Return to Transcripts main page

Legal View with Ashleigh Banfield

Russian Plane Crash. Aired 12-12:30p ET

Aired November 02, 2015 - 12:00   ET

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


(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:00:13] ANNOUNCER: This is CNN breaking news.

ASHLEIGH BANFIELD, CNN ANCHOR: Hello, everyone. I'm Ashleigh Banfield. Welcome to LEGAL VIEW.

Our breaking news, two days after the midair breakup of a Russian airliner over the Sinai Peninsula, the airline is ruling out technical problems and human error, but no other experts or government officials are anywhere near that definitive. Here is what we do know. The facts.

The flight data and cockpit voice recorders, commonly called the black boxes, from Metro Jet Flight 9268 are being analyzed in Cairo. They're said to be in pretty good shape, raising the hopes that this mystery will be solved, in fact, how and why the Airbus A-321 disappeared from radar shortly after reaching its cruising altitude the 33,000 feet. The airlines says the airplane slowed down and dropped in its final minutes, but there were no distress calls from the flight crew or anyone else on board.

Nothing turned up on the pre-flight safety checks either. All systems go. But, in 2001, the tale of this plane had an accident. It hit a runway while it was landing in Cairo. Well, that tail section was fixed and the airline says there were no signs of structural damage since that time.

Flight 9268 was carrying 224 people. From the resort town of Sharm el- Sheikh in Egypt to St. Petersburg, Russia. The remains of 144 victims have been flown back to St. Petersburg. That happening this morning. But more of them are due to land there tonight.

There was a claim from militants linked to ISIS that they were in fact the people who downed that airplane, but the Egyptian and the Russian governments are both discounting that. And this morning, the United States director of National Intelligence told a forum in Washington, D.C., that there is, quote, "no evidence," no direct evidence of terror, but he says he's not drawing any conclusions yet.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Does ISIS have the ability to shoot down an airliner?

JAMES CLAPPER, DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE: It's unlikely, but I wouldn't rule it out. We don't have any direct evidence of any terrorist involvement yet. ISIL, in a tweet, claimed responsibility for it and there is a very aggressive ISIL chapter in the Sinai, but we really don't know.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: My CNN colleague, Arwa Damon, is following the investigation. She is in nearby Cairo. And we're also joined by CNN justice correspondent Evan Perez, who's been working his sources on what the Americans believe may be afoot here.

Arwa, I want to begin with you, if I can, in Egypt. What's the latest from that country where the investigation is really in its top throes right now?

ARWA DAMON, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, a couple of things. First of all, an Egyptian military source that we spoke to is just as dismissive of those claims that the plane was shot down for the mere fact that he stated that the militant groups that operate in the Sinai, even though they have been in some pretty fierce clashes with Egyptian security forces, do not possess the capabilities to shoot down an airplane traveling at 31,000 feet max. They could potentially achieve - would be launching a shoulder-fired surface to air missile that would reach about 15,000 to 16,000 feet. A medical source we spoke to on the ground is saying that he helped process around 175 of these bodies and around 60 to 70 percent of them, according to him, were still intact, and none of them had significant burn wounds on them.

But, of course, all of this is really just lending itself to all that speculation about what is it then that did bring this plane down. If it wasn't shot down, what caused it to just drop out of the sky? Mechanical failure? Technical failure? An explosion on board perhaps? These are all different theories that are being put out there. But at this stage, no confirmation.

Now, the Russian state news agency did report quoting a Russian source that is part of the investigation in Egypt that so far none of the parts that they were looking at closely, the plane parts, contained any traces of explosives. There's still a lot of mysteries surrounding what it was that brought this plane down, Ashleigh.

BANFIELD: Arwa, if you could stand by for a moment. There is some intelligence coming in via our sources in the U.S. government, and Evan Perez has been working those.

[12:05:06] Evan, I know that they're citing a number of different investigative, you know, options to come up with the theories thus far. What are the Americans basing their knowledge on at this early stage?

EVAN PEREZ, CNN JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Well, they have a lot of access to a lot of information, actually, from the Egyptians and from the Russians. They've looked at radar. They've looked at satellites. They've looked at photos from the scene of the crash. We - they know they've seen images from there. We know that they've looked at some of the communications in that region. If you have terrorists who have carried out an attack like this, typically you get some kind of chatter. They've not seen any indication of that. They've reviewed all of this, including the passenger manifest, Ashleigh, at this point, and they've found no indications to support the idea of terrorists or even a missile brings it down.

