Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Attorneys for Michael Brown's Family Holds Press Conference; House to Debate Keystone Pipeline Today; New Images from Comet 67P

Aired November 13, 2014 - 10:30   ET

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

BENJAMIN CRUMP, ATTORNEY FOR MICHAEL BROWN'S FAMILY: Lastly, to the law enforcement officers who will be patrolling the streets, we would like to thank you in advance for not having a repeat of the horrific encounters that took place in August.

We thank you in advance for treating the citizens exercising theirs first amendment rights, many of whom will be young people with bow (ph) opinions, but there will be some older people who have more measured opinions. There will be some black people. There will be some white people. There will be some Hispanic people. There will be college educated people and there will be lay people, but they all will be American citizens. And we thank you in advance, police officers, for treating them as citizens.

Now a word to Dr. Michael Baden's visit. We have Louis Head who is here with us as well. Dr. Baden's testimony will be limited to the purview of the grand jury and we won't get into the substance of his testimony. We do not feel that is appropriate.

The only thing that Dr. Baden had wished to express to Michael Brown's parents is that in his preliminary autopsy he had not been able to determine the shots to the chest, whether they were reentry wounds or entry wounds. He was able to confirm, along with review of some of the materials from the medical examiner's office that there was an additional entry wound into his chest. It was not a reentry wound.

To that end, that would be the only thing that we get into to the substance of his testimony because that is going to be for the grand jury's consideration, and he thought it appropriate as well as Attorney Gray that that goes to them and them alone. And I'm sure subsequently after the decision is made you will hear about all the substance of his opinion.

Again, good morning. I would like to thank everyone for showing up along with Attorney Gray and Attorney Parks and I. On behalf of Michael Brown's family, we are grateful for your presence here this morning. The journey for justice for Michael Brown, Jr., has been long, stressful and difficult to endure. The family sincerely desires to thank those that have supported their calls for justice for Michael Brown.

As far as Dr. Baden's visit today, the family, Attorney Gray and myself are very grateful and appreciative that he took the opportunity to fly to St. Louis at a moment's notice and provide forensic testimony to the grand jury. Apparently members of the grand jury decided to hear his forensic perspective.

We're also appreciative of the fact that the prosecutor's office opened the invitation for Dr. Baden's testimony. We do not know what extent his testimony will be necessary or what subject matters will be covered. We are simply hopeful that whatever it is, it would offer some insightful analysis and independent analysis for the grand jury that they can use in reaching their decision.

As most of you well know, Dr. Baden is a world renowned forensic pathologist. His forensic talents are unquestionable. Therefore, we have every reason to believe that his testimony will be very helpful to this grand jury.

Thank you. We'll take a few questions and then we'll move on.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Is Dr. Baden's analysis and your investigation of the evidence, what is there to suggest that Michael Brown was surrendering when he was killed?

CRUMP: Well, he's talked about that before. As I said, he would prefer that the substance of his testimony not be discussed, that he would talk about that himself. We would defer to him to talk about that. Respectfully out of his request.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Is it your contention still, regardless of Dr. Baden's testimony that there is evidence that shows --

CRUMP: There is evidence that shows Michael Brown had his hands up, yes. There is no doubt about that. That is not in regards to his testimony. That's in regards to what we know based on our review of all the opinions here.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And forensic evidence?

CRUMP: Yes, absolutely, forensic evidence. And Dr. Baden is basing his testimony on science and nothing more.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Attorney Crump, did Dr. Baden -- did he have everything that he needed to -- was there anything that he wanted to look over that he didn't have? Was there anything that he --

CRUMP: Jonathan, he's going to respond to that. He asked for a list of things, and whether those things were supplied to him or not, we're going to defer to Dr. Michael Baden to comment on that as well on everything and anything regarding the substance of his testimony out of his request.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Can you talk to us in general terms, as I understand it from the first autopsy that we saw in August, I got the impression from reading the autopsy and from talking to you guys that the biggest point he made was that there was some distance, that it wasn't up close, and that seems to be the biggest difference between what the county is saying and what your forensic -- your medical examiner is saying. Do I have that right?

CRUMP: Well, we understand, again, that these are all very good questions, but Dr. Baden, the substance of his testimony is going to be discussed by him after the grand jury. He believes as Attorney Gray and I also agree that the substance of his testimony should be left to the purview of the grand jury.

