Return to Transcripts main page

Jane Velez-Mitchell

Should MMA Star Be Charged with Murder?; No Hope for Jobless?; Kim Kardashian Declares Her Butt is Real

Aired January 06, 2014 - 19:00   ET

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

JANE VELEZ-MITCHELL, HOST: Tonight, another self-defense controversy erupting, and this one is straight out of an action flick. Cops say a mixed-martial-arts star kills one man and puts another man in the hospital with very serious injuries. But his lawyer says MMA fighter Joe Torrez was only using his lethal, deadly skills to defend his family from thugs carrying out a home invasion.

So was it self-defense? Or should this trained fighter be charged with using his hands as a deadly weapon?

Good evening, I`m Jane Velez-Mitchell, coming to you live.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: My client did what he had to do and did what any other person would do. He defended himself and defended his family.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Deputies in New Mexico say the 27-year-old man fought off four men.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: At least one of the men had some sort of homemade weapon, and it`s believed they also picked up a knife from the kitchen.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: There was a life-and-death struggle that ensued in my client`s house.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Here`s my rant. This guy is a hero. He shouldn`t be charged with a darn thing. Law enforcement is reportedly huddling right now to decide whether Torrez should be charged. That would be a travesty of justice.

This 27-year-old man was just sitting in his house with his toddler son, his fiancee and his fiancee`s sister, when cops say possibly four men, possibly gang members, broke into the house and attacked them. He was badly outnumbered, but Torrez is a trained fighter, and he used his skills to defend his home, killing one man, sending another to the hospital, and scaring these two you`re about to see off.

Yes, Torrez may have been feuding with these guys, but so what? He still has the right to defend his house if they break in and attack.

I want to hear what you think. Is he a hero for defending his family? Or should he be charged with murder? Call me: 1-877-JVM-SAYS, 1-877-586-7297.

Straight out to the "Lion`s Den," and we begin with KRLD reporter Joe Gomez. Joe, this guy was outnumbered 4-1. How did he overpower them?

JOE GOMEZ, KRLD REPORTER: Jane, it`s an amazing story of self- defense and survival. Joe Torrez was with his family, his 2-year-old son, his fiancee and their family friends in their home on New Year`s Day in the early morning hours. They heard a bang outside, and suddenly four gangsters, police say, barge into the house, pick up a knife from the kitchen. Another grabbed some sort of shank, and come after them.

Torrez somehow beats these attackers away, ends up killing one of the men in the process, and badly beats another one of them.

Now what sparked this incident, we understand, Jane, is some sort of altercation beforehand. But what makes this even -- even more creepy is that one of the gangsters had allegedly called Torrez on the phone before, saying, "This is Big Easy. I`m going to come to your house and kill your family."

What else is this guy left to do, Jane? He`s got a 2-year-old boy in the house, and these four men come into his home, looking to kill, it seems like.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, listen, if that`s true, these men are idiots, because the kind of fighting Joe Torrez is trained to do is called MMA. And it was even featured in the hit movie "The Warrior" from Lionsgate. Check this out.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You ready? You ready?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You`re going down!

(END VIDEO CLIP)

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Anybody -- anybody, Jon Leiberman, who knows a single thing about MMA, even if they are a gang of four, wouldn`t want to mess with somebody who knows how to throw punches like that.

JON LEIBERMAN, HLN CONTRIBUTOR: Yes, absolutely. I mean, look, it appears that they messed with the wrong guy.

And I`ll tell you, John, the law in New Mexico is very interesting. While there`s no castle doctrine, per se, which are extra protections if you`re in your home and you`re protecting your home and all of your property, there`s no special law there.

But New Mexico has a very strong self-defense law that basically says you don`t have to retreat from a threat. And deadly force can be used when there`s an immediate and serious bodily threat. And it`s pretty clear from what we know here that there was an immediate threat. Not only to that gentleman, but potentially also to his 2-year-old and to his fiancee, as well.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, there`s been a rash of so-called "stand your ground" cases gone terribly wrong. We certainly know of the most famous one, or infamous, George Zimmerman`s killing of unarmed teen Trayvon Martin.

And then, of course, there`s the case of 19-year-old Renisha McBride. She was shot by a homeowner when she went to his front porch looking for help after a car accident. That homeowner now faces trial, because the judge ruled he chose to shoot rather than not answer the door.

