Return to Transcripts main page

Crime and Justice With Ashleigh Banfield

Oklahoma Fugitive Killed in Shootout; Parents Inject Kids With Heroin; Cult Leader Charged With Abusing Six Sisters; Mom of Boy Who Died in Hot Car Takes Stand Against Father. Aired 8-9p ET

Aired November 01, 2016 - 20:00   ET

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


[20:00:00] ASHLEIGH BANFIELD, HLN HOST: Authorities come to the rescue in a house of horrors too gruesome even for Hollywood. And the victims, three

innocent little kids. A couple injects heroin into three young children so that they`ll fall asleep in a rat-infested home, the kids telling police

they call it "feel-good medicine."

Six young girls, all sisters and all allegedly abused by one vile monster, one even bearing him children, starting at age 12. Where were their

parents? Police say they were ones who served the kids up.

And the anguish of a mother pours out on the stand. Leanna Taylor says her husband destroyed her life when he let their beautiful boy, Cooper, die

painfully in a hot car.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

LEANNA TAYLOR, COOPER`S MOTHER: He destroyed my life! I didn`t know about (INAUDIBLE)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: How do you cross-examine a woman in that state?

Hello, everyone. I`m Ashleigh Banfield. Welcome. This is PRIMETIME JUSTICE.

And we got some breaking news just coming into our offices right now. Moments ago, the Oklahoma Highway Patrol released some unbelievable video,

and it`s all showing that deadly shoot-out with the man they called a dangerous murderer, Michael Vance.

We`ve been tracking this story for a week. You know the picture by now. This man, Michael Vance, on the run for a week. He was accused of shooting

several people, including three police officers, murdering two family members, butchering their bodies. Investigators say it was an ugly scene.

And wait until you see what it took to take him down. Here`s the dashcam video. On the bottom of your screen, it`s the officer who`s chasing after

Vance. And you`ll see him reach for a longarm, firing what seems like dozens of shots. On the top of your screen, that`s Vance speeding away

from the dashcam. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (INAUDIBLE)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What weapon is he shooting with? What is that, do you know?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (INAUDIBLE) never seen that (INAUDIBLE)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: (INAUDIBLE)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What weapon is he shooting with? What is that, do you know?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I`ve never seen (INAUDIBLE)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (INAUDIBLE)

(END AUDIO CLIP)

BANFIELD: So you just heard them say that the trooper was using an M-4 to shoot. Look at this highway shot from the helicopter. This is where you

really see this takedown, and it is remarkable.

By infrared, you can see the troopers chasing after Vance. But ultimately, what you can see is Vance ends up jumping out of his truck and putting it

in reverse, or it`s rolling back, one of the two. And he`s taking cover behind a rolling vehicle that`s going in reverse.

Watch this. This is something else. I mean, the view that they had, the way they saw this come to an end is nothing short of heroic in terms of

what these officers were going through.

This man was hellbent on as much destruction as he could possibly wreak on these people. He`s still moving forward, but this will come to a stop.

The helicopter will get the view. It`s not easy to spot, but you will see Michael Vance get out of that vehicle and he will look like a dark speck.

And you will see what appear to be tracers. You can see bullets being fired. He`s firing out the back of the vehicle.

But ultimately, you`re going to see him on the road himself. He gets a lot more brazen, firing behind him at the troopers who are giving chase.

Remember, the video you just saw out of one of those following troopers. Now take a peek. There you are.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (INAUDIBLE) outside the vehicle. You can see him advancing. You can see his bullet casings against the white background.

They`re flying off the -- they`re flying off the vehicle. (INAUDIBLE) grass. These are rifle shot distances. This is not a -- this is not

something for (ph) pistol.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: That`s an AK he`s holding, folks. This is an AK-47 that the police officer said he had while he was on the run. And there he is, down,

down and done. And that was the end of Michael Vance.

[20:05:00]But there are these three people as well, arrested, charged with aiding Michael Vance on that run. So Danny Roach, Reginald Moore and April

Harden are all facing multiple counts as accessory to felony murder. Those are very serious charges.

They`re accused of giving Vance medical treatment. They`re accused of giving Vance weapons and cover. So the story is not over, but Michael

Vance, he is. He`s over.

