Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

No Grand Jury Decision on Ferguson Case; Unprecedented Snow in New York; Webcams Can Be Easily Accessed

Aired November 22, 2014 - 16:00   ET

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

POPPY HARLOW, CNN ANCHOR: You're in the CNN NEWSROOM. I'm Poppy Harlow, live in New York - in Ferguson, Missouri where we begin. Because this weekend there we have just learned there will be no grand jury decision. There will be no announcement on whether the policeman who shot and killed 18-year-old Michael Brown will be charged with a crime or not.

Let's go straight to CNN Justice reporter Evan Perez. He joins us live from Ferguson. So what is the new timeline then, Evan?

EVAN PEREZ, CNN JUSTICE REPORTER: Well, Poppy, now we just have to wait for the grand jury to reconvene here on Monday, and then we'll see where they go. They're in control of this now. We know they came here on Friday. They listened to some final bits of evidence from prosecutors. And then they were set to begin deliberations.

We don't know what form those deliberations took, whether they simply decided they needed to hear more, or whether they just had trouble coming to a final decision. And so we do know that they're planning to come back here. The original plan was for them to come back today. But they're in charge. And so they decided they didn't want to come back until Monday. And so now everybody is just waiting.

Law enforcement which boosts all their resources here, they've put up all these new barriers to get ready for what they anticipate will be some protests and perhaps some disorder as well.

HARLOW: So they could hear additional evidence possibly when they reconvene next on Monday. I'm wondering, Evan, does that guidance that we've all been getting about 48 hours ahead of time, does that still apply, that once a decision is made the public law enforcement, et cetera, will get 48 hours heads up before it becomes public to everyone?

PEREZ: Right. That's the last word that we have. And I talked to some law enforcement officials today, and they say they still anticipate that they will get 48 hours notice. Obviously that now pushes us into some interesting timing. We know obviously Thanksgiving is on Thursday. These jurors come back here on Monday and they spend all day and decide they need more time. We're now pushing back into the holiday.

We know that some of the schools here in St. Louis and the St. Louis region have already cancelled classes for at least a couple of days here. Some of them all week, actually, to prepare for this. And so these law enforcement people who have been sent down here are now in a holding pattern while they wait for these jurors to decide what to do.

HARLOW: All right. Evan Perez, live for us from Missouri. Thanks for the update and the reporting, Evan.

Law enforcement officials in and around Ferguson say they are ready for whatever happens once the grand jury decision is made public. Many shops really taking no chances, boarding up windows, trying to prevent any possible looting. Police say their mission is to preserve the peace. That might be easier said than done. Some protesters complain that heavily armed officers in riot gear provoked some of the unrest that played out on the streets in recent months.

Let me bring in our next guest, Rashid Abdul Salaam. He's a former police officer, now a private investigator and security specialist. He's also from Missouri. He was part of law enforcement in Missouri for quite some time. Thank you for joining us, sir.

RASHID ABDUL SALAAM, PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR: Thank you for having me.

HARLOW: Let's talk about what you think has been learned from what we saw unfold and some of the violence we saw unfold on the streets of Ferguson earlier this year.

ABDUL SALAAM: Well, it's obvious we've learned that there are outside agitators coming into the city. And this is a very difficult thing for the local people to deal with who are protesting peacefully. And of course, for the law enforcement officials to deal with as well. So my concern is just what is the intent of everyone involved? We know the law enforcement, their intent is to keep the peace and to protect the property and maintain order. We would hope that the protesters, their intent, is to let their voices be heard but also to lift and to improve the greater good of the society in reference to Michael Brown losing his life and not to denigrate the unfortunate circumstances surrounding that young man's death.

HARLOW: Let me ask you this. There are these 19 rules that have been written up and proposed by some of the protesters to law enforcement. And we understand that law enforcement has agreed to some of the rules. Overall both sides saying we're trying to make it better than it was last time. But law enforcement has also said we can't agree to all of these rules, such as telling us what our officers can wear or not wear during the protests. Do you think proposing these rules is a good idea, the right step?