But Wendy Murphy, these people didn`t knock on the door. They pushed -- according to law enforcement, they pushed the door. His fiancee was trying to block the door. They got in there. They grabbed a knife. I don`t see that there`s any question here how this could not be self-defense.

WENDY MURPHY, FORMER PROSECUTOR: Well, at a minimum, he`s going to have all the public`s sympathy. Because whatever gang bangers want to do to each other in the streets -- and I wish they wouldn`t -- with MMAs, or G-U-Ns.

You can`t go in a guy`s house, after threatening to kill his family and expect not to be killed. There`s no state in the country that would be tolerable -- that would tolerate such aggression in the place of safety where everybody has a right to be safe.

I will say this, though, Jane. You know, you show up. You`re a bunch of gang bangers. You`re not -- you`re not only doing the wrong thing as a matter of law. You`re an idiot, because whether you`ve got four or one, however many you show up with, how do you know what that guy has, and whether he isn`t going to blow you all up with a machine gun? I don`t get why these idiots were there.

Now, nobody`s deserves to die...

VELEZ-MITCHELL: You`re not a Rhodes scholar is you`re breaking into someone`s home because of some ridiculous feud.

And I want to say this. We`ve got C.J. McElhinney -- I hope I`m pronouncing it right -- the attorney for MMA star Joe Torrez on the phone out of Los Cruces, New Mexico.

Thank you for joining us, sir. What`s the back story here? Apparently, there was a feud going on?

C.J. MCELHINNEY, ATTORNEY (via phone): Well, that`s -- thank you for allowing me to be here, Jane. And allowing me to talk on behalf of my client.

I -- I take dispute with that. My client really did not know these four gentlemen, and I`ll use that term loosely. He really did not know them.

There was an incident involving his fiancee`s younger sister that happened earlier that night at a party that was happening that my client was not at. He had nothing to do with. But that -- that sister did end up at my client`s house that night. She was one of the people there at the house when the home invasion occurred.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, let me jump in, because we`re short on time. I want to ask you. Are you concerned that your client, Joe Torrez, could be charged with something? I mean, we hear that law enforcement is huddling. They`re having meetings. We`ve been calling them. I don`t know if they`re talking about when to take down the Christmas tree, but chances are they might be talking about what to do with your client.

MCELHINNEY: I am absolutely concerned. And we were cooperating with law enforcement until last week. And then I did not like how that was going, so we terminated that cooperation.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Whoa. What do you mean by that? What do you mean you didn`t like -- what do you mean by that?

MCELHINNEY: Well, it became clear to me that the police were zeroing in on my client, rather than trying to gather evidence on these four men that had kicked in my client`s front door, threatened him with a weapon, threatened the life of his son, his family and himself.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: You know, Wendy Walsh, psychologist, I just want to -- I just want to jump in. It`s shocking to me, but maybe this man`s profession, Joe Torrez`s profession, might work against him psychologically, where they regard him as a deadly weapon, which I don`t think is fair.

WENDY WALSH, PSYCHOLOGIST: Well, absolutely. I must say, also, that professional fighters really can -- are set up to almost be victims. Young guys want to challenge them all the time. They want to say, hey, they were the one that beat that fighter in some way. That`s why fighters, the big ones, even have bodyguards around them, Jane.

But in the same sense, now the police are also discriminating against him, perhaps by saying things like maybe his fists should be registered. Maybe he`s a lethally -- he`s a weapon himself. It`s sad all the way around.

We also shouldn`t lose sight of the fact that some man has died here, a 25-year-old. His parents are mourning tonight. We shouldn`t forget that there`s a death involved. So they`re going to do all the investigation they need to make sure that the decisions are the right decisions.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, I feel sorry for his parents. But I feel you take your chances WHEN YOU`RE -- home invasion, I`ve covered so many cases over the years. There is nothing, absolutely nothing as terrifying as a home invasion. OK? Remember that case in Connecticut where that family was terrorized? I`m sorry. You invade a home, you get what`s coming to you.

And from what I`ve heard, this sounds like something out of an action movie. I mean, remember "Rush Hour" when Jackie Chan takes on a whole bar full of attackers? It`s like this. check it out.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

(MUSIC)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Yes, listen, I want to end by showing Joe Torrez. Because in my opinion, I think he`s a hero. He defended his fiancee, his fiancee`s sister and toddler son. And he did kill one and leave another with facial injuries. But he`s a mixed martial arts star. Don`t invade his house and expect anything less.

