Return to Transcripts main page

Legal View with Ashleigh Banfield

3100 UNC Students Took Fake Classes; Blackwater Guards Guilty in 2007 Massacre; Defective Airbags

Aired October 23, 2014 - 12:30   ET

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

ASHLEIGH BANFIELD, CNN ANCHOR: The University of North Carolina today reeling from a blow, a really big blow, to its reputation. Especially the integrity of its legendary sports program.

An eight-month investigation found thousands of UNC athletes remained eligible to play by taking fake classes that fraudulently boosted their grades. According to the report, the alleged scam began 18 years ago. And revolved around the school's African American Studies Program.

Our Sara Ganim is live in Chapel Hill right now.

This is pretty incredible material to work with. This must be reeling. I mean what's this -- how is it landing on campus? How are people reacting to this?

SARA GANIM, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Ashleigh, this now appears -- what happened at UNC now appears to be the biggest academic fraud scandal in all of college sports history. And I have to tell you that for about four years, officials here at UNC denied that. They said, you know, we dealt with what happened, we moved on. There was nothing here to see. That's what they told us when we first started asking questions.

And they attacked the credibility of the main whistleblower here, Mary Willingham, but we listened to her when they wouldn't listen to her and that forced UNC to reopen their investigation and guess what, Ashleigh, everything that she said, all of the facts, all of the names that she named, those names were named yesterday as people who knew what was going on here, what was happening here, for 18 years.

Two head football coaches admitting to -- admitted to knowing about this scandal, at least five academic advisors in the Athletic Department said they used these classes to make sure that athletes who could not compete in the classroom, were still able to compete on the field.

This is validation for Mary Willingham for sure. I just talked to her a few minutes ago and she actually gave a lot of credit to the new chancellor here on campus, Carol Folt.

I want you to take a listen to what Carol said yesterday.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) CHANCELLOR CAROL FOLT, UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA: It was an inexcusable betrayal of our values and our mission and our students' trust. The length of time that this behavior went on and the number of people involved is really shocking. It was a wrongdoing that could have and should have been stopped much earlier by individuals who were in positions of influence and oversight. Many could have sounded the alarm more forcefully.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GANIM: So, you know, there's been a lot of frustration, a lot of anger here on campus that the way that the university responded to this. There's a feeling that because they dragged this out and wouldn't admit to it, wouldn't look into it for so long, that this dragged out and this is, you know, five years later. A whole entire class went through this university dealing with the scandal.

There is a feeling, though, here today on campus that at least they know now, that this is the answer, this is what happened, and they can start to move on.

BANFIELD: So, Sara, do you -- you reported this. I'm just going to put this out here. You started reporting this months ago. And as I recall, you took a lot of heat, didn't you?

I want you to just characterize for our audience what you went through when you started the ball rolling on this story? Because it smacks of a lot of Lance Armstrong.

GANIM: Well, you know, it was -- CNN took a little bit of heat, yes, but it was really about Mary Willingham. It was her credibility that had been attacked and her credibility had been attacked for a lot longer than any of the media that was talking to her. She's been talking about this for five years now.

The scandal started out actually as an agent scandal. Some players who had improper contact with agents that was revealed in late 2010. The university under pressure from the local newspaper who also gets a lot of credit here, they were digging and digging and digging on this, the university said OK, you're right, there were some irregularities in classes.

They pinned this all on one professor and his assistant and they said these guys went rogue basically. They acted all by themselves. They put these athletes in these classes and nobody else knew about it.

BANFIELD: Right.

GANIM: And that turned out to not be true and Mary Willingham said over and over and over again, she said, I worked in athletics for seven years, I know that we talked about this openly. I know that a lot of people knew about this. It wasn't two rogue people. And they ignored her. And when we -- you know, when we put her on national television and you know, Ashleigh, that's the power sometimes of the camera, we put her on TV and they had to listen to what she was saying. BANFIELD: Also the power of the Pulitzer, my friend. I'm not going

to lie. You got a Pulitzer on Penn State investigation, and you did a great job on this one, too.

Thank you so much, Sara Ganim, reporting for us live.

Danny, Mel, whenever this kind of thing happens, the first thing I think of is, how can they get retribution? But this is sort of the -- this is sort of an NCAA thing, isn't it? Or could it go into the criminal arena?

CEVALLOS: Well, it already --

(LAUGHTER)

ROBBINS: Whoa.

CEVALLOS: Well, it already has -- you know, it already has gone into the criminal arena. We talked about the African Studies chairman being charged with a felony for obtaining money under false pretenses, teaching classes that didn't exist. And when you take a step back now in light of this report, it really is disturbing.

Because what do you think the complainant was on that felony? It was UNC. And why do you think they did that? Do you think maybe it was to distance themselves and blame it all on this rogue teacher?

ROBBINS: They're trying to blame it on two people at the university.

CEVALLOS: On two people. I mean, if anybody has been --

(CROSSTALK)

BANFIELD: 3500 students, right?

ROBBINS: Ridiculous.