ABDUL-SALAAM: Of course I do. Because what we're dealing with here is, we're trying to update antiquated policies that law enforcement had in effect previous - the previous situation. Because we saw the evidence of that. And of course, it's a bargaining tool on both parts. They're bringing up proposals which is very good. And the purpose is for them to be able to express and to protest, for their voices to be heard, for their grievances to be heard out and addressed, and also to work with the police so that they can suppress the violence if that's going to occur. So that's a good thing.

HARLOW: Let's hope that that is not what occurs. Any violence. Very quickly before we go, some have suggested that this decision from the grand jury should be announced on a weekend when kids are not in school. Should that be taken into account? Or should this decision just be handed down whenever it comes?

ABDUL-SALAAM: You know, the law is the law. We are a country of laws. This is a land of laws. And to try to manipulate or to adjust when justice is being administered, I think that's a little extreme. As citizens, we have to buy into the system. And a part of the system is, you know, just as Dr. King would say, "Justice delayed is justice denied." And I don't think that we should tailor when decisions are made by the grand jury by other juries when they're trying to deliberate on a verdict. I don't think that's appropriate.

HARLOW: Rashid Abdul-Salaam, thank you for joining us today, sir. We appreciate it.

ABDUL-SALAAM: Thank you.

HARLOW: And we're going to turn now to Buffalo, New York. Still incredible pictures out of there. Flooding from melting snow is the newest threat after seven feet of snow fell there this week alone. At least 13 deaths are blamed on this storm. And the danger could get much worse as the temperatures rise.

Homes and buildings strained under the weight of tons of snow. Dozens of roofs there have already collapsed. The warmer weather may push many structures past their breaking point. Here's Tom Foreman.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

TOM FOREMAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Here's the rule of thumb. One foot of snow equals about one inch of water. So a cubic foot of snow would weigh about five pounds. And a five foot column like this like they have in some parts of Buffalo would weigh about 25 pounds. That on top of a modest-sized home if you spread it out over the whole surface, would amount to somewhere around 19,000 pounds of weight up there.

Most homes in Buffalo are designed to bear that. But what they may not be able to bear is this. When that snow has time to compact and to drift, you could have all of that weight from a five-foot column in a single square foot of snow. And then you put more squares on top of it of the same weight. Now you have a whole different equation.

If you cover the roof five foot deep of this suddenly that number could jump up to 95, 96,000 pounds. That's very hard for any house to withstand. Now granted, the structure is meant to disperse that weight. All the decking, all the trusses, all the studs in the wall are meant to make sure that none of that weight bears down on just one part of the house. But if it sits there a long time and especially if rain gets into it, it gets so heavy it has to do damage.

So how can you check? A few simple things you can do if you live in an area like this. First of all, take a look in the attic if you can. If you see obvious buckling of the trusses up there, that is a warning sign. If you hear a lot of really unusual popping or groaning noises from the wood up there, that's another warning. And if you try to open interior doors and you find that they're sticking, that could also be a sign that there's a lot of weight on top of the house. And you may need to get that roof cleaned off.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

HARLOW: Tom Foreman, thank you for that.

Well, coming up, a Missouri grand jury will reconvene Monday at the earliest as it decides whether a police officer should be indicted for fatally shooting an unarmed black teenager. Up next, a forensic scientist reconstructs what is known about the shooting that has raised so many questions.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HARLOW: Welcome back. We are tracking new developments in Ferguson, Missouri. Sources tell us here at CNN the grand jury will not reconvene until Monday at the earliest. And as we await the grand jury decision in Ferguson, I want to take you back to where it all began, August 9th on a quiet street in a suburb outside St. Louis. Broad daylight right around noon, Officer Darren Wilson stops Michael Brown and a friend who are on foot. What happens next is the source of the controversy.

Officer Wilson fatally shot the unarmed teenager Michael Brown. The grand jury is weighing whether Wilson should face charges for that. Our Susan Candiotti spoke with a forensic scientist to reconstruct what we know about that shooting.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

SUSAN CANDIOTTI, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (on camera): Dr. Koblinsky, can you please explain to us by showing us with this mannequin how many wounds there were?