Coming up, Kim Kardashian and her backside are back, and they are creating a brand-new uproar on Instagram. So we`re posing the question: Does baby got back? Is it back?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It`s unnatural. I don`t believe it.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Is it attractive to you as a man?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Not at all?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No. Too much.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: It`s too much.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Too much.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Wait until you can`t handle it. You can`t handle that butt.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: ... real battle over long-term unemployment benefits. The big push this week: extending emergency unemployment benefits.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We know we have a long-term unemployment problem.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The jobless rate is falling out to 7 percent. We can`t be giving emergency benefits forever.

SEN. HARRY REID (D-NV), MAJORITY LEADER: We have never offset emergency (UNINTELLIGIBLE). That`s foolishness. We have people that are desperate. They`ve been out of work as much as two years.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Many of those unemployed have gone from hardship to what is catastrophe.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Tonight, just back from the holidays and I`m already fed up. Everybody saying, to extend or not extend unemployment benefits. That is the question. But I say, no, no, no, that is not the question. The real question is, why are more than 1 million Americans unemployed for such a long, long, long, long time?

Today the Senate was supposed to come back from vacation and vote on whether to renew unemployment benefits for another three months. Well, guess what? No surprise. The vote`s been delayed. Senators are claiming the weather has kept from getting in to do their jobs. That`s rich, giving some of those very same senators who couldn`t make it in to vote and do their jobs, they`re accusing the unemployed of being lazy.

The emergency program was started about five years ago. You remember when that terrible recession hit during the subprime mortgage mess. Well, now politicians, some of them anyway, are saying the longer people get these emergency unemployment checks, the less likely they are to go out in the snow and get a job, and it makes them lazy.

Well, the White House says, no, keep the unemployment checks coming to help out families that are out of work. So again, the leaders are having this tired old debate.

Instead of bickering over unemployment checks, we really should be asking why are 1.3 million Americans chronically unemployed? That means out of a job for more than six months.

The answer is because many people do not have the high-tech skills you need to get a job today. So what about, instead of spending $6.5 billion to continue this program for three months. Why instead don`t we invest that money and retrain those people for the high-tech world we live in today? Businesses are collapsing into technology. Think about it.

Come here. Let me -- let me show you. All of it. OK? It`s right here. It`s on this. It`s on this. Your alarm clock, your compass, your directions. Even a measuring -- I found out measuring stick is on one of these. OK? So if you don`t have the technology to work in this field, you are in deep doo-doo.

I want to go to Flavia Colgan, political strategist. I mean, aren`t we always having the wrong discussions, Flavia?

FLAVIA COLGAN, POLITICAL STRATEGIST: Well, you`re not. But yes, in general across the country, we are. Because it ultimately boils down to this. What has happened to our ambitions?

Was there not a president by the last name of Eisenhower who put people back to work by building freeways? Were there not presidents by the name of Roosevelt, both Teddy and Franklin, who did the same? Did we not start and continue a nation by employing people, by building things, by innovating, by being a beacon of hope and light around the world, by trying to put people on the moon, by doing new and different things? Why -- why is everyone in Washington, D.C., thinking so small, and so narrow, and so partisanly?

This is not about Democrats or Republicans. This is about who are the people who can get things done? The American people could get things done.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Other countries -- Flavia, other countries are training. They`re churning out millions of high-tech...

COLGAN: Exactly they are. Why aren`t we?

VELEZ-MITCHELL: ... graduates, engineers. We`re not doing that.

COLGAN: Right.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: And we`re not even giving kids who graduate from high school skills. You can be a good carpenter. You can be...

COLGAN: Guess what we`re doing? Jane, guess what we`re doing? We`re cashing China`s checks instead.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Exactly.

COLGAN: ... violations out the yin-yang. Let me tell you why. I`ll tell you why.

Because politicians in Washington, D.C., where I never worked, because I worked for the great state of Pennsylvania when I was in politics, as a chief of staff for the lieutenant governor. That`s where people are getting things done. People in Washington, D.C., are trying to get reelected. They`re caring about self-preservation instead of being statesmen. They`re not taking risks.

