to give a satisfying ending.


TAPPER: "AC 360" starts right now.


Good evening, everyone. Tonight, North Korea ups the ante yet again in its nuclear showdown with America but how real are these threats? There's been a lot of breathless reporting about this. Tonight, some badly needed perspective. We'll look at the reality behind North Korea's missile scare tactics. Christiane Amanpour and Fran Townsend join me in a moment.

Also tonight, late new developments in the murder of Tom Clements, the chief of Colorado prisons. Two persons of interest with white power connections, armed, dangerous, are on the loose right now and police want your help in finding them.

Also tonight, my exclusive interview, only on 360, with Tom Clements' wife Lisa and his children. They don't want you to remember the killer of their beloved husband and father. They want you to know about the man they lost, the man they love. We'll talk about his life and how they say they're not letting what could be a bottomless pit of anger swallow them up.

Then later tonight, the death of film critic Roger Ebert. We'll look at a creative and courageous life that deserves two thumbs up and talk to his longtime movie reviewing partner, Richard Roeper.

But we begin right now with the situation that in the words of one U.S. official does not need to get any hotter. The problem is there's a dictator with a blow torch trying to make it hotter by the hour. North Korean dictator Kim Jong-Un moving as many as two mobile missile launchers and fuel tanks to the country's east coast, closer to potential targets in South Korea and Japan. Now that is according to a U.S. official who says classified imaging and intercepted communications confirm it.

Intelligence also suggesting that Pyongyang could be preparing to test a missile, maybe a flyover of Japan. That move would certainly test a lot of nerves. Which is why tonight, even as they prepare militarily for the worst, a Pentagon official tells CNN, quote, "We're trying to turn down the volume."

In a moment we'll take a hard look at North Korea's true capacity for destruction and we'll talk, as I said, with Christiane Amanpour and Fran about how best to cool things down. But first, the very latest from on the ground in Seoul, South Korea with Kyung Lah.

Kyung, the State Department today making it clear they want to shift the focus in this situation to diplomacy, to dial back the tough talk, the rhetoric. What are the South Koreans saying?

KYUNG LAH, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, it's having two impacts. In the government, what we're seeing is a ratcheting up of tone to reassure the Korean population that it's sort of trying to keep up with the U.S. show of force. The defense minister yesterday saying that if the country detects that there's some sort of imminent nuclear threat, imminent nuclear attack from North Korea, South Korea will not rule out the possibility of a preemptive strike .

So some strong words from the South Korean government. But there's also this growing sense among the general population that the show of force from the United States may be part of the problem. One of the major newspapers here saying that it's having the effect of cornering a rat. That rat reference, of course, Anderson, being towards Kim Jong-Un.

COOPER: Obviously no conventional fighting out there at the moment. It does look like the virtual war may be heating up. How so?

LAH: Well, if you take a look at what happened overnight, take a look at this picture. This is obviously something that's meant in lighthearted manner. This comes from a hacker group, a hacker group from the umbrella of Anonymous, and it's a picture of Kim Jong-Un dressed as a pig with Mickey Mouse tattoo. This is symbolic of the war that is happening in cyberspace.

It has been raging, it has been ticking up, North Korea trying to attack South Korean banks, the South Korean government via cyberspace. But we're also seeing counterattacks from South Korea's military as well as a very robust South Korean hacking community.

COOPER: Interesting. Kyung Lah, appreciate the reporting from Seoul.

As we've been reporting, North Korea's nuclear power in a limited sense, they have tested nuclear devices as you know but probably not done what it takes to shrink them down to warhead size and actually mount them on a -- on a missile. They're however making threatening noises, threatening moves. So with a reality check on North Korea's military capabilities, Tom Foreman and retired General James "Spider" Marks.

TOM FOREMAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Hey, Anderson, despite all of the global implications of a conflict between North and South Korea, the truth is it would really play out essentially on the Korean Peninsula. And that's what we want to talk about right here. Everyone knows that the DMZ has basically been fortified for a very long time. Neither the South nor the North could simply charge across that and attack the other side. So if the North wanted to get something started, what would they do?

GEN. JAMES "SPIDER" MARKS, U.S. ARMY (RET.): Tom, the first thing we'd see would be volumes and volumes of artillery fire and surface- to-surface missiles. These guys were trained by the -- by the Soviets and the Communist Chinese. They know how to use long-range precision fires to make -- try to make a difference.

FOREMAN: And they would be firing from hidden positions?

