Return to Transcripts main page

At This Hour

SC Investigators Examining Dash Cam Videos; SC NAACP Holds Press Conference; Iran Wants Sanctions Lifted Immediately; Day 2 of Jury Deliberations in Hernandez Trial; What Justifies Use of Deadly Force?; New Secret Service Accusation. Aired 11-11:30a ET

Aired April 09, 2015 - 11:00   ET

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

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: Hello, everyone. Great to see you today. I'm John Berman.

KATE BOLDUAN, CNN ANCHOR: And I'm Kate Bolduan. Thanks for joining us.

AT THIS HOUR, investigators are poring over a key piece of evidence in the shooting death of an unarmed black man by a South Carolina police officer. State investigators are examining dash cam video from the day Officer Michael Slager shot and killed Walter Scott.

[11:00:05] Slager has since been charged with murder and fired from the police department.

BERMAN: And we could get dash cam video any moment now. While we're waiting, the witness who took this video, Feidin Santana, is speaking out. This morning, he seemed to question claims from Officer Slager that there was a struggle over a taser that Walter Scott was trying to get his hands on.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

FEIDIN SANTANA, FILMED THE SHOOTING: When I saw the video, I saw that he was trying to get away from the taser. His reaction was just, you know, to get away of the taser.

MATT LAUER, NBC HOST: Was there a struggle over the taser that you saw? Were they fighting over it?

SANTANA: No. He never grabbed the taser of the police. He never grabbed the taser.

(END VIDEOC LIP)

BERMAN: Let's bring in Jason Carroll on the ground in North Charleston, South Carolina. Good morning, Jason. What's the latest?

JASON CARROLL, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, first of all, obviously Santana's video is going to be key to the investigations that are taking place here in South Carolina. There are multiple investigations that are taking place. You've got the FBI. You've got the criminal investigation going on as well. You've got the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division. That state agency that is conducting the investigation. That is the one that a lot of people here, John, are focusing on.

Just a few moments ago, I actually spoke to the spokesperson from that agency, called SLED for short. His name Thom Berry. And when I asked him about what sort of evidence they have, specifically the dash cam videos, because that seems to be a question in terms of how many dash cam videos are out there and what are on the videos? And when I spoke to Berry about that, he said there are multiple dash cam videos. He did confirm that. Unfortunately, he said in all likelihood most of those dash cam videos probably won't show that much, simply because the officers who responded, they responded, most of them, after the shooting took place.

So the key dash cam video that's in question obviously is the dash cam video from Officer Slager's car. So I asked him specifically about that. He said he had not seen that video as of yet. But he did tell me a few things. He did say that from what he knows, he says in all likelihood that video may not show that much either. He says it probably shows the initial stop. Both men in front of the car, likely shows that. It may not show the struggle, because it's his belief that that struggle took place a certain distance away from the car.

So in all likelihood, even Officer Slager's dash cam video will probably just show the initial stop, both men in front of that car, and then Berry believes both men then running away from the car. Still, it will still be an important piece of evidence in this investigation. I asked how long their investigation should take place. He said they're not going to put a timeline on it, not with a case as important as this one. They said they're not going to put a timeline on that. They're going to take their time to gather as much evidence as they can. Once they have all that evidence, it will then be turned over to the prosecutor's office to proceed from there. John.

BERMAN: Jason Carroll, as you said, even that initial moment, though, being pulled over for the broken taillight, even that might shed some new light on this. Jason Carroll for us in North Charleston in South Carolina, thanks so much.

BOLDUAN: And how it escalated to -- that point being shot at eight times. Let's dip in right now. Local NAACP in Charleston, South Carolina, holding a press event. Let's listen to what they have to say.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: -- all black men who died at hands of law enforcement officers in Charleston County, suffer with them. The many other black men who were shot or otherwise injured by law enforcement officers in Charleston County, who recovered physically but not -- but still struggle emotionally, suffer with them.

Mr. Scott's death shows what happens when racial profiling yields the worst possible result. And racial profiling is still chronic and egregious in many of Charleston County's law enforcement agencies and across South Carolina. In past five years, 209 police officers in our state have fired at suspects, but only a handful have been accused of doing so illegally, and none have been convicted.

It's time for a change. Our hope is that Mr. Scott's death, and the video that left no option but a murder charge, is the catalyst for that change. The Charleston branch of the NAACP will continue to fight for change. And we recommend two specific steps to promote that change. We urge our state legislators to stop dragging its feet on legislation proposed by Senator Marlon Kimpson and Representative Wendell Gilliard and enact a law requiring all law enforcement officers in South Carolina to wear body cameras, because, as Mr. Scott's case shows, videos don't lie.