And guess what, Jane? You know this, because I hear you talk about it. The greatest risk that we have is to do nothing.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Let me tell you something. Let me tell you something -- you talk about China. I said for a month, I`m not going to buy anything from China. I couldn`t shop for anything. I was -- sometimes they`d say, Jane, you`re wearing that same shirt over and over. Go on and get a new -- It`s impossible to find anything that`s not made in a foreign country. I mean, it`s very difficult.

But here`s the point. You`re right. There`s -- there`s human rights abuses going on there. And yet we`re subsidizing that instead of putting the money in this country and churning out high-tech employees who can get the job done, and develop all this...

COLGAN: But Jane, let me just say, it`s a little bit more than that. Because look, I have a flip phone, so not all of us are high on technology. So let me tell you this...

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, get with it, girl.

COLGAN: Yes. It is about retraining. The people -- because in the great state of Pennsylvania and Michigan where I`m from, those two states, things happened in the world that we can`t fully affect. And it`s not people`s fault they haven`t been given...

VELEZ-MITCHELL: I`ve got to jump in. Hold on. I`m sorry to interrupt your speech, Flavia. But I want to talk to Jessie real quick from Arkansas. We`re running out of time.

Jesse, what have you got to say?

CALLER: Hello.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Hey, how you doing, Jesse? What have you got to say about this?

CALLER: It`s very cold, but I`ll tell you what. There`s a lot of good people out here in the poorest part of the country that has no money. And I`ll tell you what, there`s no jobs over here to begin with. And if there`s people out here helping other people waiting on their benefits, guess what? Those people that depend on the people with the benefit aren`t going to get anything. And there goes our economy. I mean...

VELEZ-MITCHELL: You cannot blame people -- Jessie...

CALLER: And we all know our local congressman here, Mr. Womack (ph), you know, feed these people, get them paid. They worked for it. It`s their money.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: I agree with you, Jesse. Unemployment is their money. It`s not welfare, OK? You pay into it so that when you need it, you can have it.

And I will say, you can`t blame people for not having jobs if they`re living in an area where all the jobs are gone and they live in a rust belt, OK? We`ve got to change our thinking. It`s all collapsing.

Read a book called "The Mobile Way." I read it. You want to know the future of the unemployment world? It`s all in these devices. We`ve got to train people to make them and create new things, new apps, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.

Kim Kardashian, ringing in the new year with friends. She`s creating buzz with her backside, again. We took to the streets.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

VELEZ-MITCHELL: What`s wrong with that?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It looks to be a bit enhanced. But you never know. It could be genetics. Plus a lot of the new diet. I heard there`s one making the butt big.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Really?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Oh, my God. Becky, look at her butt.

KIM KARDASHIAN, REALITY TV STAR: I look so hot. I am back.

There`s so many rumors that I have butt implants.

Uh-huh, honey.

So I really just want to get a butt X-ray so I can show the whole world.

(MUSIC: "BABY GOT BACK")

(END VIDEO CLIP)

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Oh, yes. All those moves, I`ve got to work on those.

It`s big, yes. And it`s back. Tonight`s "Buzz," all about Kim Kardashian`s booty selfie. Check out this picture the reality queen posted on her Instagram showing off her huge butt. But it was next to an even bigger butt.

Kanye`s soon-to-be wife was posing in skin-tight gym clothes with her good pal, Blac Chyna, a former stripper who`s engaged to this rapper, Tyga. It`s hard to keep up.

Kim said she`s been working out like crazy -- emphasis on crazy -- since giving birth to daughter North West back in June. This isn`t the first time she`s had us looking south at her famous heinie. Oh, no. Who could forget this bathing suit butt selfie she posted just a few short months ago. Notice any change?

Kim`s butt is so famous, Eminem has even rapped about it. She denies having any injections or implants to boost her behind. She even went to a doctor to get a butt x-ray to prove it`s big, but it is real. Watch this from E!`s "Keeping Up with the Kardashians."

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KARDASHIAN: There are so many rumors that I had butt implants. And I`m so tired of them, so I really...

(END VIDEO CLIP)

VELEZ-MITCHELL: All right. Well, I guess the butt just destroyed our equipment for a second there.