So in respect for the process, we won't be able to comment on that this morning. Dr. Baden may be able to talk to you about that after the decision.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Are you getting a better sense on the timing of this today? Have you guys gotten a better sense on timing?

ANTHONY GRAY, ATTORNEY FOR MICHAEL BROWN'S FAMILY: I believe that it appears by Dr. Baden's appearance today that we're probably getting to the end of the witness list. We don't know for sure, however. But it just -- we gained a sense that we're probably reaching the end of the road as it relates to witnesses.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Can I ask you -- I'm Sara from CNN -- can I ask you both about the secrecy of this grand jury. Is there any worry on your part that telling people that he is going to be testifying today, let's some of that secrecy out and let's people know what's going on inside of the grand jury?

CRUMP: Well Sara, I've been on record. I've always believed as Michael Brown's family has believed that we should not have this grand jury, that the police officer should have been charged, there was enough probable cause to charge Officer Darren Wilson with killing unarmed Michael Brown. And with such mistrust in the Ferguson community, that it being transparent based on the constitution of the United States of America that we have a right to trial by jury, that Michael Brown's due process warranted that the officer be charged.

And that was not to violate the police officer's due process. Nobody is saying he's guilty until proven innocent, but we thought it would be better for everybody here that they saw all the evidence, all the witnesses and that there was cross examination of all the evidence and all the witnesses. So whatever decision that was handed down, people would accept.

There's a great concern that because of this secret proceeding, that people will not be so accepting of whatever decision the grand jury makes, and we need to, as I said in my earlier comments, after viewing questionable outcomes with law enforcement, we need transparency so people can believe that the system works equally for everybody, even in communities like Ferguson.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What's your thoughts on (inaudible) has said that if there is no indictment, that he's going to release the evidence and that is rare, he says, to be transparent? What's your thoughts on that?

GRAY: Well, my thought about that is this: we may get the benefit of hearing and seeing all the evidence that was presented to the grand jury, but what we're missing would be how that information was presented. What emphasis was placed on what piece of evidence? What were the inflections in the voices and those kind of things that we will not have the benefit of actually seeing once all the information is out, especially if it's in transcript form. You're only going to get the words and not how those words were conveyed which in terms of presenting evidence is very key in having persuasive power.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Is Dr. Baden saying that he is not -- that he disagrees with the autopsy that was done by the county?

GRAY: I don't know that.

(CROSSTALK)

CRUMP: Again, Sara, respectfully, we have to refer to him to the substance of his testimony. I think he's commented on your question before already in a number of newspaper articles about that.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Can you just tell us --

CRUMP: I can't. I don't want to violate.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Is he still sticking with --

CRUMP: His testimony is that he answered that question a week ago, as well as I think the other pathologist who said she was misquoted. And so we will leave that to the doctors to comment on that.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Can you confirm whether there was something that Dr. Baden found that prompted him to want to (inaudible) or does the grand jury have a question (inaudible) -- or question him because of something they weren't sure about. How does this all come together?

CRUMP: Apparently the members of the grand jury wanted to hear from him, and we're thankful that the prosecutor's office extended the invitation to satisfy that request.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: (inaudible) asked to testify this late in the process? He offered to testify a week ago.

CRUMP: Again, we have no control over the process. You know, the family is at the mercy of this office, you know, the prosecutor's office. They are praying that they will give Michael Brown, Jr., due process of the law as every American citizen and that they can get justice that it works equally for them, too.

(CROSSTALK)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It sounds like this process has no credibility in your eyes right now.

CRUMP: We've questioned Ryan, as you know from the beginning this whole process. Again, we've been on the record, we think there's enough probable cause that exists to charge the police officer with killing an unarmed teenager. We've been consistent on that in that way, everybody will get their due process, the constitutional rights will be extended both to the police officer, but also to Michael Brown, Jr.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: If it is so evident, why don't you believe the grand jury will also come to that conclusion?

CRUMP: Here is the problem. When you have a grand jury, they only have one voice in there. And that is historically they're going to do whatever the prosecutor wants them to do as Attorney Gray so eloquently said. If he presents the evidence in a certain way, there will be an indictment.

CAROL COSTELLO, CNN ANCHOR: All right. We're going to jump away from this news conference. These are the attorneys for Michael Brown's family talking about the grand jury and its likely decision this weekend on whether or not to indict Officer Darren Wilson.

We've been having a spirited conversation onset, at least Midwin, Paul and Jason Carroll has. We want to continue that conversation for just a second.