[11:05:00] We also urge Governor Nikki Haley to advocate for that law so that black man can say, as she likes to say, it is a great day in South Carolina. We also urge United States Attorney William Nettles to not only look at Mr. Scott's case, but to work with the United States Department of Justice to review and thoroughly investigate the policies and practice of the North Charleston Police Department, the Charleston Police Departmentm and the Charleston County Sheriff's Department, especially when it comes to racial profiling and officer- involved shootings and physical altercations.

Body cameras and that thorough review will make it easy for many good law enforcement officers to do their job, lessen the chance that any other black men will be used for target practice, as Mr. Scott was, will hopefully make ours a safe and more just community, and will hopefully eliminate the need for press conferences like this one. Thank you. That's our statement.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Questions.

BOLDUAN: We're hearing right there from the South Carolina chapter of the NAACP, them making recommendations they would like to see happen, be put in place going forward to try to avoid this horrible situation from happening again. One thing they brought up is something that's definitely become a huge part of the conversation now, is the use of body cameras. They're calling for legislation for body cameras to be required by all law enforcement in South Carolina. We know in the city of North Charleston, the mayor said that due to a grant and an executive action, they're going to be putting that in place. That does take time. But that's going to be happening in the town where Walter Scott was killed.

BERMAN: We'll get back to North Charleston in a moment, following the developments there. But first we have some new developments this morning in the nuclear deal with Iran, maybe some new complications. Iran's President Hassan Rouhani says his nation with sign the deal only if economic sanctions are lifted the same day. The U.S. says the removal of any sanctions would have to come in phases.

BOLDUAN: This statement comes after weeks and months of negotiations between the United States, other world powers, and Iran. The framework agreement then was announced just last week. Senior international correspondent Nic Robertson, he's looking at all of this for us. Nic, didn't President Rouhani go as far as to say in his comments to press TV that all sanctions against the country needed to be lifted all at once? NIC ROBERTSON, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: And right at

the get-go, as soon as -- or before Iran committed anything on the ground. One of the things it's supposed to do is to give weapons -- rather inspectors access to facilities in the country. That's expected to be built in to the final agreement. So Iran is really wanting to get its cake before it's paid for it, if you will. Certainly that's not something that's going to be particularly easy for President Obama to sell.

What Rouhani has said today, President Rouhani in Iran, has said today is that come that final agreement, the 30th of June, he will only sign up to it if there's an agreement to lift all the sanctions. The Supreme Leader in Iran today said he didn't mind if the deal worked or the agreement didn't work, so that's not a ringing endorsement. Iran definitely for its own internal cell, putting out a very, very strong and tough line.

The reality is with sanctions, there are many, many different types of sanctions. Unilateral between some countries and Iran. Some countries are buying less oil. The United States asked them to do that -- Japan and Canada, for example. You also have U.N. sanctions, weapon sanctions on Iran. You have European Union sanctions on Iran. So there is an opportunity to phase down some sanctions and not others. But that doesn't sound like that's what Rouhani is talking about here right now. Kate, John.

BOLDUAN: I know you know it as well, there's a lot of politics, not only when it comes to this issue here in the United States, but a lot of politics in Iran as well, that they're speaking about when these leaders take to microphones. Nic Robertson, thanks so much, Nic.

Also happening right now for us, the second full day of deliberations is under way in the Aaron Hernandez murder trial deliberations. The jury has been behind closed doors for 10-1/2 hours at this point since Tuesday when they began in the case involving the former NFL star and the death of his friend Odin Lloyd.

BERMAN: Some potentially key requests from the jury. They asked for a list of the more than 400 exhibits in the case. They also asked for clarification regarding one of the weapons possession charges against Hernandez.

Want to bring in a person who's probably covered this case more closely than any other reporter, CNN's Susan Candiotti. Good morning, Susan.

SUSAN CANDIOTTI, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, John. It appears as though -- and gosh, it's almost close to 11 hours that they've been deliberating at this time -- but that they seem to be concentrating first of all on the two weapons charges first, that's a possibility, instead of the murder charges, either first degree premeditated murder or second degree murder.

And that's because of the notes, about four or five of them so far.

[11:10:00] One of them asking about weapons possession -- that's one of the gun charges that's before them -- wanting to know whether you have to have the intent to use a weapon, in this case a .45 caliber weapon as the murder weapon, or do you just have to be in possession of it?