I want to you take to Washington state now. There is a community there that`s trying to figure out how something so horrible could actually be

real. And it is real, a house where a couple allegedly injected their three little children, age 6, 4 and 2, with heroin. Just let that sink in

for a moment. Ages 6, 4, 2, Mom and Dad inject their babies with heroin.

It happened in their home, allegedly, if you can really call this a home because it was absolutely rife with rat droppings and worse. There were

needles strewn about, heroin scattered all over the place, multiple people living there, strung out. There was a 2-year-old girl who had marks and

cuts and bruises, police say, consistent with heroin tracks -- 2 -- 2 years old! And there were track marks on all three kids.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Some of the statements they made were very discerning (ph) about how they would get "sleepy juice" to go to sleep and it was

injected to them by needle.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: They told the police -- and I`m going to use their terminology - - it was their feel-good medicine. Apparently, it was their bedtime ritual, as well.

Detective Ed Troyer is the spokesman for the Pierce County Sheriff`s Department. And Detective, I can only imagine that it was your colleagues

who ultimately had to make this discovery and go into that home and find these children in the condition that they were in. How bad was in it

there?

DET. ED TROYER, PIERCE CO. SHERIFF`S DEPT. (via telephone): Well, we were able to get ahold of this right away when we just first originally found

out that the house was in deplorable condition and the children weren`t being treated good. So we were able to get them out with our child

protective services.

And then through professional interviews, we started hearing the sleepy juice. So our detectives were assigned the case. We spent some good time

working it because it took a lot of lab tests and a lot of work to talk to kids that age to figure out what happened.

So we`re very lucky that we have specialists that got the truth out and got all the information. And then we were able to physically go out and

confirm and corroborate with evidence to back it up and get it to the prosecutor`s office.

BANFIELD: So that`s where I want to follow up because I`m looking at these pictures of these little children, and it is just deplorable to think that

this could happen, that anyone could do this to a child, let alone their own children.

But when kids say things and you say there`s evidence to back it up, when children say that they were getting needles with white powder made into

liquid and injected into them, what kind of evidence, physical evidence, medical evidence backed that up?

TROYER: Well, what we had was the fact that we actually found syringes and found the different types of items made to do exactly what they were doing

to the kids. And at age 6 and 4, you cannot make that stuff up. No matter what you`ve been watching on television, you can`t make that up.

Secondly, through physical tests, you can tell when the body has metabolized morphine or heroin at some point in their lives, and they came

back positive with that. So we actually had the physical science to back up what they told us and the actual items in our hands. So when we had all

three of those, the prosecutor went ahead and charged them with the crimes.

BANFIELD: I mean, it`s just repulsive that I`m telling this story tonight, Detective. I don`t -- I just -- every day, I think it can`t get worse.

And then there`s this. The kids from reports that I`ve read had what appear to be track marks. But then you can do hair follicle tests, as

well. There were three children, and the results were varied between all three, am I right?

TROYER: That`s correct. And we were able to talk to the kids and put them in a safe place and take our time and do this right. So we made sure we

got it all right and put it all together because, you know, the kids were so little and because the adults in this case were not talking to us. They

got attorneys. We knew we were going to have to put a good case together, and we weren`t under a big time crunch because the kids were in a safe

location and they were not going back. They are in a great place right now.

BANFIELD: They`re in a great place. They`ve been taken out of that house. Thank God for that. No child should ever be in a circumstance like that.

But it is a six-month period from the initial reports in that there was lice and squalor and rat droppings. Six months later, ultimately, they are

taken from that home because of the heroin crisis.

What happened in that six months? Were there follow-up visits? Why -- I mean, how could CPS not see that this was sort of the track they were on

and get them out of there sooner?

TROYER: They were out of there sooner. You have your timelines wrong. They were out of there way before that. We got them out of there right

away, and they were in foster homes when we came up with the heroin usage and went back...

[20:10:06]BANFIELD: So that the May...

(CROSSTALK)

BANFIELD: ... May 2015 to November 2015 -- look, the timeline I have is that the original reports came in with lice and rat droppings and squalor

May 2015, and it took until November 2015 to get them out of there. That`s, like, a six-month period.

TROYER: Oh, no. They`d been removed before.

BANFIELD: Are they ever going back? Are they ever going to go back to their parents?