DR. LAWRENCE KOBLINSKY, FORENSIC SCIENTIST: It looks like there are at least seven shots. Perhaps eight. A grazing wound to the right palm near the right thumb, a wound to the forearm, which has both entrance and exit features. There is a grazing wound to the right bicep, a fourth wound to the upper right arm, two shots to the chest, one to the right forehead, the so-called kill shot which entered at the very top of the crown of the skull.

CANDIOTTI: This is the first shot because there was a struggle described in the car between Michael Brown and Officer Wilson.

KOBLINSKY: It's consistent with the struggle. What we can say is that hand was very close to the gun when it went off.

CANDIOTTI: And there appears to be material which is likely gun residue.

KOBLINSKY: That's correct.

CANDIOTTI: Can you tell from what you have seen so far how far away Officer Wilson was from Michael Brown? KOBLINSKY: No, not from autopsy results. What you look for is a gunshot residue pattern. Beyond 18 inches, a gunshot leaves no residue pattern.

CANDIOTTI: So you can't tell.

KOBLINSKY: You can't, even if you had the clothing, you would not see anything.

CANDIOTTI: So many witness accounts differ. Were his hands up in surrender, were they coming down?

KOBLINSKY: In surrender, I would expect the entrance wound to be on what we call the ventral surface, the inner aspect of the arm. That's not what we see here. We see the exit wound on that surface. That's demonstrated right here. The entrance wound is on the back surface of the arm. So the entrance wound is actually here, which is not what you would expect. People don't surrender like that. That would be the entrance wound. So -

CANDIOTTI: Could there be another explanation?

KOBLINSKY: Well, the explanation is when that shot hit Mr. Brown, the arms were down. When it comes to the arm, it could be up, it could be flailing, it could be rotating. It can take on an infinite number of positions. So we have to be careful making statements about trajectories. And I think that brings us to that upper arm.

I certainly don't feel comfortable stating that that is an indicator of hands up or hands down. Of the three autopsies, I think they would certainly all agree on the position of the trauma, the wounds to the body. I think how they got there is a matter of opinion. In other words, was Michael Brown running toward the cop, police Officer Wilson? Was he falling? Was he surrendering? Was he not surrendering? All of these are part of the reconstruction.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

HARLOW: And the question remains, what will the grand jury make of the autopsy evidence as they look at that. Many thought we would have known what their decision would be by now. But we are still waiting. What should we expect? We're going to talk about that next. But first this.

Bill Gates and Steve Jobs have something in common. Both left college early to pursue their dreams. So the big question is, is a college education today worth the cost? The CNN film "Ivory Tower" takes a look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFED MALE: There's going to be a collapse. One way or another there's going to be a crisis. It gets to the point where the price of a degree is so high that people just don't want to pay for it anymore.

UNIDENTIFED MALE: This is not what most colleges want to talk about. They want to pretend education is something that's completely nonfinancial, it's an end in itself. These are very noble ideals. But they don't make sense when people are taking on 100, $200,000 of student debt.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HARLOW: We are analyzing new developments this hour from Missouri. The grand jury considering charges against a Ferguson police officer who shot and killed Michael Brown has not yet reached a decision. Sources tell us here at CNN, the grand jury will reconvene on Monday at the earliest. Let's bring in HLN legal analyst and criminal defense attorney Joey Jackson.

I want to talk about this grand jury. Just the fact that this grand jury by the prosecutor has been presented a host of evidence. Even evidence that may not be admissible in a trial. How rare is that?

JOEY JACKSON, HLN LEGAL ANALYST: Very rare, Poppy. How many times have you heard a grand jury could indict a ham sandwich, right? And the reason you hear that is because generally the evidence is really tailored to the grand jury.

HARLOW: (INAUDIBLE) by the prosecutor.

JACKSON: Exactly. It's tailored in such a way to get the result and the outcome you want which is generally an indictment. In this scenario, apparently the prosecutor has opted to present everything to the grand jury. Now there are some that applaud that, and there are others, Poppy, that are very critical of that.

And here's why. In the event that you present everything, is it political cover? Should he have even gone to the grand jury? Couldn't he have done a criminal complaint? That would have resulted in what's called a preliminary hearing. We would have had all these hearings transparent and everyone would have known what the evidence is.

HARLOW: Our Ana Cabrera asked the prosecutor McCullough why a grand jury. He said look we do this always in situations like this where there is any question about anything especially when you're talking about someone being killed.