So you see the kind of minutia that has to be addressed when juries are deliberating any case. They have been mainly going over a lot of housekeeping issues in the first couple of days, asking, as you said, for that laundry list of 440 exhibits. In fact, yesterday they were still asking for a laptop that had to have the wi-fi disabled so that they could view some of the many videotapes that has been shown to the jury. So you see the complications that are involved. John and Kate, there's no telling, of course, how long the deliberations could continue.

BERMAN: Some meticulous questioning, perhaps giving a sense that this jury wants to understand exactly what the instructions are, exactly how they will have to decide going forward. Susan Candiotti, thanks so much. Appreciate it.

BOLDUAN: Ahead AT THIS HOUR, Walter Scott was unarmed and shot five times in the back. His death at the hands of a police officer has pushed a critical question back into the questions. When is an officer justified using deadly force against a suspect who is running away? The answer is crucial to the pending murder case against Officer Michael Slager. That's next.

BERMAN: And what about his family? Well, they're speaking out, desperate for answers. We will speak to his brother about that video, how he got his hands on it so early. That's ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:15:14] BERMAN: We have some new questions from South Carolina surrounding the shooting of an unarmed black man by now former Officer Michael Slager. Big question now is how might Officer Slager's attorneys actually defend it?

BOLDUAN: Will they be able to show he was justified in shooting Walter Scott as Walter Scott ran away? When is the use of deadly force by an officer against a fleeing suspect justified? That's a key question here.

Legal Analyst Paul Callan is here, he's a former Homicide Prosecutor and current Criminal Defense Attorney. Tom Verni's here as well. Former NYPD detective and now a Law Enforcement Consultant. We got the legal view and the cop on the beat. This is important because it very much gets to the core of this pending case.

So, Paul, we could go real deep into history books and legal jargon. This kind of gets back to, as I found, a Supreme Court case in '85 that got to the key question of when is an officer justified in shooting a suspect who's fleeing. This is a burglary suspect that at Supreme Court case got to. This is a traffic stop that we are talking about here. What is the legal basis?

PAUL CALLAN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Up until 1985, the doctrine, called the fleeing felon doctrine, was that, if you committed a felony and the police were pursuing you, they could shoot you down if you tried to escape. It arose out of the middle ages when all cases were punishable by death. So, you could shoot somebody if they were a felon or suspected of being a felon.

In 1985, the Supreme Court said no, that's constitutional, it's unconstitutional to take someone's life away under those circumstances. And, unless the fleeing felon is a substantial risk to the life of the police officer or arguably to other people in the community, only then can you use deadly physical force to subdue them.

BERMAN: Tom, I want to get you in one second here and talk about how officers actually implement this, Paul, let me ask you to further explain this in a way that I think is pertinent to this. Obviously in Ferguson, Missouri, we saw Officer Darren Wilson did not face charges for his altercation with Michael Brown. He shot and killed a fleeing suspect. Here, in South Carolina, we see an officer facing charges immediately now that this video has been released. Explain to me the difference in these cases from a legal perspective.

CALLAN: Well, you know, I think it's a great question because Ferguson has sort of become emblematic of a police use of excessive force, particularly against African-Americans and people of color. But, when you look at the facts of Ferguson, radically different than the facts here. Originally people thought that the cop in Ferguson had shot Michael Brown in the back. He was fleeing at the time, and he wasn't endangering the officer. Even a Department of Justice investigation, that was done, confirmed that that wasn't true. In fact, he was shot -- Michael Brown was shot as he was approaching the officer. The officer said he felt threatened, and that there had been a struggle for his gun.

Now let's look in South Carolina. What we know now, and we don't know everything, but we know from that videotape that we've seen, that this man was shot in the back, five times I'm hearing. We haven't seen an autopsy report.

BOLDUAN: Not all of them in the back.

CALLAN: He's a good distance from the officer, doesn't seem to pose any kind of physical threat to the officer or anybody else at that point in time. So, it clearly looks, if you apply the fleeing felon doctrine, like an excessive use of force.

BOLDUAN: Apply that, then, to a cop on the street. How are police officers trained? How do you translate that legal framework to training a police officer when you are face down with a split-second decision?

TOM VERNI, FORMER NYPD DETECTIVE: Well, that's an interesting point that you just made because all of these incidents, including Ferguson, occurred in the matter of seconds. You're talking about a potential life changing circumstance.