The most interesting thing to me, and I didn't know you could do this, that grand jurors could actually ask for someone to testify. And apparently they asked for Dr. Baden, this pathologist hired by the Brown family who did an independent autopsy to testify before them. What does that tell you -- Midwin, Paul?

PAUL CALLAN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: I just wanted to say and I'm sure you've presented cases as well. But the prosecutor stands in the grand jury, it's just the prosecutor and you've got a room full of grand jurors. Now in this case there would be 12. One of them can raise their hand and say is there another -- was another autopsy done? We'd like to hear that.

They can request anything that they want. Now the prosecutor can say that's not legally admissible evidence. I'm not allowed to present that to you. But in this case, of course, the autopsy of the family's doctor would be admissible. So they can ask for that. They don't usually. Usually they kind of just go along with what the prosecutor presents.

But when a case goes on so long like this, they're going to start having their own individual questions. So I'm not surprised if they asked for it.

JASON CARROLL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: But I also think it's about transparency, isn't it? I mean the prosecutor makes the decision in terms of whether or not to allow a certain person to testify. And given the nature of how sensitive this case is I think the prosecutor in this case wants to show that he wants to allow all the evidence in there -- even evidence that might not rule in his favor.

COSTELLO: Yes, but Midwin, you were saying before this is unusual in a grand jury proceeding. Because now you have competing doctors right, with competing autopsies. So now you're leaving it to these grand jurors to decide what? They're not supposed to decide.

MIDWIN CHARLES, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: But that's the point that I've been trying to make. The way grand jury proceedings usually work is you have a prosecutor who's at the helm. And like Paul said, the prosecutor's just up there, he's the only attorney in the room -- there's no judge, there's no defense attorney and the prosecutor directs the process. And he does it in a manner, or she, to secure an indictment. In other words, it's supposed to be specific. It's supposed to be focused.

COSTELLO: Is there enough evidence to bring this case to trial.

CHARLES: Yes. In other words, you don't --

CALLAN: A lot of cases are dismissed by grand juries though and I'm sure you're not saying that Baden should not have been permitted to testify.

CHARLES: I am not at all saying that. My only point is that --

CALLAN: If you say that Baden should have been permitted to testify, then you think there should have been an extensive presentation for this grand jury.

CHARLES: I'll say what I think. But my point, as I was making, is that this should be more focused and it should be more narrow. And yes, Dr. Baden should testify. But my point is, the fact that it's gone on for so long, it's been so protracted and we've had all this sort of information being leaked, it's very questionable whether or not this prosecutor is doing the job he's supposed to do which is justice -- which is to secure it in this case.

CARROLL: Look, I'm just going to say, it does have to be focused, but the prosecutor is also aware of what is happening in that community. You heard it there in that press conference, the calls for calm. And there are a lot of people in the community who do not trust the system. They do not trust the process. And so what the prosecutor is trying to do here, I think, is he's trying to show that he is trying to make this process as open and as fair as possible. That's why he's allowing Baden to come in.

COSTELLO: Yes. But his duty -- that's not his job. These leaks from the grand jury are unusual. I mean we knew Darren Wilson testified -- we knew what Darren Wilson told the grand jury. That's unusual.

CARROLL: But this is aside from that. This is aside from the leaks. And we don't know if these leaks are coming from this particular prosecutor. We don't know where these leaks are coming from. I'm just simply saying with this specific situation, by having this -- by having Baden come in and having him testify, I believe it's because he knows what's happening out there in that community. He's trying to make the process as open as possible.

CALLAN: I'm telling you, I've seen and spoken to DAs who have presented these cases, if it's a controversial case involving a police officer, almost universally prosecutors present all of the evidence and let the jury decide. They handle it differently because they know they're in the public spotlight. So to say this is unusual and the prosecutor should have just gone in and got an indictment of the police officer, that's just not the way the system works.

COSTELLO: I'm not saying they should have gotten an indictment of the police officer. I'm just saying they should conduct the grand jury as normal.

CALLAN: This is a normal grand jury in a police shooting case.

CHARLES: And there should not be that double standard.

CARROLL: But it's not a normal situation.

COSTELLO: True.

CHARLES: There should not be a double standard.

COSTELLO: Oh, Midwin's amazing.