MARKS: They are firing from positions that are on the north slope of the mountains that define the DMZ. They are firing at targets that are tucked up into the DMZ on the South like Seoul. What that means is it's very difficult to target those locations and to observe that fire.

FOREMAN: Simultaneously what would be going on here?

MARKS: Special operations forces. The North Koreans have over 100,000 SOF capabilities. They would be inserted by midget submarines along the coast. They would also be inserted by aircraft coming in. They'd activate the Special Operations Forces in the form of sleeper agents that exist in the South.

FOREMAN: So all of that would be going on from the North, what they would be trying to do, but South Korea and the U.S. would not stand by during all of this. They would also be responding. What would they be doing?

MARKS: Instantaneously. We would see indicators of this about to occur so the United States would move a couple of carrier battle groups into the region primarily so that we would have access to their aircraft. Because mission number one is counter fire. We have to go after those artillery and missile pieces that are firing on to South Korea. Then the next mission would be to go after the North Korean air defense capabilities and their command and control capabilities.

FOREMAN: So communications, all that. And ultimately, you're still going to target arteries like bridges, roads?

MARKS: Absolutely. What you want to do is restrict the freedom of movement of the North Korean forces. So you go after things like bridges.

FOREMAN: So if it came, Anderson, to an actual conflict between these two sides in that fashion, and frankly very few people think it will, that's the doomsday scenario. They think in fact it will be more provocative motions and threats, but this is how it would somewhat play out, at least how people believe it would play out -- Anderson.

COOPER: General and Tom, I mean, North Korea does have a very large conventional force. What do we know about its ground forces?

FOREMAN: Yes, this is really an interesting concept to consider, General. If you were to actually engage the North Korean troops in fighting, what sort of force are you engaging?

MARKS: Tom, first of all, you're engaging a million men under arms. That's the fifth largest military in the world. They have eight million on the reserves. That's the largest in the world.

FOREMAN: Eight million?

MARKS: Eight million. And they are ready for mobilization very, very quickly. But the most important thing is the population of North Korea has been fed a steady diet of propaganda by this regime for over 70 years, so if the United Nations were to invade North Korea and try to wipe that out, they would be fighting the population of North Korea.

FOREMAN: That would be a very, very daunting prospect indeed -- Anderson.

COOPER: All right. General Marks, Tom, thanks very much.

Capabilities are half the equation. Intentions, the other half. They add up to a military and a diplomatic challenge to the White House, no doubt about it. The question is how to get the guy to back down, how not to push him too far.

We're digging deeper tonight with chief international correspondent Christiane Amanpour and former Bush homeland security adviser Fran Townsend, who is currently a member of the CIA's External Advisory Committee.

Christiane, it seems like the State Department is clearly dialing back the rhetoric, saying this doesn't need to get any hotter.

CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes. Look, 24 hours ago we were here discussing what seemed to be a very serious situation. But you are absolutely right. I think they've come to the conclusion that no matter what they say from North Korea, you can't respond in kind, because it simply ratchets up the tension so from the State Department and from the Pentagon today, a clear desire to step back off this very confrontational ledge.

Question is, how can all sides get away from their backs against the corner right now.

COOPER: Ratcheting it up, does that play into North Korea's hands, Fran?

FRANCES FRAGOS TOWNSEND, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY CONTRIBUTOR: It does, Anderson, because remember, you know this is -- while the rhetoric, the back -- the volley back and forth is bilateral between the U.S. and North Korea, the rest of the world is watching and this is not the only country we have a serious proliferation problem with. There's Iranian negotiations over their nuclear program.

The world is watching. And so what you don't want to do is force yourself as Christiane infers into this direct confrontation with North Korea and leave no one a way to talk their way out.

COOPER: To someone who's watching this -- I mean who looks at North Korea and says, why is this young dictator doing this? Why would he have all this bellicose rhetoric? What's in it for him?

AMANPOUR: Well, I think, look, everybody has been trying to put him on the psychiatrist's couch, if you like. People are trying to figure out who is he, what is he doing, why, all the questions that you and all of us ask. It's really difficult to understand. But I have to say, I think that this is sort of emblematic of many, many years of a dysfunctional relationship between North Korea and frankly the rest of the world.

But the United States is a superpower. The United States does have interests, it has its allies to take care of, has its own people to take care of. There has to be some kind of better diplomacy, better engagement, between these two countries. Now the U.S. doesn't want to do that, does not want to, quote, unquote, "reward" North Korea. Thinking that diplomacy equals rewarding.