BERMAN: Well, life-ending circumstances in both of the cases too. VERNI: Well, life-ending circumstances that can take place in a matter of seconds. That can be very well the life of the officer as well. And the officer's safety is always paramount. You know, if the officer becomes disabled or killed, the weapons and tools that they have in their utility belt become open for anybody, especially the perpetrator. So, but, in South Carolina, you know, clearly there were more options available to this officer. So, I think it's stunning everyone in the law enforcement community because he could have either chased after the guy, called for backup, could have gotten this guy another day. You know, really-

BOLDUAN: Right. It was a traffic stop.

BERMAN: And Tom, I mean, obviously, you know, you weren't there and you have more time to analyze it. But, did it look like the officer faced an imminent threat? Did it look like that man, Walter Scott, posed an imminent threat to the community as he was running away?

[ 11:19:38] VERNI: Well, what we also have to remember too is that he was initially stopped for traffic infraction, then found he was wanted on a warrant for unpaid child support. So, at that point he was under arrest. And I think, I'm assuming that's what the office relayed to him. That he was going to be under arrest. He couldn't let him go and he couldn't give him the summons. He was going to have to place him under arrest.

And at that point, they became some distance from the car stop to where they wound up, and where the video picks up, they're struggling, apparently, with a (INAUDIBLE) taser, or if the taser had been fired. There's a bit of a struggle and he takes off. Now, when he takes off, at that point again, was it necessary for him to turn around and fire five or six or seven consecutive shots?

BOLDUAN: (INAUDIBLE) right now. You would say no?

VERNI: I would have to say no. I just don't see, based on what we know. How that could be--

BERMAN: And this is exactly what his new attorneys, because his attorneys left the case. The new attorneys, for Michael Slager, now having to figure out how exactly how they're going to lay this out. Paul Callan, you know, Tom, thanks so much for being with us. Really.

Ahead for us AT THIS HOUR, the Secret Service, new issues, knew accusations. This time, a female agent is making accusations against a high ranking supervisor. What she is saying next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BOLDUAN: New embarrassing accusations coming up against the Secret Service today. The Washington Post is reporting a female employee, of the Secret Service, has accused a supervisor of assault and making unwanted sexual advances. This follows a series of mishaps already facing the agency.

BERMAN: Now, let's lay out the history here. There was a gunman firing a shot at the White House back in 2011, there was a White House fence jumper, that video, there was those officers driving through that active bomb investigation, charges said they had been drinking, there was a prostitution scandal. It goes on and on and on.

And joining us now with these new allegations, White House Correspondent Michelle Kosinski. Good morning, Michelle.

[11:24:53] MICHELLE KONSINSKI, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Hey, John. Right and these details came out in The Washington Post. The Secret Service isn't denying them, but, then again, they're really saying much about this because the Secret Service Director immediately spent this to the Inspector General's office, with the Department of Homeland Security, to fully investigate it.

But, the details that came out in the press were that this senior supervisor, within the security clearance area of the secret service, he decides who gets security clearance and who doesn't, was at an after-hours party celebrating him. He was getting a promotion. A woman co-worker, who was his subordinate, claims at the party he told her that he loved her, that he wanted to sleep with her and that later when they arrived back at the office, after this party, he tried to kiss her, grabbed her arms and that they scuffled. She then later reported it to the Secret Service and it escalated from there.

So, that's what's being claimed. He now though -- immediately the Secret Service says they took action. They put him on administrative leave, removed his security clearance, took away his gun and badge and now this whole thing is under investigation. But the Secret Service Director who was new and was tasked with cleaning up the Secret Service, he's been under scrutiny because of this. Because, as we know, in these past incidents, and there have been many of them, Congress, who has also investigated what's going on in the Secret Service, has said that there needs to be somebody from the outside.

So, this latest incident is just going to raise those same questions again of what is wrong, within the Secret Service, within the culture that these incidents that, in some cases, seem to be stranger fan fiction keep happening, and why isn't it being cleaned up sooner? Why hasn't someone come out to say there's a zero tolerance policy. Why hasn't the Secret Service Director answered certain questions that has Congress felt were important to answer and so on and so on. So, one more case for the Inspector General to investigate here.

BOLDUAN: Absolutely. And Michelle Kosinski at the White House for us. Michelle, thank you so much.

BERMAN: One more problematic party for the Secret Service, also perhaps.

BOLDUAN: Exactly. Ahead AT THIS HOUR, Walter Scott's brother will be joining us. We're going to get his reaction now that the only known eyewitness to his brother's death is speaking out.

[11:27:26]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)