TROYER: We hope that they never go back. I mean, now it`s in the judicial system`s hands. It`ll be up to the prosecutors and defense attorneys,

obviously, and the courts at this point. But we believe we have a good enough case working with CPS and our officers that they have all the

information that they never go back. Unfortunately, that`s not our decision to make at the end, but we pretty much assume with what we`re

looking at here and what we`ve done and what we`ve proven, they probably will never go back.

BANFIELD: And I just want to be absolutely crystal clear. The initial report on these kids living in terrible conditions comes in May 2015. What

was the date they were removed from the home?

TROYER: So what happened -- some of this is medically driven and through another agency, through Child Protective Services, who has the other

reports. But what happened was that the original reports come in about the squalor. Unfortunately, when you go into a place like that, it`s just a

matter of giving them some services and having them clean the mess up, and then they`re going to get their kids back. They`re going to get

visitation. I`m sure you`re aware of that.

And we`ve worked it all the way entirely through whole thing. As far as the actual date, we`d have to go through the court paperwork, but it was a

continuing process and it was never not being worked. You look at all the different dates and times that the labs were sent and the professional

child interviews were done because we have professional child interviewers that obtained this information and give it to the police. Then we got to

go back with search warrants and do more work to get the rest of it.

BANFIELD: Yes. But you mentioned that...

TROYER: So it took a long process to do it.

BANFIELD: ... much before -- much before November, right? Like, you said much before November, the kids were taken out.

TROYER: Yes.

BANFIELD: I just want to know...

TROYER: Correct.

BANFIELD: ... how it could get to a position and a situation where children are getting injected by their parents with heroin to make them

sleep if child protective services had been there a couple of times. When did they get taken out? When did...

(CROSSTALK)

TROYER: ... they`ve been taken out of the residence and they were taken out previous to (ph) the residence. The charging paper says that they were

moved from the residence, but there`s a lot more than what you`re reading in the charging papers. This investigation is probably 100 pages long when

you look at everything. You`re just looking at two pages.

But it was a continual investigation, continual removal with a whole bunch of different agencies that were on it the entire time.

BANFIELD: It`s just so incredibly sad and unbelievable for so many people across this country who hear the stories of heroin all the time and see

people passed out in their cars and passed out on the sidewalk. And then you see these three little babies, 6, 4, 2.

TROYER: Right. When you look at pictures on Facebook, though, you know, that`s -- that`s the narrative that people are trying to tell you what`s

really happening in their lives or what`s going on. You take away that facade and cover when we do our investigation. It`s not the photos that

you guys are probably seeing. I`ve seen those, and that`s not what the place was like.

BANFIELD: I tell you, Detective. I`m going to ask a specialist about this in a moment. When they gave that first injection, how dangerous was that?

How reckless was that? How potentially deadly was that for the kids? And then what about all those follow-up injections, if they did that? What are

the long-term effects for those kids?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[20:17:27]BANFIELD: How bad does it have to be? How bad for an addict does it have to be for you to make a decision to take a needle, put heroin

in it and stick it in your baby, 2-year-old baby and your 4-year-old baby and your 6-year-old baby? Because that is the story that we`re talking

about right now. I never thought I would deliver a story like this, I`ll be honest with you.

This happened near Tacoma, Washington. Ashley Willcott is a certified child welfare specialist (INAUDIBLE) in too many of these types of cases.

Dr. William Morrone is a forensic pathologist, as well as a medical examiner and toxicologist, and I`ve got questions for both of you.

If I can, Ashley, I`m going to begin with you. I`m still trying to get to the bottom of this whole idea that there`s a call (ph) with a squalor-style

lifestyle for these children. There`s lice. There`s rat droppings all over the house. CPS goes there, but they don`t end up being permanently

removed from the home for another six months or so. I get it. You can`t just take kids away from their parents if they live in a dirty area. But

this got to where they were being injected with heroin. How does that happen?

ASHLEY WILLCOTT, CERTIFIED CHILD WELFARE LAW SPECIALIST: Yes, Ashleigh. Good evening. So here`s the thing. When CPS goes in to investigate a

home, they have to identify, are these children at risk? And that is their first and foremost responsibility, to protect the safety of the children.

In this particular case, it does beg the question. Were these children at risk? Were there obvious signs these children are at risk? And what

disturbs me in this case are the facts, the facts that all three children had marks and bruises indicating that there had been injections and needles

had been used in all three children, just really, really horrific circumstances.