I asked Nick Rasmussen, the head of - the director of the National Counterterrorism Center, what his impressions were of the claims of ISIS. Here's how he put it at this Defense One (ph) forum this morning.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

NICK RASMUSSEN, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL COUNTERTERRORISM CENTER: We've got nothing that we've seen in intelligence to corroborate a specific nexus to terrorist activity. You'll - you'll notice I said "at this point," because it's an unfolding picture. We're learning more every day. Just in the days since the tragedy over the weekend, we've already reached out and tried to collect as much intelligence information as we can.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PEREZ: And, Ashleigh, a few things that they are looking at still is, you know, they're going to look at the cargo. They're going to look at everybody who had access to this aircraft before it took off from Sharm el Sheikh on its way to St. Petersburg. There's still a lot of work to be done, but at this stage, there's really no indication of terrorism, Ashleigh.

BANFIELD: All right, Evan Perez, standby, if you will.

I want to bring in a couple of top aviation experts. David Soucie is a CNN safety analyst and former FAA investigator and author of "Why Planes Crash." Bob Baer is a CNN intelligence and security analyst and former CIA operative. And Richard Quest is CNN's aviation correspondent.

David Soucie, if I can begin with you, At this stage, and it is early, would the Americans have anybody actually on the ground getting the intelligence from the scene or would they be really relying on the things that Evan was just listing out the come up with their theories?

DAVID SOUCIE, CNN SAFETY ANALYST: If the Americans have someone on the scene, it's not because of this accident. it might be for some other investigations that are underway. But as far as the accident scene, there's no reason for the Americans to be there. They didn't manufacturer the airplane. They didn't have passengers on the airplane, nor did they manufacturer any part or operate any part of the airplane.

BANFIELD: So, Bob Baer, then weigh in on that, if you will, because Evan was very clear in listing out the different sources of information that the Americans are weighing, radar, satellite and photo images, signals intelligence communication, a review of the passenger manifest. And I just want to know from your vantage point if any of those make you feel very strongly and safely in the zone where you know at this early stage where we're going and where we're not going.

BOB BAER, CNN INTELLIGENCE AND SAFETY ANALYST: Ashleigh, I think it's - the word is inconclusive at this point. If the plane was brought down, you know, by ISIS, it would have been with a bomb. It was much too high for a surface to air missile that they have. They have (INAUDIBLE), which will only go about 11,000 feet. So I'd - I'd rule that out right away.

And advanced systems, I doubt they have. So if there's any terrorism involved, it was probably a bomb put on at Sharm el Sheikh Airport. The security isn't perfect there. It would be a fairly easy target. But what they're going to do is find residue from the fuel that was involved in the explosion. And we're just going to have to wait on that.

BANFIELD: And will - we'll know from the forensic - from the forensic analysis on the bodies, I would imagine, as well as on the debris.

But, Richard Quest, if you could come into this conversation with regard to the geography of where those all-important data recorders will be analyzed. Sometimes there's a lot of politics involved in this sort of thing, and we have the Russian and the Egyptian, and to my knowledge the studies, the investigations, those technical tests will be going on in Cairo.

RICHARD QUEST, CNN AVIATION CORRESPONDENT: Well, we don't know, Ashleigh, and that's one - it's - it's not a question of who does it, it's who's got the capability of doing it. We do not believe the Egyptians have the capability, the technical capability, which is just a straight - you know, that that's just the way we're told. The Russians do have the capability, but now it's whether the Egyptians ask the Russians to decode or to open up the boxes.

It's taking a bit longer than I would have thought. Quite often - I mean if you look back at the previous incidents, the boxes are found, they're either taken to the labs in the country of occurrence or they're flown to France, the U.K. or Australia and they are opened up and decoded or downloaded pretty quickly. It hasn't happened yet. And those boxes really are the key to this mystery, at least in the initial phase, because they're going to show exactly what was happening to the operating of the aircraft. And you're going to hear the cockpit crew what they were saying at the relevant moments.

[12:10:23] BANFIELD: Because certainly they weren't saying it, if you're to believe Metro Jet's officials, they weren't saying anything to anyone on the ground at this point.