Obviously that's not what diplomacy's about. It's trying to engage and get a better situation with your adversary.

COOPER: Fran, from your perspective, does negotiation mean giving in to extortion? Or -- yes, giving in to extortion.

TOWNSEND: Well, it's interesting to me, Anderson, the backing away from the bilateral confrontation is exactly what the U.S. needs to do, right? North Korea wants to make this about a confrontation, a threatening tone towards the United States.

What the United States ought to to be doing, the people who are nearer to this threat are China and Japan, our allies in the region, and it was the whole purpose of having a regional negotiation of which the U.S. was a part, it was President Bush emphasized during the Bush administration and I think what you're seeing now this sort of toning down the rhetoric, is an ability to bring the regional allies in to apply leverage.

AMANPOUR: But again, this is where it all gets stuck, because this basically means the United States, the superpower, is outsourcing one of the most important negotiations and that is about proliferation. Whether it be with North Korea or Iran, even in Iran there are no bilateral talks. And look, we might laugh, I concede we might laugh, but Dennis Rodman, when he went to North Korea, said that the one thing that this leader said was get President Obama to call me, now, OK, we might laugh, but he didn't say I'm going to bomb --


COOPER: Did you ever think, Christiane --

AMANPOUR: No, I didn't.

COOPER: -- you would be quoting Dennis Rodman?


AMANPOUR: Frankly, no, I didn't. But he's the only one who's talked to this leader. And if we're trying to figure out what's going on. I guess what I'm trying to say is there seems to be this inability to get this business done.

COOPER: I mean, there's -- the risk of an atomic strike but also, play a greater risk of a conventional strike. There is talk of moving ballistic missiles, I think, to their coast. How big a reality is that for North -- for South Korea and for the region? It's obviously not something that's going to hit the United States.

TOWNSEND: Well -- yes, it is -- it is a threat. But let's be clear. North Korea has more failed missile launches than it's had successful ones. Certainly the U.S. has intercept capability and that we would put it at the disposal of our allies in the region. We certainly have exercises and defensive exercises with our allies in South Korea, and so it is a threat, it is a threat that we have to be taking seriously but we have the relationships and the capability to counter that.

And as is clear, we have all sorts of national assets that are deployed to give us an early warning if they're serious, like the movement of mobile systems. It's not flawless. It's not sort of perfect. But we've got a lot of capability, Anderson, to understand it before it happens, to deal with it if it does happen and to work with our allies in the region.

COOPER: Also, North Korea, I mean, has a lot of limitations. I mean, yes, they have these capabilities, but I mean, they have serious hunger problems, they have an army which is used to plow the fields which has got to get into the fields at some point soon in order to harvest. They have a lot of limitations.

AMANPOUR: They do. Their policy, though, is military first. It's been going on for the last several decades and the -- the fact is according to all the scientists and particularly the last American nuclear scientist who was there in 2010, they don't believe the North Koreans have the ability to put a bomb on a missile, in other words --

COOPER: A nuclear warhead.

AMANPOUR: -- to make a warhead. No. Exactly. So they don't think they have that capability as Fran was saying, not even to launch into South Korea. What I worry, and I don't know whether you agree with me, is that both Iran and North Korea are now saying to the West you're going to deal with us as if we were nuclear powers. And I think that that is the road that they're on right now.

What North Korea is doing right now reminds me of what Iran was doing in 2005 when Ahmadinejad very publicly told me exclusively, told the United Nations, that we're going to continue with our nuclear program and don't tell us not to enrich. Now the Iranians say they don't want weapons. The North Koreans do. But treat us as nuclear powers. That's what worries me.

COOPER: So for you, is negotiation the solution here?

TOWNSEND: Look, this is --

COOPER: Or diplomacy?

TOWNSEND: Well, Anderson, I have always believed that this is -- you're foolish to rely on any single tool of national power. And so sanctions alone are not sufficient, right? Sanctions alone are not going to deter conduct. We've seen sanctions on Cuba. And where has that gotten us? So sanctions regime by itself is not enough. You need to use sanctions, you need to use intelligence, you need to use covert action. We've not talked about that. Sort of the clandestine capability of the United States against these very hard target. And you need to use diplomacy.

And so what you do is you use -- you leverage all tools of national power to try and get that right mix, and it will be different with each country.

COOPER: All right. Fran Townsend, Christiane Amanpour, thanks.

AMANPOUR: Thank you.


COOPER: Let me know what you think. How worried are you about the threats coming from North Korea. Let's talk about it on Twitter right now @andersoncooper.