So ideally, when the system works well, children do not stay in this kind of state before being removed from the home.

BANFIELD: No.

WILLCOTT: They just don`t.

BANFIELD: And to be real clear, we don`t know at this point when the track marks were found, when the heroin evidence was found. It might have just

been a dirty, filthy, you know, den of disgust when they first saw them, but we don`t know if they knew about the heroin until much later.

But Dr. Morrone, how dangerous -- this is a stupid question, but it begs being asked in this case. How dangerous is to inject a child of 2 with any

amount of heroin? How deadly is it? How deadly could that first injection have been?

DR. WILLIAM MORRONE, FORENSIC PATHOLOGIST: In this society at this time, in this heroin epidemic, every single injection in that child was risking

that child`s life.

[20:20:02]That could have died -- any one of those three or all of them at the same time, they all could have died on every single injection based on

the heroin, the fentanyl and the car (ph) fentanyl that`s on the streets right now from a toxicology point of view.

BANFIELD: And for these children to have known this to be more of a pattern than just a one-time affair -- they called it their sleepy

medicine. They seemed to know it was a bedtime ritual. Is it possible that these kids were addicted? Is it possible after the first injection

they were addicted and that they might scream at these heroin addict parents, Give me my sleepy juice? Is it possible that that could have been

the scenario playing out?

MORRONE: Well, I don`t know that they would have recognized it as such. But if regular injections of heroin were made into these children and it

became a regular activity, if you took it away, if they didn`t get it back fast enough, they would have nausea, vomiting, panic attacks, insomnia,

cold profuse sweating and terrible abdominal pain. And how can a 4 or 6- year-old -- that is withdrawal.

BANFIELD: Yes. Yes. Dr. Morrone, real quickly. I`ve only got 30 seconds left. But what about the long-term effects? Will there be long-term

effects for these children if they`ve had multiple injections?

MORRONE: Well, every single injection affects brain, and these brains are developing. Developing brains cannot tolerate or repair as much as an

adult brain. This is a terrible thing.

BANFIELD: Unbelievable, just an unbelievable story. Thank you both.

Like I said, the hits keep coming. Six sisters -- six sisters, all kids, all allegedly sexually assaulted by the same man living in their house.

Were they actually gifts to him from their own parents?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[20:26:06]BANFIELD: Some stories make you wonder how any one person can be capable of such awful crimes. But this man, Lee Kaplan -- take a good

look. He faces 15 charges, including rape and sexual assault against six sisters, six children, six out of ten youngsters who were living in his

Pennsylvania home, 10 little girls, all sisters, living in his home. He`s charged with raping six of them. That`s what they were, children.

Apparently, he lived with them for years. One of the girls actually had two babies fathered by Lee Kaplan. We are still trying to get our heads

around what the parents of these 10 girls understood about him, what they knew about him, why they allowed their 10 girls to live with this man.

Apparently, they made arrangements for Kaplan to have their girls.

Court documents reveal some of the details. You`re going to have to bear with me. This is not pleasant. Victim number one was 12 years old the

first time Lee Kaplan had vaginal intercourse with her. Another victim said she was 14. Kaplan took her as his wife and then, quote,

"consummation was accomplished by Kaplan penetrating her front hole, as she said, with his private part."

Another victim said, according to the probable cause affidavit, quote, "When she was 10, 10 years old," Lee Kaplan had, quote, "sex with her for

the first time. She says he put his penis in her birth hole," end quote.

In all, 12 girls were found living with Kaplan. That`s a dozen possible victims, 12 girls. Prosecutors say Kaplan made the girls believe that he

was some kind of religious figure. The sisters are from Amish country and religion is a big part of daily life there. And here these young girls are

thrust into the arms of what some would agree, most would agree, I think almost everyone might agree is the devil if he`s, in fact, guilty of these

crimes.

This is such a complicated chart, I had to show you this, that the district attorney used it. Don`t bother reading it. I`m going to get it all to you

in a moment. I just want to you see what this looks like, what the commonwealth actually released in order to try make the flow chart make

sense for us. It`s a lot of victims to comprehend there, six boxes with a bunch of ugly uglies all inside.

But those six boxes, those six girls -- they`re not potentially the only potential victims here. Matthew Weintraub is the Bucks County district

attorney. He`s with me live.