CEVALLOS: Has anybody been to a large university that has a big sports program? Do we really think this pervasive problem is the fault of two rogue officials?

ROBBINS: It's absolutely ridiculous.

CEVALLOS: I highly doubt it.

ROBBINS: But let me tell you. And I agree 100 percent with what Danny is saying. This is not an issue for UNC. This is a pivotal moment for the NCAA. Do they matter? We're talking about an 18-year scandal, 3100 students, 47 percent of them are athletes, Ashleigh. The only academic scandal that I could figure out and find that the NCAA did something, you know, significant to was Minnesota back in 2000.

That was only a case where it involved 18 players over five years where the coach's secretary was allegedly writing their papers for them and they did a postgame season suspension and they suspended some of the scholarships. What is the NCAA going to do? They better come down hard because if they don't, they don't matter at all.

BANFIELD: Well --

CEVALLOS: And universities.

BANFIELD: You know --

CEVALLOS: They are shaking in their boots after this report.

BANFIELD: Sara Ganim is probably knocking on their door right now. So we'll watch the story and keep on this (INAUDIBLE) to see exactly what does transpire.

You all are not free yet because there's another legal story that we're grilling down on and this one involves the actions of Americans who were fighting in Iraq.

Several American contractors, not soldiers, contractors, working during the Iraq war, have been found guilty in the massacre of more than a dozen Iraqi civilians. The details on the crime, the punishment and why they just might have a legitimate appeal on this coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BANFIELD: Massacre of more than a dozen Iraqi citizens back in 2007 has now resulted in guilty verdicts for the four former Blackwater guards who were responsible for the killings. The most serious charge, first-degree murder. And it fell to Nicholas Slatten.

Armed with a sniper rifle he's blamed for starting the rampage by firing into a crowded traffic circle in Baghdad. When the shooting stopped, 17 Iraqis were dead and 18 were wounded including women and children.

The others, Evan Liberty, Paul Slough and Dustin Heard were all convicted of multiple counts of voluntary manslaughter and attempted manslaughter. They were also convicted of firearms violations, very, very serious ones, that could be more serious than even the homicide.

CNN's Jomana Karadsheh recalls the gruesome details of what happened that awful day.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JOMANA KARADSHEH, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Ali Abdul Razzaq's life ended with a bullet to the head on September 16th, 2007. Ali was not yet 10. Ahmad Rubaie was studying to become a doctor. His life, too, tragically ended on that September day.

These are some of the faces of the 17 Iraqi victims of the shooting rampage in Baghdad's Nisour Square seven years ago. In an incident involving the U.S. security firm known at the time as Blackwater Worldwide. The firm said the State Department convoy it was protecting was in danger and that it had come under attack in the central Baghdad square. Something eyewitnesses interviewed by CNN at the time said wasn't true.

The Iraqi government called the shootings "unprovoked" and "premeditated murder."

KARADSHEH (on camera): The incident sparked a diplomatic crisis and was a turning point in U.S.-Iraqi relations. It also changed the rules on the ground for security contractors who now operate with no immunity and under strict Iraqi regulations.

KARADSHEH (voice-over): For survivors like Lawyer Hasan Jaber Salman, the physical wounds may have healed, but the memories haunt him he says.

HASAN JABER SALMAN, LAWYER (through translator): No matter how you try to describe this, you can't do it justice. They killed 17 people in cold blood. Families have lost a father, a son, a child. It's a tragedy I cannot describe.

KARADSHEH: Salman was driving to work when he got trapped in the traffic in Nusar (ph) Square. When the shooting started, like many others, he tried to flee. He was shot three times.

SALMAN: It was horror. People were terrified. People running out of their cars were being shot at. Anything that moved in Nusar Square was shot. Women, children, young people, they shot at everyone.

KARADSHEH: The defendants say they acted in self-defense.

SALMAN: I felt that there are people who care about this case. I felt the U.S. judiciary was interested, even if it's to show the media that America is just and guarantees people's rights. I have trust that there will be justice.

KARADSHEH: For the families of the victims, the long wait for justice will not bring back their loved ones but may finally mean closure.

Jomana Koaradsheh, CNN, Baghdad.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ASHLEIGH BANFIELD, CNN ANCHOR: And back on the set with me live now, CNN's legal analyst Danny Cevallos and Mel Robbins.

So I want to drill down on this. This is so important because a lot of people say this is going to be the new form of warfare. There's a really good chance we'll have sort of mercenary type armies that will be fighting wars that Americans don't want to see with American boots on the ground. And with that in mind, are soldiers treated differently than say contractors? If soldiers had done that, would there have been a big difference in -

MEL ROBBINS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Well, from a legal perspective, yes, because they'd go to military court. They would not go to a federal court. So this was a case that, you know, we can explain the statute under which they tried these guys, but they're not boots.

BANFIELD: But you don't have more leeway.

ROBBINS: It's like shoes on the ground because they're contractors.

BANFIELD: If you're a soldier in uniform and you are there on your tour of duty, you don't get more leeway. You don't get more benefit of the doubt.