All right. Well, I`m glad we`re getting to the bottom of this mystery. Entertainment reporter Kendra G., what is going on? I mean, what is going on with the dueling of butt selfies? I mean, let`s go right to Chyna. You`ve got to go right to Chyna. What is going on with that? That can`t be real.

KENDRA G., ENTERTAINMENT REPORTER: I don`t think Chyna`s is real. I don`t think it`s real. I agree with you on that one.

But I think Kim Kardashian`s butt just might be real. You know what? I appreciate this photo bomb, because Kim Kardashian got so much flack when she was pregnant with North West. I mean, she`s been taking photo like this ever since she came out of Kris Jenner`s womb. I mean, I`m used to it by now. I love it. It`s inspiring to all moms everywhere, because moms will keep that baby weight excuse when the child is like 35 and...

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Wait, wait, wait, you`re saying it`s inspiring. I think it`s perspiring. But it`s not necessarily inspiring.

Wendy Walsh, psychiatrist, we need a psychologist. What is this, auto eroticism? What the heck is going on here?

WALSH: This is absolutely the worst role modeling for a new mother I have ever seen in my life. The pressure on young moms to get back in their jeans and in their cubicle and in their Victoria`s Secret underwear, when they should be home with their baby.

Where is the baby in this? Usually new moms take pictures of their kids and put it on Instagram. Not the two kids in the behind. All right? I`m just like, it`s disgusting. Because I don`t want women to think that their sexuality and who they are as a sexual creature is the most important person. Especially in the important phase of their life when they`re supposed to be nurturing.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, she`s a narcissist; she`s into herself. And you know, here`s what I find shocking, is that just a couple of months ago, she went on national TV -- yes, Kim -- and begged for privacy, because she had become a new mom.

WALSH: Oh, yes.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Remember this? Check it out.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KARDASHIAN: Don`t need that energy. I`d rather be in a happy place when I`m home. And I choose to go out, you know, with family and friends when I want to. But I definitely try to live, like, more of a private life because of that. Because they were so nasty.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

VELEZ-MITCHELL: OK. I`ve got to go to Kendra G. She is begging for privacy on national TV. And then she does this. I mean, are you kidding me?

KENDRA G.: No. It`s just an Instagram photo. I mean, I have to talk about, first of all, it is inspiring, because just because you have a child does not mean you cannot get your body back in shape. And I think that`s what Kim Kardashian is really representing with this photo. She said she`s getting ready for the 2014 year.

And I love it. She is inspiring with this photo. I think all moms should know that just because you have a baby, you can still be a sexy hot mama.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: OK. We got a debate going. Let`s line up our contestants, and that`s not me. That`s you and Wendy Walsh.

OK, Kendra G. is saying this is inspiring to new moms. I mean, I see her point. A lot of times people feel like, OK, they`ve got a kid. They don`t have to worry about their bodies at all. We have an obesity crisis in this country. I do give her props for getting back into...

WALSH: But Jane, I want you to understand a medical fact. Maternal fat stores, which are built up during pregnancy, are there to provide nutrition so that a woman can breast-feed. Our caveman ancestors did it for three to five years. So forcing maternal fat stores off too early is denying your baby food. She should be breast- feeding. That`s how you lose weight after your baby.

KENDRA G.: You can`t be sexy and breast-feed? You can`t be sexy and breast-feed?

WALSH: But not every woman has that body. And it`s setting an unrealistic standard.

KENDRA G.: No, no, there are women who keep up with their baby weight and their child is, like, 35 years old. This -- I love this. I love the fact that Kim Kardashian is...

(CROSSTALK)

WALSH: Did she have surgery?

VELEZ-MITCHELL: OK, one at a time, ladies. Please. Kendra? Your closing argument?

KENDRA G.: I feel like this. Kim Kardashian, we are used to her showing her heinie. I love the fact that, post-North West, she is bringing her body back. And I believe it can be inspiring to mothers to know that you can still be sexy after a baby. Go ahead, Kim Kardashian, kudos to you.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: All right. Wendy, closing argument?

WALSH: It`s completely unrealistic. This woman has had so much plastic surgery, and it`s sending a message to young mothers that their primary role should be sex symbol instead of nurturing, loving mother.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: And I come down somewhere in the middle. I think that you can still be beautiful, and you are beautiful as a mom. And I think that women who have kids should try to get back in shape for the sake of their kids, because when you`re in shape, your child is more likely to be in shape. If you`re eating healthy, your child is more likely to be eating healthy.