JACKSON: Yes and no. Again it depends on the facts and the circumstances. In this particular case he opted to do it. There are others who praise him for that, Poppy. Why? Because they say the grand jury now has all the evidence, they have all the information. They can make an educated and informed choice based upon that.

So certainly there are pros to what he did. There are cons to what he did. But unlike the ham sandwich issue, this grand jury can do anything because they have an awful lot to consider. And I don't know that unlike a regular presentation it's not tailored specifically to get an indictment, it's tailored to give them all they need so if an indictment is appropriate they'll give one. HARLOW: We know that all of the - I think 700 plus hours of testimony

from the grand jury is going to become public. So eventually we can all see that if we want to.

JACKSON: Yes.

HARLOW: Right.

JACKSON: If and only if the jury decides not to indict. Apparently it will be made public in the event they don't, Poppy. The other process will be followed.

HARLOW: Doesn't this bring up the issue of whether you put the witnesses names out there? Whether you strike them or not?

JACKSON: It could. It's interesting. Because the whole reason for a grand jury secretive proceedings - and the secretive proceedings are not limited to Missouri. Secretive proceedings are in general. The reason you have that is to ensure the integrity of the investigation, to ensure that witnesses are not intimidated, that they can give testimony without threats, without fear and so when you reveal the information there is that threat.

However, Poppy, what the prosecutor can do is what we call redact the information. That is to block out the names of the witnesses who testified. But great people in the media and people who dig like you they may just find out exactly who those witnesses are.

JACKSON: Final call, right choice to release everything to be as transparent as possible?

JACKSON: Absolutely. In a case like this, Poppy, you want it all out there. You want people to have confidence and ensure that there's an integrity to these proceedings. Release it, let's examine it and see what they presented to that grand jury.

HARLOW: Joey Jackson, thank you as always.

JACKSON: Thank you, Poppy.

HARLOW: Here's a question - most of us have them. You probably have them a webcam? Is it on right now? If so hackers could be watching you. That is what happened to a lot of people. You will not believe how easy it was for the hackers.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HARLOW: Your private webcam might be streaming in Russia and you'd have no idea.

Laurie Segall has the story.

LAURIE SEGALL, CNN TECH CORRESPONDENT: Hey there. Well imagine in a mouse click, a baby sleeping in his crib, a hospital room in Minneapolis. These private moments are being publicly streamed on the internet. A Russian web site is now displaying the footage from thousands of web cams worldwide. So what's the point of this? The point is to prove just how easy it is to turn on the webcam right inside your home.

And it doesn't stop there. They're able to actually turn on public cameras and devices like baby monitors connected to the web inside your home. If it sounds scary, it is. But here's what's more alarming. This isn't a hard-core hack. It's quite simple to do. The reason the hackers were able to stream the web cams of thousands of people around the world? It all comes down to passwords. A lot of the cameras connected to the internet that people buy have default passwords. And that is where you're vulnerable.

Now many of the default passwords for these types of devices are posted on internet forums for anyone to browse. I got to tell you there are a lot of hackers looking at these internet forums with these default passwords. One security researcher showed me just how easy the whole process is. Take a look.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

UNIDENTIFED MALE: It is a live shot of somebody's home. And there are many others out there like that.

SEGALL: You were able to actually turn on the camera on someone's computer within their home. Now we're looking at a person talking.

UNIDENTIFED MALE: Yes. Not only the camera but on a lot of them you can also get audio. People don't change the default password. So while they may not think people are looking at their home, there are people out there that are searching looking for the default user name and password which are publicly available.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SEGALL: I should mention Kyle is an ethical hacker. He wanted to do this to raise awareness. He actually asked his friend ahead of time if he could break in online. But he was able to do this within minutes, which is pretty eye-opening.

So what can you do? You can change the password on your webcam if it's set to default. We can also encourage manufacturers to prompt users to change that default password automatically. If you're very paranoid just put some tape over that webcam. Back to you.

HARLOW: I like that idea, Laurie. Thanks so much. CNN NEWSROOM continues at the top of the hour. SANJAY GUPTA M.D. starts right now.