Mr. District attorney, I don`t even know where to begin. I don`t know where you begin. How do you begin to prosecute a case like this?

MATTHEW WEINTRAUB, BUCKS COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY (via telephone): Well, Ashleigh, it obviously took a coordinated effort. It was -- really saddens

me and it sickens me that we have to prosecute this, but it doesn`t surprise me. Unfortunately, once you have a situation where one girl in a

household is molested, it often leads you to find out that many, if not all of the other young kids in the household were molested, and that was mostly

the case in this instance.

BANFIELD: OK. So that`s where my next question comes to. When the flow chart came out, there were the six girls all under the age of 18 when their

assaults happened. One of the girls is now 18th. She has two children by this man.

But there were 10 sisters all told, 10. That means four more sisters without charges attached to them. And then there`s, of course, the two

babies, which brings to us a total of 12 children. What about those four other sisters? Are there more charges coming down the pike for those

sisters, as well?

WEINTRAUB: I have to be circumspect, but I`ll say this. The investigation is ongoing, and we will let it take us wherever it leads us. The six

sisters that have come forward have gathered up their courage, probably the most courageous thing they`ve ever had to do. And if the younger ones come

forward, as well, we`ll be prepared for that, but we have to gain their trust first.

BANFIELD: How young are they?

[20:30:00] Because the ones we`ve got so far date as young as 8 years old, sex with 8-year-olds and telling them that this is the hole where you poop

comes out. This is the kind of language this man was allegedly using in order to anally rape an 8-year-old. What about these other four? Are they

younger?

WEINTRAUB: Yes. There is one young lady that`s 9. She`s fortunate. She lives in Lancaster, not in the home where the molestation took place. But

the other ones are even younger, age 7, age 5, and age 3. And then, there is progeny of Lee Kaplan, and raped by him, and they`re ages 3 and 1, all

girls.

BANFIELD: I can`t even imagine if the 3-year-old is a victim as well. His own child. But I have to ask you this because there is a second part of

this horrific story. And that is how those children, those ten siblings, those ten little girls, all sisters, ended up in a home with him.

The story that we`re getting is that he was offered the first victim as repayment for a financial debt. And if that`s true, it is hell. But how did

the rest of them end up being in the home with him as well? What is the story about the parents?

WEINTRAUB: I absolutely make no excuses for the parents and we can`t forgive them. Justice will be done to them. But my understanding is that he

was a cult-like figure to them. They literally worship him. He was able to brainwash them, in essence, compel them to have their daughters live with

him under the same roof.

BANFIELD: I guess I don`t care what their religious beliefs were because of those two parents offered up ten little girls of theirs, ten little sisters

to a violent rapist, that to me is felony rape. Call me crazy. But what kind of justice are you talking about for these parents?

WEINTRAUB: The parents have both been charged with endangering all of their children`s welfare.

BANFIELD: That`s it?

WEINTRAUB: They`re currently locked up in jail just like Lee Kaplan.

BANFIELD: But that`s it? Endangering the welfare. I mean, what about -- what about some kind of rape charge? I mean, accessory to rape? Something

else?

WEINTRAUB: The father is actually charged with conspiring to have his daughter raped by Lee Kaplan. The oldest daughter. We`ve not approached

that with the youngest ones because we have to go where the evidence leads and they have not -- they have not provided us with that type of evidence

that their parents were involved in the rapes.

BANFIELD: I am -- I don`t envy you, and the job that you have to do over the coming months and maybe years in order to serve out justice to these

people. But God bless you for doing the work that you do and thank you for talking to me about it.

WEINTRAUB: Thank you so much, Ashleigh. Have a good night.

BANFIELD: You too. I will try as well our viewers after having to sit through that. That`s really what`s happening. A tough job ahead for the

prosecution bringing those accusations that are so graphic, so hard to even think about. Now imagine that you are sitting in that jury box. Just

imagine it.

[20:35:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BANFIELD: Lee Kaplan is in a whole lot of trouble right now because he was older man living in a home with 10 little girls. Now, he`s facing 15 sex-

related charges regarding six of those little girls, maybe more, coming down the pipe too. And the details are disgusting.