But then, I agree with Wendy that this is extreme narcissism, and there seems to be much of a focus on her and less of North West. OK? North West has given way to South East, if you know what I mean.

All right. Thank you, ladies.

Kim`s steamy backside selfie. I`ve got to tell you, it`s wild, it`s crazy, it`s causing a stir. And it`s nothing compared to what we have coming up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

NAILAH WINKFIELD, MOTHER OF JAHI MCMATH: Who wants to know the date and the time that their child would die?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Complications from tonsil surgery last month.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Jahi began bleeding heavily from her nose and mouth, then went into cardiac arrest. Doctors told her family, she`s brain-dead.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: There`s no medical instruments on this planet that will bring her back.

WINKFIELD: She responds to my touch and my voice. How can she -- how can a dead person do that?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It`s been confirmed many times in her face. Now we have the coroner saying she`s dead.

WINKFIELD: Her heart beats. She has blood pouring through her system.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Her family has been in a legal battle since doctors declared her brain-dead.

WINKFIELD: That`s my child that they`re talking about. They don`t even use her name. Her name is Jahi McMath.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Tonight`s big story, a family`s gut-wrenching controversial battle to save their daughter who doctors have declared brain-dead. It`s a story that`s touched a nerve, on all sides across America.

There are those supporting the family and others sending them death threats, believe it or not, as if they haven`t suffered enough. Hours after, quote unquote, "routine tonsil surgery" 13-year-old Jahi was declared brain-dead. A terrifying reminder that, routine or not, when you have surgery, a lot can go wrong.

In Jahi`s case, she was ok after the surgery. She asked for a popsicle and then she started bleeding profusely from the nose and the mouth ultimately causing her heart to stop, as her mom watched helplessly. Machines right now at this hour are keeping Jahi`s heart and lungs going. But if it were up to the Oakland hospital where she had this disastrous surgery that got botched, they would have already pulled the plug.

Her family fought for weeks to get her moved to a different hospital that would continue treatment. Well, tonight they have finally succeeded. Because of some nutjobs out there, however, the family is keeping the name of the facility secret. They`re afraid of what could happen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

OMARI SEALEY, JAHI MCMATH`S UNCLE: Me and Chris both have received a lot of threats about, you know, doing stuff to Chris, doing stuff to me, coming to the hospital and doing things to Jahi.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

VELEZ-MITCHELL: What in the world is wrong with people? An independent doctor and a coroner agree the girl`s brain has stopped functioning. They say there is zero hope for recovery. But Jahi`s family says over and over they have witnessed signs of life like Jahi grabbing her uncle`s hand. And they refuse to give up hope.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

WINKFIELD: She is breathing. She is moving. And I love when I go in there and I touch her and she moves. And I say, "Hey, Jahi, I`m here." And she moves. She`s starting to move more and more.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Ok. Tonight we`re asking what would you do if Jahi were your daughter. We`re going to put up a whole bunch of Twitter and Facebook comments. We`ve been flooded with responses. But I want to hear from you. Call me 1-877-JVM-SAYS, 1-877-5867297.

You know, so many difficult questions like, and I`ll start with Jon Leiberman, HLN contributor and investigative reporter, who is going to pay to keep Jahi on a ventilator? The family has raised about $50,000 on GoFundMe.com, but that`s a drop in the bucket when you`re talking about keeping this child indefinitely on a ventilator.

JON LEIBERMAN, HLN CONTRIBUTOR: Look, Jane and that`s the bottom line here. This is a complicated issue. We all hope as parents that we never have to say good-bye to our children. But the bottom line here is, the question is, how long do you wait for a miracle? How long do you artificially keep this child alive essentially when five doctors, including three independent doctors, have said she is brain-dead which in the medical community means dead?

It is heartbreaking. The surgery never should have been botched, obviously. That`s one issue.

But then the second issue is, how long do you wait for a miracle? And frankly, are you truly honoring this 13-year-old`s life by continuing to artificially keep her alive?