David Soucie, just quickly about the five different airlines that have now very quickly made a policy decision not to fly anywhere near that pattern, not to fly over the Sinai, the Emirates Air, Air Arabia, Fly Dubai, Air France and Lufthansa. Did that surprise you or is that pretty much standard operating procedure at this time when you see something in a region like this?

SOUCIE: I'd say it's standing operating procedure post-MH-17. I don't think it's something we've seen before that. But it's a very good, precautionary measure on their part. The other thing to think about is they - all four or all five of those airlines actually have very good intelligence gathering capabilities of their own. They don't have to rely on the ICAO (ph) NOTAM (ph) reports. They don't have to rely on their individual information gathering. They have their own. So they may be making a decision based on information that we don't have, which brings up the point, why is that not being shared with the other airlines if they indeed do have additional information.

BANFIELD: Yes, that's a good point. In, fact, I want to dig down a little deeper on that. Richard Quest, Bob Baer, David Soucie, if you'll stay with me.

There are so many theories and so many questions that are still floating. Up next, as experts analyze the critical information from those so-called orange black boxes, the investigators are looking closely at the wreckage, those pieces themselves, for any kinds of forensic clues that might show malfunction or explosive residue, anything, that will lead them to the reason that plane came crashing down with everyone on board.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:16:09] BANFIELD: This just into CNN. President Obama has just signed the two-year budget bill. Did it in the Oval Office. And before he signed it, he gave a couple of remarks as well from the Oval Office. Take a look at this just from a short time ago.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Last week Democrats and Republicans came together to set up a responsible long term budget process. And what we now see is a budget that reflects our values, that grows our economy, creates jobs, keeps America safe. It's going to strengthen the middle class by investing in critical areas like education and job training, basic research. It keeps us safe by investing in our national security and making sure that our troops get what they need in order to keep us safe and perform all the outstanding duties that they do around the world. It protects our seniors by avoiding harmful cuts to Medicare and Social Security. And it's paid for in a responsible, balanced way. In part, for example, by making sure that large hedge funds and private equity firms pay what they owe in taxes, just like everybody else. And by locking in two years of funding, it should finally free us from the cycle of shutdown threats and last-minute fixes. It allows us to therefore plan for the future.

So I very much appreciate the work that the Democratic and response - Republican leaders did to get this to my desk. I think it is a signal of how Washington should work. And my hope is now that they build on this agreement with spending bills that also invest in America's priorities without getting side tracked by a whole bunch of ideological issues that have nothing to do with our budget. So this is just the first step between now and the middle of December before the Christmas break. The appropriators are going to have to do their job. They're going to have to come up with spending bills. But this provides them the guideposts and the baseline with which to do that and I'm confident that they can get it done on time and there's no better Christmas present for the American people because this will allow the kind of stability and will allow the economy to grow at a time when you've got a great weakness in economies around the world. This puts us on a responsible path and it makes sure that the American people are the beneficiaries.

So I very much appreciate their work. Let's keep it going. And with that, I'm going to sign it. There you go.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: There you go. One pen. That was quick. By the way, this is the very last budget bill that Mr. Obama is going to sign as president. You saw it here.

By the way, we are following the search for the answers into what appears to be the midair disintegration of a Russian airliner over the Sinai Peninsula in Egypt. This morning, U.S. intelligence officials discounted a claim of responsibility by groups linked to ISIS, but also said nothing can be ruled in or out at this early stage.

I want to get back to my panel, CNN safety analyst David Soucie, CNN intelligence and security analyst and former CIA operative Bob Baer, and CNN aviation correspondent Richard Quest. We are also joined now by CNN contributor and forensic scientist at John Jay College of Criminal Science, Lawrence Kobilinsky.

Dr. Kobilinsky, I'd like to get to you on this one. Clearly there will be ample forensics in the debris that is still in that very large debris field, as well as the bodies, which our Arwa Damon said she was able to gather information from a local official on the ground there, a medical official, that that person had seen about 60 to 70 percent of the bodies intact. That person had actually been able to look at 175 of these victims, and that not one of those victims had burns. And what does that tell you, Dr. Kobilinsky?