Solomon Jones is the morning host for WURD Radio in Philadelphia. Solomon, how did this story go on for so long? How did this go on and on and on

until 10 little girls were exposed to this man?

SOLOMON JONES, MORNING HOST, WURD RADIO: Apparently, neighbors had already gone to police in lower South Hampton. Up to a year before to report just

this strange behavior by Kaplan, including the fact that he had acknowledged that he was taking care of several girls with their parents at

his home.

Police visited at least ones but officers said they didn`t have probable cause to get a warrant to enter the home so it wasn`t until a neighbor

complained in June to both County Children and Youth Services that the police finally got a warrant to go in because they found out that a girl in

there was pregnant.

BANFIELD: Probable cause. Ten little sisters and two little babies and one very frightening-looking man. Diana Aizman is a former prosecutor. Danny

Cevallos is a defense attorney and a CNN legal analyst, also comes from Philadelphia as well. Diana, sounds like a slam-dunk to me. Call me crazy.

But that man has two little babies and the mom had to be a baby herself. It is just open and shut, isn`t it?

DIANA AIZMAN, FORMER PROSECUTOR: You would think so, yes. Ultimately, what happens is the prosecutor will present the evidence in this case and it

will come down to the details. That`s what the jury will hear. When they hear details like that, they want to render a punishment.

They want to render a judgment that is in favor of the state. Especially when you have child victims like this. So it is not difficult to

emotionally inspire a jury to convict. The question is, is there proof beyond a reasonable doubt? It seems as though there`s plenty of forensic

evidence.

BANFIELD: When you have a baby with a baby, that`s kind of proof beyond reasonable doubt. Danny Cevallos, how do you defend something like that?

DANNY CEVALLOS, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: I was afraid you would ask that question. This is a really tough case to defend. This might be one of those cases

where you don`t look so much to the liability portion but possibly the sentencing side and make your client`s landing as soft as possible.

BANFIELD: There is no soft landing on this one.

CEVALLOS: Because there is no -- give him a shave, give him a hair cut. Hope for the best.

BANFIELD: Did you hear the D.A.?

CEVALLOS: And tell him to be nice. I -- I don`t know what else to tell you.

BANFIELD: The D.A. said those victims are as young as 6.

CEVALLOS: Yeah. In cases like this, the proof is relatively easy to make because you can simply look at the age of each person. And there is no more

proof of sexual contact than a child. So this is a case that does not bode well for the defense. Either on the liability side or the sentencing side.

[20:40:00] BANFIELD: Diana, what about the parents? I mean -- look, the dad now, an accessory because he is being called a potentially, a conspirator

to rape. Are they going to be in as much trouble as he will be in because these were their girls and they just shipped them off to this man.

AIZMAN: Yes, absolutely. I mean, it comes down to this. Were they accomplices and was there a conspiracy to commit these crime? If so, them

yes. They will be as liable as this particular defendant. And if they actually had knowledge of this, they`re also guilty of many other crimes

like child endangerment and all the other crimes that are associated with you doing horrible things to your own children, such as sending them to a

sexual predator to have them be abused.

BANFIELD: Solomon Jones, real quickly, just button this up for me. Let me know where are the girls. Are they okay? Do we know anything about them?

JONES: Yeah, the girls -- the girls are okay. They are with the authorities now. And the authorities still, trying to gain their trust. Trying to get

more of the girls to talk. But it`s gonna be apparently based on what the authorities are saying. It will be a slow process.

BANFIELD: Thank you all. Appreciate it. Did the mother of a toddler boy just to go to bath for the father directly involved in his excruciatingly

painful death?

[20:45:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BANFIELD: A crucial day in the trial of that father who left his 22-month- old boy Cooper in the car to die in temperature that raced past 100 degrees. Cooper`s mom. The ex-wife of defendant Justin Ross Harris. She

took the stand for a second day today.

The defense is hoping that what she says can paint a picture of perhaps a forgetful dad but a loving dad and not a murderous dad. But today, she

unloads quite a shocker, saying that he ruined her life. She also spoke of his infidelities, their intimacy issues, and a lot more too.

(START VIDEO CLIP)

LEANNA TAYLOR, EX-WIFE OF JUSTIN ROSS HARRIS: The problems we were having with the sexual dysfunction in our relationship. Low testosterone level,

the shots, he did gel, he did patches. His response was that it was pornography.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Were you aware he was using Craigslist during this time to set up sexual meetings with men and women?