Important new developments in the murder of Colorado prison chief Tom Clements. Authorities seeking two persons of interest right now who are said to be on the loose, considered armed and dangerous. And police want your help in finding them.

Also tonight, a very powerful, emotional interview with Tom Clements' wife and daughters. It's a 360 exclusive. I talk with Lisa Clements about her husband, the life he lived and the clerical error that likely led to her husband's alleged shooter going free and being able to target Tom Clements. Her answer to that, just one of many surprises.


LISA CLEMENTS, WIDOW OF TOM CLEMENTS: I could become enraged. I could, for the rest of my days, I could be angry that someone made a mistake and didn't capture what a judge conveyed or believed but it won't bring Tom back.


(COMMERCIAL BREAK) COOPER: In a moment, you're going to hear from Lisa Clements and her two daughters, Sara and Rachel. Lisa's husband was Tom Clements, director of prisons in Colorado, a man who dedicated himself to the idea that people who committed crimes could be rehabilitated. A man who was murdered on the doorstep of their home last month.

Tom Clements was a dedicated public servant, a devoted father. We wanted to talk with the Clements to learn more about Tom and as always, we think the focus should be on the -- not on the perpetrators of crime, but on their victims. History should not remember the name of the young man suspected of killing Tom Clements. There's no need for us to show you his picture tonight. We hope history remembers Tom's name. Tom's face.

You've likely already heard the alleged killer's name. You've already know he died in a hail of police gunfire in Texas. You already know he belonged to a racist skinhead gang. Before I talk with Tom's family, however, there is some urgent news to report tonight. Two known associates of the gang, the alleged killer belonged to, are being called persons of interest in Tom Clements' killing.

Now we are going to show you their faces briefly and tell you their names and the reason we are doing that is because police right now are actively looking for them and frankly police want and need your help.

So these two men are on the loose and are considered armed and dangerous. That's 47-year-old James Lohr on the left, Thomas Guolee, 31, on the right. Again, they're considered armed and dangerous so do not approach them if you do happen to see them. Stay safe, call local authorities if you do see them.

Joining me now with more on the investigation is Martin Savidge.

Why do police want these two guys?

MARTIN SAVIDGE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Good evening, Anderson. It's because they believe these two men have some important information pertaining to the case. Also because they believe these two men are extremely dangerous.

You know, this case has continued to push forward even though the prime suspect is dead. Authorities want to make sure that he was in fact the murderer and they want to make sure there were no accomplices and also make sure that if there were accomplices that --

COOPER: We just lost connection with Tom -- excuse me, with Martin Savidge. We'll try to reestablish it. I'm told he's back. So hey, Martin. We just lost you. You're back now.

SAVIDGE: Sorry. I was saying that the reason that authorities have been so adamant is that they're interrogating a lot of people, particularly members of that gang you talked about, and the names of these persons of interest came up out of those interrogations. The BOLO, that's to be on the lookout, went out to warn the public but more to warn authorities. These men are considered to be a real threat to any police officer that may come across them. They want them on their guard.

COOPER: Do we know what their specific association with the alleged killer was?

SAVIDGE: That's the part where authorities really don't give you a lot of information. We know that all three men know one another -- knew one another. We also know that they have a couple of things in common. They have the criminal or violent past. They were all members of that same gang. And -- this is most important -- in the last weeks and months leading up to the murders, they all had contact.

So the question is, were these men accomplices? When I asked that, that's when the authorities stopped talking -- Anderson.

COOPER: All right. Martin, appreciate the update. Thanks.

Now let's take a few minutes with us, if you will, and just listen to Lisa Clements and her daughters tell us about the man that they lost last month, a man that they continue to love deeply. I talked with Lisa earlier today. Her first interview since the murder of her husband, Tom. Her daughters Rachel and Sara joined me as well.

We talked about loss and about coping with the enormous void in their lives, but also about finding hope and perhaps, surprisingly, the capacity to even forgive.


COOPER: First of all, I'm so sorry for your loss. How are you holding up?

L. CLEMENTS: You know, I -- the support that we've had from family and friends and people that we don't know has been incredibly meaningful to us and I think we're doing well.

COOPER: What do you want people to know about your dad?

RACHEL CLEMENTS, DAUGHTER OF TOM CLEMENTS: That's a big question. I think I would like people to see how he lived his life and that that is so much more important than how he died. That he lived his life with such passion and such compassion for other people.