I'll be right back.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CRUMP: We think there's enough probable cause that exists to charge the police officer with killing an unarmed teenager. We've been consistent on that. In that way, everybody will get their due process. Constitutional rights will be extended both to the police officer but also to Michael Brown, Jr.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COSTELLO: The Keystone Pipeline is on the table today. Democrats and Republicans will vote on the controversial energy project tomorrow. And guess what? They just might give it the ok, although President Obama will likely shoot it down. The Keystone oil Pipeline needs presidential approval because it crosses an international border and that would be Canada. The pipeline runs down through Nebraska. Environmentalists say the pipeline would threaten water supply and burning the tar sands which contribute to climate change.

Democrat Mary Landrieu, who is in a runoff election in Louisiana, says, quote, "It's time for America to become energy independent and that's impossible without the Keystone Pipeline."

Ok, let's talk about this. Robert Zimmerman is a Democratic strategist and Ron Christie is a former special assistant to President George W. Bush. Welcome, gentlemen.

RON CHRISTIE, FORMER ASSISTANT TO GEORGE W. BUSH: Good morning, Carol.

ROBERTS ZIMMERMAN, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: Good to be with you.

COSTELLO: Ok. So Robert, let's get real. I mean come on, this is like a naked political move.

ZIMMERMAN: Well, you know, not that there's anything wrong with that, but clearly, Mary Landrieu gets the show as a senator running for reelection. She's taking on the leadership of her party. Her opponent, Cassidy, now has his name put in the lead on the bill by the Republican leadership. Obviously there's politics. And when both sides usually say there's not politics, then you can count on it being political.

Let's talk a little bit about what the Keystone Oil Pipeline would accomplish if, indeed, Congress passes it and President Obama gives it the ok? I like to live in fantasy world. But you know, you never know. It could happen.

ZIMMERMAN: It could happen.

COSTELLO: So let's talk about energy independence. Right now the United States is producing more oil than ever. And here's the proof. The U.S. is now producing 8.9 million barrels of oil per day. In 2005 the United States produced 5.1 million barrels a day. That's amazing, right?

CHRISTIE: It is.

COSTELLO: Gas is below $3.00 a gallon on average throughout the country. So do we vitally need the Keystone Pipeline right now, Ron?

CHRISTIE: Sure. Why not? I mean if we can find any way to bring energy into the United States, we can find ways to keep it cheap at the gas pump and, of course, to create thousands of jobs, why wouldn't we? I think this is a win-win for the United States to work with our Canadian allies to have American jobs here at home.

But as my friend Robert Zimmerman would say this is nothing more than the Mary Landrieu preservation act what we're talking about now.

(CROSSTALK)

ZIMMERMAN: I think this is about Cassidy, her opponent in that analysis. But here is the point that I think really frustrates me. This is a missed opportunity.

CHRISTIE: Yes.

ZIMMERMAN: This was a chance for the Democrats to negotiate with the Republicans. If they wanted the Keystone Pipeline, there could have been initiatives to retrofitting plants. There could have been initiatives that we could have hopefully gotten from the Republicans on greenhouse gas emissions. The problem is Ron's friends in congress and the Republican members don't believe in climate change. For that matter, they don't believe in science.

The new environmental chairman James Inhofe says God handles the climate. We're not supposed to get involved in that.

CHRISTIE: Well, we believe in science but we don't believe in global climate change. You're absolutely right because the planet has actually cooled the last decade and not gotten warmer.

COSTELLO: Oh, come on. No.

CHRISTIE: But here's the important thing that I think we will agree on Carol and here we are.

COSTELLO: No we have 98 percent of scientists agree that there is such a thing as climate change --

CHRISTIE: Oh yes, 98 percent of scientists who are --

COSTELLO: You believe in two percent.

CHRISTIE: I don't buy the 98 percent figure at all.

ZIMMERMAN: Who do you buy? Who's your source, Rush Limbaugh?

CHRISTIE: No, it's not Rush Limbaugh. We seem to be (inaudible) -- let's stick to the topic at hand. When you find Mitch McConnell who was beaming on the senate floor yesterday and you had two very key opponents of the Keystone Pipeline in the form of Barbara Boxer and, of course, the senator from Maine -- I'm getting a mind blank on -- Bernie Sanders who didn't object --

ZIMMERMAN: Vermont.

CHRISTIE: -- from Vermont, yes -- who didn't object to bringing this up, this is pure politics, pure and simple.