TAYLOR: No. I did not.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: She knew something. She didn`t know other things. He certainly had a lot of sexual issues. He was involved in the child`s death and she is

grieving. You can understand why she would want Justin Ross Harris out of her life once and for all.

(START VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: How do you feel about your ex-husband?

TAYLOR: He ruined my life. He destroyed my life. I`m humiliated. I may never trust anybody again. The way that I did. If I never see him again

after this day, that`s fine.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: Despite all of this, if you step back and look at her testimony, the mother of this little dead toddler seemingly made efforts in court to

keep that father out of prison. And the question is why?

Natisha Lance, HLN senior producer. She has been in the courtroom everyday of the Justin Ross Harris trial. That`s the question. I think I asked you

yesterday too. She knew all about the sexting, she knew all these issues, and she still defends the guy that she says ruined my life. Why is she

doing this?

NATISHA LANCE, HLN SENIOR PRODUCER: Ashleigh, that last bit of sound that you played was what the jury was left with before she left the stand,

saying that Justin Ross Harris had ruined her life. The defense said early on in this case that if there was anybody who should hate Justin Ross

Harris, it is Leanna Harris.

But what we learned through her testimony is that she believes Justin Ross Harris was a good dad, that he loved Cooper, he would not never done

anything to harm him, and she believes that this was all an accident. And that`s what we`ve seen throughout her testimony.

BANFIELD: So Natisha, there was something else other than these beautiful pictures we`re seeing and Leanna crying on the stand. We also got a glimpse

into their financial picture. And that was that Justin was having trouble at work.

He didn`t get a job he wanted at Chick-Fil-A. He didn`t get a promotion that he wanted at the Home Depot where he was working. And somehow the

prosecutors are making a pretty big leap to say, if I didn`t have a child, life would be a lot easier. How are they doing that?

LANCE: They`re releasing his picture that Justin Ross Harris` life was spiraling out of control. And this had to do with a message that he had

sent to someone that said he was at his breaking point. And these were things that they also try to hit on with Leanna saying that she did know

that he was at his breaking point. But, yes, you`re right. He had applied for a job with Chick-Fil-A. He didn`t get the job.

She said that he was unfulfilled at work. He liked the work but he had been over for a promotion. And so he was a bit frustrated. They talked about her

job saying that she was working about 20 to 30 hours per week, but she wasn`t getting the hours that she wanted to be getting at that time. It

didn`t sound like they were having serious financial issues though.

BANFIELD: Okay, so something that Leanna did at the funeral of this beautiful little baby we`re seeing on the screen right now. It got a lot of

people flipped out. These are the things that she said at her own son`s funeral. Am I angry with Ross? Absolutely not. It has never crossed my

mind. Ross is and was and will be, if we have more children, a wonderful father.

Ross is a wonderful daddy and a leader for our children. I am happy to have a list of things my son will skip. His first heart break. I won`t have to

see that. Junior high and high school. I didn`t like it. Who to sit with at lunch those awkward middle school years?

He will not have to suffer through the death of his grandparents. He will not have to suffer through death of me and Ross. I miss him with all of my

heart. Would I bring him back? No. To bring him back into this broken world would be selfish. That had so many people asking questions about Leanna

Taylor, then Leanna Harris.

[20:50:00] Lawrence Zimmerman is her attorney. Mr. Zimmerman, thanks so much for being with us. I`m still so curious about who she is.

LAWRENCE ZIMMERMAN, LEANNA TAYLOR`S ATTORNEY: Exactly.

BANFIELD: . and who she has become. Here she is saying these odd things like, would I want my baby back, no. And then getting on the stand today

and saying, Ross ruined my life but he`s no murder. Help me understand where her head is?

ZIMMERMAN: Number one, Asheigh, this was not evidence in the trial whatsoever about what she said at the funeral. Secondly, she lost her

child. I don`t know how many people you know that have lost children who died in a car in such a tragic way. She was shell shocked.

She was emotional. And she had the police breathing down her neck, casting aspersions and suspicions and social media and media showing up at her

house. So she was in a very broken place herself. She is also very religious.

And so she made those comments because she was at a place in her life where things were very tragic and sad and that`s -- she is a very prayerful,

faith-based person. And she just said that.