COOPER: Sara, how about for you?

SARA CLEMENTS, DAUGHTER OF TOM CLEMENTS: Yes, there's just so much I just want people to know that he was just so much more than his career and his work accomplishments and all those things. Like yes, they were great, and he did so many great things for corrections, but I mean, I see him as my dad and you know, he was my hero. He intervened in my life so many times and just really changed my path, that I just want people to know that, you know, he's my dad, not just -- I don't know.

COOPER: I read that he was a tough hiker. Did he make you go on hikes?


S. CLEMENTS: Yes. Lots of hikes. Lots of physical activities.

COOPER: What do you want people to know about your husband?

L. CLEMENTS: Much like the girls have indicated, there's so much being said about who he was in his career and what he did in corrections and certainly he had a significant impact and he was a leader in his field. But for me, much more significant is the integrity of the person that I know and love, and that he really truly cared about other people, and so his career was successful I think because his passion was about believing in other people and believing that people could be redeemed, and their life could be changed.

COOPER: He met you when you were 19?


COOPER: At school?


COOPER: What was it about him that drew you to him?

L. CLEMENTS: So he is fun, he's kind, and -- and passionate about life and so at a very early age, that was very interesting to me. We shared a common -- we were common sociology majors and so I think we shared a common interest in sort of working with people, and I was drawn to him because of that.

COOPER: I lost a brother to suicide many years ago and it was very violent, and one of the things I have my whole life found very hard is to separate how my brother lost his life from the way he lived his life. And you saying that you want to remember how your dad lived his life is I think a really important thing.

Is it -- are you able to do that? Are you able to not focus on how his life came to an end?

R. CLEMENTS: I just have to choose to not think about -- think about the way that he died, and not think about all of that. You know, it was horrific and I just have to choose to not even -- to not even go there, not even dwell in that place, because it can just -- like I think it could just take you over. Like it would be so easy to get just wrapped up.

COOPER: Lisa, I know you spoke about that night at the memorial service. Is that important for you to speak about what happened? Or do you want to not speak about it?

L. CLEMENTS: It altered my life, obviously, forever and much like the grief that you shared over your brother, it's -- you know, it will be a part of my experience through the rest of my life. But more important to me is the life that we enjoyed before that and the life that the girls and I have yet to live. COOPER: I have a policy of never mentioning the name of somebody who has committed a crime like this and I know that's important to you as well. Can you tell me why that's important to you?

L. CLEMENTS: So my field is behavioral health and I -- as a psychologist, I understand trauma and the impact of trauma. And we know from the bombing -- the bombing of the World Trade -- the trade towers that children were repeatedly re-traumatized with the view of the plane crashing into the towers, and we know so much more about what that does and the impact on the brain of children, and so professionally, I know that when you sort of relive and relive and relive and experience the name of the person who murdered my husband that it just recreates that trauma all over again, and so that's what I know professionally.

And personally, I fully believe that I don't want to participate in any way, and nor does my family or anyone around me, in creating fame so that everyone in the world knows the name of the person who murdered Tom, but they don't know Tom, and so I know the name of the man who took my husband's life but I won't use it.

COOPER: You spoke about Tom believing in redemption, in the power of redemption, and also in forgiveness, and that he would want justice but he would also want forgiveness.

L. CLEMENTS: What I tried to convey at the memorial is that we are praying for forgiveness and -- and our ability to forgive. I think that it's not perhaps a point in time thing, that it's something that we grow into and by grace that we receive, and it would just be -- it would just be the ultimate tragedy for me, Anderson, if Tom's life became this horrific end and then my life was destroyed because of it.

I have heard Tom in our years together so many times talk about victims with whom he's spoken who described their entire lives falling apart, their marriages falling apart, their health falling apart, because of the rage and the lack of forgiveness toward the person who harmed their loved one or took the life of their loved one, and conversely, victims with whom he'd spoken who simply said I have to let go so I can live my life. And that's -- and that's what I choose.

COOPER: A lot has been made about why the person who did this was out and a mistake that was made, clerical error, basically. Is that something you focus on, that you are angry about, or is that something that's not important to you at this point?

L. CLEMENTS: Much like the incident itself, I could -- I could become enraged, I could -- for the rest of my days, I could be angry that someone made a mistake and didn't capture what a judge conveyed verbally but it won't bring Tom back and it's -- and then my -- my life is lost in that and my ability to be a good mother to my children.