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Let me say this, I`ve learned a lot researching this. I was quite ignorant about certain new nuances here. I did not know you could be legally dead and still be moving around -- ok. But doctors say it happens. It`s an involuntary muscle reflex and it`s not really a sign of being alive -- believe it or not. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

WINKFIELD: When I touch her feet, I can take my fingernail and run it up her feet and she`ll move. The first time when I finally got up the courage to go see her, I leaned over to her hear and I yelled, "Jahi, you need to wake up and we need to go home. She threw both of her arms over her head. They said that`s just normal reflexes. That`s just nerves.

ARTHUR L. CAPLAN, NYU LANGONE MEDICAL CENTER: You do get some spinal cord reflexes. (AUDIO GAP) I`ve never seen, but dead bodies sometimes sit up at the morgue, something you see in a lot of TV and movie shows. But spinal cord reflex is not the ability of the brain to run your heart, run your lungs or do anything.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Dr. Dave Montgomery, you`re a board certified physician. I did not know you could sit up and be dead or grab somebody`s hand and be dead. How is that really possible? Do you believe that? Because there was a Catholic pediatrician who visited Jahi and observed all this, and he said, well, she might recover her brain function.

DR. DAVE MONTGOMERY, BOARD-CERTIFIED PHYSICIAN: Yes. You know, Jane, I think you make a great point. If it`s not purposeful movement, then it`s really hard to actually attribute that to any real brain function. But when you hear the mother tell her, you know, her passionate plea and talk about how this young girl grabbed her hand, it`s very hard to explain that away with just a reflex. If there was actually a response to a verbal cue that means that there`s some level of arousal. And it`s very difficult to just explain that with reflexes. You know sitting up at a morgue --

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Let me jump in Doctor -- let me jump in and ask you, the doctors and several of them including an independent doctor said she has no electrical activity in her brain. She is brain-dead.

MONTGOMERY: Yes.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: So you can`t have both. You can`t have, I don`t think, a response that indicates intelligent life and have no brain activity in your brain or your brain stem.

MONTGOMERY: That`s exactly right. That`s the point. So unless somebody else who has some medical training, has actually observed this happening, then all of the studies, and believe me, Jane, with the national attention that this case has gotten, you know, those physicians I`ll bet without having talked to them have done all the tests that we do to make sure that there is no brain activity in this young girl. And so it would be very difficult to have this be explained.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Let me jump in here and say this. On the other side of the break, I`m going to tell you why I believe this was so unnecessary. The surgery should never have happened.

And I`ll give you three hints. Sleep apnea, high weight, and increased risks in surgery. Stay right there.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This child is moving. There can be an argument about brain-dead or not. But her heart is beating. And today she was moving when her mother was talking.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Here is your crazy and in my opinion, hideous Video of the Day. Look at this. A bull festival in Costa Rica -- the bull charges a woman in the ring and launches her up in the air. Do you know why bulls jump like that? Because they`re being tortured -- that`s not what they`re going to do naturally. Their testicles are tied to the point where it is extremely painful. That`s why. Critics say this is just another example of why we shouldn`t be doing it.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

WINKFIELD: When I walked her into that hospital, she was perfectly fine. There was nothing wrong with her. She had no health problems. Even when she got out of the surgery, I talked to her. And the only thing she said was that her throat hurt and that she wanted a popsicle.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Jahi had her tonsils removed to treat her sleep apnea. Here is my rant. I don`t think Jahi should have had this elective surgery at all. She was a chubby young lady -- that`s what she was. Overweight patients are known to be at higher risks for surgical complications. Sleep apnea and obesity are directly connected.

I believe lifestyle changes could have been the best answer to Jahi`s sleep apnea. Doctors are too eager to offer quick fixes to problems like this.

Incredibly, there`s another family going through a similar tragedy. Get this, this is a heart breaker. Three-year-old Finley Boyle went in for dental surgery last month, ended up brain-dead. Her family has made a different choice. And ultimately this child has been declared dead, and her life is over.

Rick Fried, you were the attorney for Ashley Boyle, the mother of this precious three-year-old who was declared brain-dead after a dental procedure. Why did this family that you represent make a different choice from the one that Jahi`s family has decided to make?

RICK FRIED, ATTORNEY FOR ASHLEY BOYLEY: There`s a pediatric neurologist who is the most respected here in Honolulu, Dr. Gregory Yen, looked at all the MRIs told them that there was no purposeful movement, that she had no interaction with her environment, and was in a persistent vegetative state. And the family felt, and the mother used the example of, "My daughter being in diapers when she is going through puberty," decided they would go from the care of feeding to change that to comfort care.