[12:20:24] LAWRENCE KOBILINSKY, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Well, it's very important because that typically is a question that we ask, was the jet on fire when this event occurred? It does appear the plane disintegrated in the air. That's why you have such a wide debris field that goes six square miles. Now, really the evidence has not yet come in on whether an explosive was involved. You've got to look at the bodies. You've got to look at the luggage. You've got to look at the plane. If there was a bomb on board, there will be no question, it will be determined by using some sophisticated analytical instrumentation. We probably don't have all of the information yet.

Now, the bodies are in - they're exposed to incredible trauma when that plane reaches terminal velocity and huts the ground. The forces are enormous. And that is why it is no surprise that some of the bodies are going to be found in body parts and it will take DNA analysis to put them all together again. It's a - it's a very gruesome scene. But we will then get more information on exactly how this catastrophic failure occurred.

BANFIELD: Richard Quest, if you could just jump in here. You know, I'm noticing "Aviation Week" magazine talks about two different plane breakups in the last few decades. One in 2002, China Air, one in 1988, Aloha Air. These are mid-air breakups that were due to structural failure. They're not that often. I mean this is a - this is a rare occurrence. It's - if this is in fact what happened, it doesn't happen often.

QUEST: Oh, it's very rare to have a catastrophic failure of the airframe. There was a plane in the 1950s, the Comet, the British Comet that had an entire series of these mid-air failures, but that was because it was in the early days of the jet aircraft and they hadn't gotten the pressurization fully understood as the plane expanded and contracted. But besides that, no, these were - it's very unusual.

Now, you've had cases, for instance, J.A.L., a Japanese airline, where a bad repair from a previous incident with the tail strike led to a rupture and the tail fell off. And you've had cases where metal fatigue has led to, there has been structural failures of the aircraft. But we know about these things now. And the C and the D checks and the bore (ph) scopes right into the very metal of the aircraft. They go right inside it to look for any form of metal fatigue, of any form of structural failure. So, yes, Ashleigh, if this is, then it's very unusual.

BANFIELD: David Soucie, this Airbus A-321 was built in 1997. It had clocked about 56,000 flight hours over the course of nearly 21,000 flights. I am a layperson and that sounds exhaustive for one aircraft. Is it? And, if not, how many aircraft, you know, flying in the United States are of this age and of that ilk?

SOUCIE: Well, there's quite a few, actually, but we do have extremely good maintenance systems for doing this. Richard mentioned - or it was mentioned before, the Aloha accident in 1998. That accident itself changed the way that we look at airplanes and their aging and how they age. So by looking at the x-rays - x-ray is a very important part of this too, during the d-checks (ph) and the c-checks (ph) that Richard was talk about. Their - the fuselage, the metal is actually looked at. All of the composites now are even looked at through x-ray to see if there's any fatigue fractures, that sort of thing. So these airplanes can go a long time because they have such a good detection method of detecting if a crack is started and if it's propagating itself and how to stop that.

BANFIELD: And, Bob Baer, just quickly, when Americans are trying to determine how they are going to travel the world, you know, it seems obvious, pick aircraft carriers that you understand or that you know. But, really, if you're looking at flying to Egypt, that's a highly touristed area. A lot of these places are highly touristed areas. Is this just a crap shoot to be flying to some of these zones?

BAER: No, you're adding to the risk going to the Sinai in Egypt out of an airplane because ISIS can take down an airplane with a surface to air missile on takeoff, below 11,000 feet. It's a true risk. Any war area, whether it's Ukraine or Iraq or Egypt, stay out of, don't fly over and you'll improve the likelihood of getting safely where you're going.

[12:25:10] BANFIELD: Richard Quest, Bob Baer, David Soucie and Larry Kobilinsky, all excellent analysis. Thank you all. I appreciate it.

Coming up next, the men, the women and, yes, the children. There were many children on that flight who were lost. Flight 9268 and the people on board, we're going to tell you this child's tragic story. This is the last picture taken of this toddler before that toddler boarded.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:29:46] BANFIELD: We mentioned 224 lives lost in the Metro Jet disaster in Egypt. That is every man, woman and child on board that plane. And among the youngest, if not the youngest, this little girl, Dorina Gromova (ph), 10 months old, photographed by her mom as she looked out the window at the St. Petersburg Airport before starting her family vacation in Egypt on October 15th. Dorina was one of 25 children who died on the return