So I choose not to make it a focus and I know this is a journey. I know that tomorrow I'll feel differently than I will today and next week and next year, and the next 30 years, I spend without my husband. But it doesn't -- you know, it doesn't bring him back. Even if I -- even if I do that. So I choose not to do it.

COOPER: Is there anything else you want people to know about Tom?

L. CLEMENTS: There's a scripture that's talking about when darkness overtakes the Godly, light comes bursting through and I think that that scripture captures exactly what I would like people to know about Tom.

That that horrific night and you know, the sound of that doorbell and all that happened was just unmentionable darkness. But I trust that people will see light coming through, that they'll see that a man lived a good life and people's lives were impacted by that.

COOPER: I hope that you see that light, too, in the days ahead.

L. CLEMENTS: Thank you.

COOPER: Remarkable strength and courage.

Just ahead, as a Texas district attorney and his wife are mourned, authorities search for the answer to these questions. Who is killing Kaufman County prosecutors and what will it take to crack the case? We have new developments in that investigation.

Also ahead, Pulitzer Prize winning film critic Roger Ebert has lost his battle with cancer. We take a look back at his remarkable career that spanned nearly half a century. His friend and colleague Richard Roper joins me ahead.


COOPER: Tonight, the credits are rolling for one of the most legendary film reviewers of all time. Roger Ebert has died at age 70 after a long, courageous battle with cancer.

Just this week, Ebert wrote on his blog that he was facing a recurrence of cancer and he was going to slow down and not review as many movies as he once did. Here's a look back at Roger Ebert's life and career.


COOPER (voice-over): Roger Ebert once wrote no good film is too long, no bad movie is short enough, and that was Roger Ebert. As much as he loved to praise and celebrate good films, he also loved to point out their flaws.

ROGER EBERT, FILM CRITIC: We pick on big visible films since they're more likely to be seen by more people and therefore, cause more suffering.

COOPER: He suffered through a lot of films, working for the "Chicago Sun Times" for 46 years. He began as a freelancer in 1966. The next year, he was asked to be the newspaper's permanent film critic. It was an unexpected role. He always said he never planned to make a career out of being a critic. But the fact is, he was made for the job. He simply loved movies. He even wrote a screenplay for a trashy Hollywood film, "Beyond The Valley of The Dolls." The movie bombed so Ebert finally decided to review films instead of make them. In 1975, he became the first film critic to win a Pulitzer Prize.

EBERT: Our show is opening soon at a theatre near you.

COOPER: That same year, he made his television debut on a local station with rival film critic Gene Siskel from the "Chicago Tribune."

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Te early years were pretty rocky. There are a lot of fights, lot of disagreements, some edginess and then gradually I think we came to really enjoy doing the show and to respect the other guy.

COOPER: The oddly matched duo somehow worked. Three years later, the show went national on PBS.

In 1986, the show was renamed Siskel and Ebert and the duo began their signature thumbs up, thumbs down ratings system, which was Ebert's idea. A two-thumbs up rating became a coveted marketing tool for movies.

Siskel and Ebert were widely recognized as the two most powerful film critics in the world. Viewers loved to watch their on-air bickering and disagreements over movies.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's not that good. The last act of the picture I think runs on too long. He makes his point early and he doesn't --

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I disagree. You lose all of Tommy Lee Jones if --

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I don't think there's much of Tommy Lee Jones in the picture.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You would also lose all the last business with -- you saw it, right? Would you like to lose the third act? Of course, not.

COOPER: In 1999, Gene Siskel died at age 53. The duo had been on screen together for 24 years.

EBERT: We had been through so many movies together and so many experiences together, that we could read each other's minds sometimes.

COOPER: Ebert continued on with his television show, pairing up with Richard Roper in 2000, but soon, Ebert's health began to decline. He battled cancer in his thyroid and salivary gland.

Still, he was a workhorse, reviewing at many as 285 movies a year, scheduling operations around important movie openings. In 2006, he lost part of his lower jaw to cancer and with it, the ability to speak or eat.

Although Ebert was no longer on television, he continued his career with a wildly popular blog. In 2010, he appeared on the Oprah Winfrey show with his wife to show the world his new computerized voice.

EBERT: This is the first version of my computer voice, what they call the beta. It still needs improvement, but at least it sounds like me when I type anything.

COOPER: Just this past Tuesday on his last blog, Ebert wrote, I must slow down now, which is why I'm taking what I like to call a leave of presence. He ended his essay with the words "I'll see you at the movies." Roger Ebert was 70 years old.