You know, we`re trying to take snippet of someone`s life in the most tragic times and trying to project it out what kind of person they are. She`s a

caring person, she`s a loving mother, and she has a great heart.

BANFIELD: I think you make a really good point. Mr. Zimmerman, nobody can ever imagine what it is like to grief and everybody griefs differently.

People have been indicted because of the way they grieve. And it is not always right or not always fair. I will ask you this. It took about a year

and a half for Leanna to finally walk away and divorce Ross.

I`m wondering if you have insight. I know you worked with her on the divorce as well. Did she leave him because he is responsible for the death

of Cooper? Did she leave him because of his porn and sex fascinations and the cheating?

Or did she leave him because he is the reason all of that spotlight was cast on her? He is the reason people took those words from the funeral and

began to look askance at her. What was it? What finally made her decide, he is done, he ruined my life, I never want to see him again?

ZIMMERMAN: Well, again, Leanna was not going to divorce Ross because for whatever particular reason. She was not trying to do it to make him look

better for him or for her. Number one, remember, Ross has been in jail all this time. She was never able to have a private conversation about any of

these things she was hearing.

Every time she spoke to him, it is always recorded by the Sheriff`s Department and the District Attorney Office views all these videos. So she

couldn`t ask him all these questions. Did you do this? Why did you do this? Most people who go through a divorce or lose a child actually got to have a

conversation about with the person they`re trying to divorce.

So she had to process all this for a really long time. And once you got to the point where she felt comfortable that this man is not for me, after

hearing all these things, she finally decided on her timetable, anybody else`s, that she wanted to divorce him. That`s what she did.

Some people stay married for 30 years and there`s spousal abuse. So, I mean, she just -- took a year and a half. That`s not really long. Time goes

by really fast. Two years now since Cooper passed and the time has flown by.

BANFIELD: Yeah, I understand that. Hold on for a moment. I want to update our viewers on a story that we`re tracking tonight here on Primetime

Justice. Maybe it`s a good story born of a bad one. Because the survivor in this Stanford rape case has been named one of Glamour`s Magazine Women of

the Year. She is Emily Doe. It was a powerful letter that lit a fire against the rape culture in colleges and universities across the country.

She is still anonymous and this is what she wrote. She decided that this letter would come after a judge sentenced Brock Turner to just six months

in jail for the crimes that he committed. He just served three months of that six-month sentence. It prompted new state laws in California and

launch a recall movement against sentencing judge, Aaron Persky.

So I want to read for you. I think the most poignant part is actually the last line of her essay in Glamour Magazine right now. Victims are not

victims, not some fragile, sorrowful aftermath. Victims are survivors, and survivors are going to be doing a hell of a lot more than surviving.

[20:55:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BANFIELD: Leanna Taylor was Leanna Harris. She was married to Justin Ross Harris when he left Cooper Harris, their 2-year-old in the back of the car

to die in long, slow, and painful death. And now she gets on the stand and said, he ruined my life. Former prosecutor, Diana Aizman is here. Defense

attorney, Danny Cevallos is here as well.

Guys, I`m still trying to figure out whether she is helping anybody in this case at all. You ruined my life. I want to get as far away from you as I

can. I knew all about your sexting and your ugly sexual afflictions but you did this by accident. Diana, who is she helping?

AIZMAN: Ultimately, you know, it is not clear who she is helping. She kind of helps both sides at one point. But really what happened here is the

prosecutor has to prove motive. It is the only way that they can make it clear to this jury that it wasn`t an accident. And the only way that they

can do that is by bringing in personal facts from this particular witness.

BANFIELD: Danny, what do you think?

CEVALLOS: She is helping. This is a variation on the classic -- you know, you know, I don`t like my client. I don`t like this person. But, he did not

kill Professor Plum with a candlestick in the library, even though I would love for him to be guilty of something.

BANFIELD: Right.

CEVALLOS: This is a very -- this is a well known trick and it works very well in defense land.

BANFIELD: Well, we will continue to watch. That trial is not over yet. That sure is a star witness. Thank you so much, both of you, appreciate it.

Thank you for watching. We are going to see you right back here tomorrow night 8:00. This is PRIMETIME JUSTICE. Great having you here. Stay tuned.

"FORENSIC FILES" is next.

[21:00:00]

END