And then last Friday night, after a month in this coma, Finley expired. This was a situation where there were four medical negligence areas that occurred. And it was quite horrendous.

Usually there`s one mistake made. But here, the treatment plan, they called for excessive dental work which wasn`t necessary. We got further x-rays after she was in a coma. It was determined that almost none of the procedures were necessary. They were going to do ten root canals and fillings.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: By the way, sir, we reached out to the dentist who performed the procedure and we have not heard back from him, or the dentist`s attorney. They`re invited on at any time. This is a heart break all around. There are no easy answers or easy decisions. My heart goes out to both of these families. And both raise the possibility of unnecessary surgery. Think about it.

All right. We`ll be back after the break. We`ve got more surprises for you.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Time for Pet of the Day. Send your pet pics to hlntv.com/jane. Bear -- look at you (inaudible), you are. Just as cute is Cliffy and Harry. And they`re saying, when are we going to go out and hit that snow? And Marley says well, I`ve been partying in style. Look at this great, great color. Gunner, you`re having a lot of funner, aren`t you, Gunner? Love you.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Hey, little Rico. Tonight, two brave congressmen coming to the rescue of wild animals under attack from our own government. That`s right, the U.S. government. I`ve been saying it on this show for years.

The USDA`s Wildlife Services is a cruel program that forces taxpayers to fuel the vicious slaughter of wild animals for the benefit of businesses. For example, just one example, the cattle industry. Now two congressmen, a Republican and a Democrat, are saying get rid of this agency. We`ve got a deficit. Our educational system is a mess, and we`re spending money on the senseless slaughter of wild animals that many, many Americans want to protect? These two congressmen say the U.S. Wildlife Services is wasteful.

They can`t figure out where some of the millions is going every year, and they claim Wildlife Services breaks the law by killing protected species, ok? Gassing, aerial gunning, trapping and poisoning -- they`re endangering, according to these congressmen, not only wolves and coyotes, but our beloved pets.

So I want to go straight out to Congressman Peter DeFazio, a Democrat of Oregon. Sir tell us what you think is wrong with the USDA`s Wildlife Services.

REP. PETER DEFAZIO (D), OREGON: Well, they`re totally unaccountable. You`ve got your national federal bureaucracy where they spin these stories about what they`re doing -- regional offices. But then they have essentially this dispersed agency. We don`t know what contracts they`re working on or who they`re working for at the state level.

All around the country, they employ professional hunters, killers, exterminators. They use incredibly indiscriminate methods. We`ve had - - they`ve killed domestic pets. I have constituents who`re actually trying to save their dog who had pulled on one of these cyanide -- they have like shot shells that shoot cyanide that have bait on them.

Sooner or later, some child is going to pull on one of those, but they have killed many people`s dogs, and this couple ran over to try and save their dog and they also got exposed to the cyanide -- indiscriminate.

And so the impact not only on wildlife where they`re acting, you know, incredibly indiscriminately but also on domestic issues, and potentially the loss of human life at some point here.

They need to be brought under control, and for the most part, they should be eliminated. Sure, do we want to take care of problems at airports that could endanger airplanes? Sure. There are a few limited areas where there is a legitimate role, but mostly what they`re doing actually defies science and they`ve actually caused problems in the food chain and the environment by eliminating predators in places where we would benefit from having predators.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: By the way, we called USDA`s Wildlife Services and have not heard back. Very briefly, Congressman, what should Americans do?

DEFAZIO: Well, I`d love them to support our efforts. I`ve been on this for about 20 years. Actually, once I got their lethal control defunded, but then in a very rare moment, my amendment was re-voted at the end of the consideration of the bill, and a bunch of people reversed their votes under heavy pressure from the agriculture.

(CROSSTALK)

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Sorry to interrupt, Congressman, but call your representative and say, get rid of USDA`s Wildlife Services. Thank you for joining us, sir.

Call.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

VELEZ-MITCHELL: We`ve got a response from U.S. Wildlife Services, USDA. They say they operate responsibly and you can see their entire statement on our Web site, hlntv.com/Jane.

Thank you so much for joining us. Night.

END