COOPER: Roger Ebert reviewed films side by side with "Sun Times" colleague, Richard Roeper after Gene Siskel's death. Richard Roeper joins me now. First of all, Richard, I'm so sorry for the loss of your friend and your colleague.

Had you known that the end was close, because just two days ago, he wrote a blog post saying he had a recurrence of cancer, but he would continue doing reviews and re-launching his web site?

RICHARD ROEPER, FILM CRITIC: Well, Anderson, first of all, thank you very much. I thought that was such an elegant and perfect way of putting it when Roger said "a leave of presence," but the reality was for a long time now, he's been -- things have been getting slowly worse and worse.

And I'm grateful today that he's actually at peace, and very grateful for the outpouring of sympathy and love that I'm hearing from people all the way from the president of the United States to guys on the street. I mean, he had that everyman quality, which is what I think made him such a universally beloved critic.

COOPER: It was really interesting, because I never thought I would sit down and watch two guys reviewing movies, but I watched him and Gene Siskel, I watched you and him, I mean, religiously, because there was something so entertaining about it and I really trusted your guys' advice movies and nobody since have I really done that with. What was he like as a friend, as a colleague?

ROEPER: With Roger, what you saw on TV, Anderson, what you read in his blog or if you saw his tweets, what you saw is what you got. That was Roger. You know, he was a larger than life guy. He had a great passion for the movies.

You mentioned how long he's been doing this. When I joined the show, he had already been a film critic for 30 years. He had already reviewed literally 10,000 movies and he would still get excited every time the lights went down and the curtains parted in the screening room. He was always rooting for a movie to be good. But if it wasn't good, you would know about it.

COOPER: And it's also, the scope of his influence was incredibly wide. He wasn't just movies that interested him. It was politics, it was culture, and the way we communicate and tell stories. ROEPER: That's absolutely true. You know, when he lost his voice, now it's almost -- it had been almost six years ago, he almost found a deeper and richer voice in his writing. I think he felt freer to write about even more subjects. He had a little bit in the past, but then he really did.

And he didn't care. If you didn't want to listen to his politics, if you didn't care about his views on religion, if you didn't want to hear what he had to say about other things that is cool. You could just read his reviews, as always. He was just as passionate about a lot of other subjects as he was about movies.

COOPER: Nearly four years ago, I found this blog post that he wrote. I just want to read some of it. It said I know it is coming and I do not fear it because I believe there is nothing on the other side of death to fear.

I hope to be spared as much pain as possible on the approach path. I was perfectly content before I was born and I think of death as the same state. He did have a remarkable kind of perspective on this journey that he was on.

ROEPER: He did, and he wouldn't describe himself, Anderson, as a particularly religious person, although he definitely grew up Catholic, but he was certainly very spiritual. And he was very much concerned and talked and wrote a lot about the big picture.

And as you mentioned in the piece there, he had gone through so many operations and he had been in so much pain, yet, he continued to work because he found joy in the work, and he found joy in the writing. And he was brave and he was interested and engaged with the world up until the very end.

COOPER: Well, Richard, I appreciate you spending some time with us today. Thank you so much.

ROEPER: Thanks, Anderson.

COOPER: Again, just so sorry for your loss.

A Texas prosecutor and his wife are mourned as the hunt for their killer widens tonight. Investigators are asking again for your help and the reward being offered is growing. We'll tell you about that ahead.


COOPER: Welcome back. In "Crime and Punishment" tonight, government offices were closed today in Kaufman County, Texas. Hundreds of mourners turned out for a public memorial for District Attorney Mike McLelland and his wife, Cynthia.

They were shot dead in their home last weekend. McLelland is the county's second prosecutor to be killed in just two months. As we've been reporting all week, Kaufman County is a community on edge. Investigators have yet to name any suspects. They are asking for the public to help. Today, that call for help got louder with Governor Rick Perry announcing a new reward for information. For many in Kaufman County, today was a day for goodbyes. Ed Lavandera reports.


ED LAVANDERA, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): It was a poignant farewell to Mike and Cynthia McLelland.

CHRISTINA FOREMAN, MIKE AND CYNTHIA MCLELLAND'S DAUGHTER: Mike took his office because he loved what he did, and he really thought he was making a difference, and he was. And my mom supported him in every step of the way.

LAVANDERA: The McLellands' daughter, Christina Foreman, remembered with pride her father's tough-talking vow to hunt down the killer of the assistant district attorney, in this unforgettable moment two months ago.