ROBBINS: Correct. It's just a different court system that you would go through. These were absolutely crimes that were committed. These were not acts of war, these were crimes that were committed and a federal jury handed down a devastating conviction to these four --

BANFIELD: But this shouldn't chill anybody out there who's thinking of doing this kind of work in the future. You can't do it as a soldier. You can't do it as a contractor, right.

ROBBINS: Correct. Correct.

DANNY CEVALLOS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Great question.

BANFIELD: So, Danny, here's the interesting thing. They're talking about these convictions and this is, you know, great news apparently overseas where there was no trust in the American system before. Now to show that the American judicial system has done its job and has actually convicted four of its own, it may not be the end of the story. There is a very legitimate ground on which they could appeal these and it is tricky business. Can you explain it?

CEVALLOS: Yes. Here's how it works. The jurisdiction works, you have the Department of Defense here, you have the Department of State here. The act as written applies to people who are carrying out the mission of the Department of Defense. However, if you're a contractor and you're working for the Department of State, which is what these guys were doing on the day of, they were providing security for State Department employees, then the question is whether or not their activity was relating to or supporting the mission of the Department of Defense. So in other words, while defending state employees, State Department employees, were they carrying out a mission of the Department of Defense? If you're a U.S. attorney you argue everything in Iraq relates to the Department of Defense.

BANFIELD: Absolutely. It's a war zone.

ROBBINS: Right.

CEVALLOS: If you're the defendants, and I think this is a strong appealable issue because both the State Department and the Department of Defense appear to have supported the defendants on this issue, if you are defending Department of State employees, that does not relate directly to a mission of the Department of Defense.

BANFIELD: And I - what was interesting here, though, is that, I don't know that a lot of people know this, but that the -- that American jurisdiction will get you if you're working under the DOD, under the offices of the DOD -

CEVALLOS: Correct.

ROBBINS: Right.

BANFIELD: But it doesn't have that kind of jurisdiction if it was the state.

ROBBINS: Right. And you know what's interesting is, it also is what saved these guys from not being prosecuted overseas.

BANFIELD: Overseas. Right. Right.

ROBBINS: So if they win on appeal, they might open themselves up to being yanked overseas and tried.

BANFIELD: To be more - it could be a much longer story.

Mel, Danny, as always, brilliant and thank you so much. Appreciate it.

So, the air bag that you think about in your car, you don't see it unless it blows. And it's supposed to save you. But could it instead cause you a serious injury? There is a massive recall of these things going on right now, and it's growing. It's on its way to becoming the biggest auto recall in history, if you can believe it. So you need the information that's coming at you next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BANFIELD: So it's kind of hard to believe this next statistic I'm going to tell you but already defective air bags, the recalled, has affected nearly 8 million car owners in the United States. And here's what's weird, that could just be the beginning of it because some analysts are saying that this could end up being the biggest recall in history and it could take years, actually, to get the job done. Years of people driving around with those bags.

I want to bring in Rene Marsh.

So I -- when I first heard this story, I thought it was astounding. And every iteration since has become more and more astounding. I'm wondering if consumers are hearing this story because they're driving the cars out there.

RENE MARSH, AVIATION AND GOVERNMENT REGULATION CORRESPONDENT: It is a very critical, very important story, especially if you own one of these vehicles. We've been trying to get the word out. I can tell you right now, federal prosecutors are now looking into the faulty air bags, which can send metal shrapnel flying at car passengers. The question that these prosecutors are looking into is whether the Japanese manufacturer of the air bags was truthful about when it knew about the defects. And I can tell you, lawmakers on Capitol Hill, they are putting pressure on the agency that handles the car recalls, questioning whether they're even doing enough to keep drivers and passengers safe.

So if you remember, this week, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Ashleigh, they put out an urgent warning to nearly 8 million car owners. They said immediately you should get defective air bags replaced. The problem is, some of the air bags manufactured by this Japanese company, Takata, well they expand way too fast and violently and the metal inflator inside, it ruptured, and that's what sends the shrapnel flying. In some cases it's caused injury and some believe that in other cases it has even caused death.

Now they say that --

BANFIELD: Wow.

MARSH: Yes. Yes. And they say it's especially urgent for cars in more humid states.

BANFIELD: Oh, OK. That's odd.

MARSH: But that's the problem, lawmakers are saying, why are they only focusing on those humid states?

BANFIELD: What is it?

MARSH: They need to focus on all of the vehicles, Ashleigh.

BANFIELD: What is it about a humid state that would make - or render the air bags more dangerous?

MARSH: Well, according to NHTSA, what they're finding is that this issue of the metal inflator essentially rupturing, it's mostly happening or somehow linked to high temperature, high humidity. But we have two lawmakers, Senator Blumenthal, as well as Senator Marquee from Massachusetts, saying, look, don't just focus on the humid states, focus on everyone who has these vehicles.

Ashleigh.

BANFIELD: All right, Rene Marsh, good work. Thank you. And keep us posted on this. We'll keep telling the message. Thank you for that.

And thank you, everyone, for watching. It's been nice to have you with us. My colleague, Wolf Blitzer, starts right now.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)