COSTELLO: Yes, because couldn't we find a solution about the burning tar sands and the environmental damage it would cause -- right.

ZIMMERMAN: Right. Carol, your point is really on target.

COSTELLO: And I know that. And maybe leave the climate change thing out since Republicans are not exactly like enthusiastic about that? I'm sure they care about the environment in some way, right?

CHRISTIE: Of course we care about the environment. We don't care about Democrats and the global climate folks who are creating a problem --

(CROSSTALK)

ZIMMERMAN: Excuse me Ron. The problem we have is there's not even a recognition of science, least of all of climate change. But here is a bigger point, when you look at the Keystone Pipeline, the fact of the matter is the heavy oil from Canada will be transported into the United States through rail or for that matter through trucks. It's much safer to bring it in through a pipeline and actually use less energy to do it that way.

So there's an environmental argument for the Keystone Pipeline compared to what we have. The bigger issue here is we have to move forward in terms of compromise. And the Republicans' failure to sit with us and even recognize climate change is a real issue.

CHRISTIE: The real issue is that I think you are right. But the President missed an opportunity to have a bipartisan --

ZIMMERMAN: Carol, there is one issue we have bipartisan consensus on from Ron and myself.

COSTELLO: Please tell me.

ZIMMERMAN: It's your first Christmas holiday season in New York. Here is your official "I Love New York". New York loves Carol Costello t-shirt.

COSTELLO: I love that. Thank you so much. I feel honored.

ZIMMERMAN: To kickoff the holiday season.

CHRISTIE: Bipartisan consensus to give to you.

COSTELLO: Awesome. Thank you so much.

CHRISTIE: Always a pleasure.

COSTELLO: I am touched. Thank you so much.

I'm blushing. I'll be right back. It's so awesome.

Oh, I'm sorry. I've got to do a Jeanne Moos. I'm so flustered now.

Let's talk about the comet, right. Fantastic new pictures have just been released of the comet everyone is talking about. This tiny leftover from the creation of the universe is about as rough and inhospitable as you would imagine in deep space. And we wouldn't know anything about it were it not for a plucky little space probe now hitching a ride on it.

As CNN's Jeanne Moos explains scientists at the European Space Agency are over the moon with their stellar success.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JEANNE MOOS, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): If you were landing something the size of a washing machine on a speeding comet, your face would look like this, too. That's the flight director with his hand on his mouth, wiping his forehead.

JAMES GREEN, DIRECTOR OF PLANETARY SCIENCE, NASA HEADQUARTERS: How audacious. How exciting to dare, to land on a comet.

MOOS: It was like the movie "Armageddon" or "Deep Impact" -- minus the astronauts. And instead of coming to destroy a comet, lander Philae came to study one.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Science fiction has become science fact.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Like a bullet hitting a bullet.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What humanity has done now is that we have caught a comet.

MOOS: And this is how it looked the moment European Space Agency scientists learned they'd caught it. For a second they became almost too giddy to go on.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We are live, I guess, so we can't be happier than what we are now.

MOOS: So giddy, they dropped the mike.

The flight director didn't just drop a lander on a comet. He dropped an F-bomb in Italian.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (EXPLETIVE DELETED)

MOOS: Even Star Trek's Captain Kirk sent good wishes.

WILLIAM SHATNER, ACTOR: I am so excited.

MOOS: And the lander itself tweeted its arrival, "Touchdown. My new address, 67P." That's the comet's designation emblazoned on team T- shirt.

These Europeans know how to throw a watch party. You don't hear NASA talking about a robot meeting a comet like this.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We're moving in for the kiss.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The comet needs the breath mint.

MOOS: That's become the comet stinks from mixtures of for instance ammonia and hydrogen sulfide.

(on camera): Do I hear it singing?

MOOS (voice-over): That's what they call noises from the comet that their instruments picked up. A special Google doodle celebrated the successful landing.

(on camera): Wait a minute. This just in. We're hearing that the space agency has chosen its next mission and this one requires landing in unbelievably difficult terrain.

(voice-over): Forget the tale of a comet inspired by newly released photos of this other worldly object. The agency will attempt to touch down on the tail of Kim Kardashian. Talk about a celestial body.

Jeanne Moos, CNN --

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: How audacious.

MOOS: -- New York.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

COSTELLO: That's one way to put it.

Thank you so much for joining me today. I'm Carol Costello.

"@THIS HOUR WITH BERMAN AND MICHAELA" starts now.