MIKE MCLELLAND: Anything that you people can do to accelerate our getting our hands on this scum will be appreciated.

FOREMAN: He believed in standing up and if any of you ever saw the interviews, he was quite eloquent at saying that he didn't give a -- if people were scaring him, and he wasn't frightened, and he was going to stand his ground.

LAVANDERA: There was heavy security at the McLellands' memorial service as there has been at the Kaufman County Courthouse all week.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No filming out here, only in the courtroom.

LAVANDERA (on camera): Only in the courtroom?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Only in the courtroom.

LAVANDERA: A judge has ordered news cameras off the Kaufman County Courthouse grounds and employees are brought in and out of the building with armed escorts. All of this as state officials and investigators have announced that the reward in these murder investigations is now $200,000 for information leading to the arrest and indictment of the killer or killers.

GOVERNOR RICK PERRY (R), TEXAS: I want to thank all of you in the audience for coming out and being with us today.

LAVANDERA (voice-over): While there are no clear leads so far, Governor Rick Perry did confirm one possible theory is being looked at.

PERRY: There was a report by the Department of Public Safety that said the greatest threat to Texans' safety were the drug cartels. Obviously, that's part of the investigation, those individuals involved with that. LAVANDERA: Investigators are asking for the public to call in tips, no matter how small. These billboards will be spread out across Texas to try and generate leads. A sign that investigators still haven't found the break needed to solve the murders.

DIEGO RODRIGUEZ, FBI SPECIAL AGENT: At this time, we're looking at everything available. We're looking at every single avenue and not leaving any stone unturned.

LAVANDERA: With the investigation intensifying, we heard from Brandi Fernandez for the first time. She's been picked to temporarily replace Mike McLelland, a woman adjusting to life under threat and around the clock protection. She calls it unnerving.

BRANDI FERNANDEZ, ACTING D.A., KAUFMAN COUNTY: It certainly puts a kink in your life, but I think it's necessary so that we can still show up and get this job done. I think it's just a necessary inconvenience.

LAVANDERA: A big price to pay for a small-town prosecutor thrust into the spotlight of a frightening murder mystery. Ed Lavandera, CNN, Kaufman, Texas.


COOPER: Obviously anybody with information, police want to hear from you.

Coming up, the "Ridiculist." Find out who made the list tonight.


COOPER: Time now for the "Ridiculist." Tonight, we have a story from a small town in Tennessee, where people are very neighborly and when they hear someone is in trouble, they do the right thing and call 911.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: 911, what is your emergency?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I just got home and got out of my car and somebody's hollering help.


COOPER: But was that hollering for help originating from a human or something else? The neighbors had various theories.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It almost sounded like a chimpanzee, to be honest with you. Then you could mistake that for a screaming woman.


COOPER: Police rushed to the scene. Found that the source of the cry for help came from neither person, nor chimpanzee nor any other primate.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It was a goat tied to a post.


COOPER: That's right. The cry came from a goat.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It sounded like somebody was dying down here.


COOPER: A lonely, lonely, lonely goat.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It turns out Charcoal, the 1-year-old goat, just doesn't like to be separated from its herd.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: A lonely cry, I guess.


COOPER: Yes, Charcoal, the lonely, lonely goat, just crying out in her angst. Look, anyone who has gone on YouTube lately knows that it's pretty easy to mistake a screaming goat for a human. And anyone who has covered a county fair knows a goat can lead to a screaming human.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: From the Manatee County Fair -- would you not eat my pants?


COOPER: And anyone who has ever seen the "Ridiculist" knows now, we're going to have to see those side by side.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Would you not eat my pants?


COOPER: But not all goats screaming has to necessarily sound distress. It can actually be kind of musical. For instance, United States of YouTube has discovered that it fits pretty seamlessly into Taylor Swift's song "Trouble."

Remember "Party in the USA" by Miley Cyrus? So much better with the goat. So cheer up, Charcoal, maybe one day you could player your lonely cries into internet super stardom, a lucrative career in the music business, perhaps. Even if you don't, we'll always be your friends here on the "Ridiculist." We'll be right back.


COOPER: That does it for this edition of 360. Tomorrow on the program, we will rebroadcast the "60 Minutes" report I did about North Korean concentration camps. You will hear from a young man born into a North Korean concentration camp who managed to escape and the story he tells is simply extraordinary.

That will be on 360 tomorrow at 8:00 p.m. We'll see you again later tonight at 11:00 p.m. Eastern for another edition of 360. "PIERS MORGAN LIVE" starts now.