Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Former Prosecutor Wanted to Arrest Cosby; Feds Call for Nationwide Airbag Recall; Will Keystone Loss End Landrieu's Career?

Aired November 19, 2014 - 10:30   ET

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

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JANICE DICKINSON, FORMER MODEL: In my room he had given me wine and a pill. The next morning I woke up and I wasn't wearing my pajamas and I remember before I passed out that I had been sexually assaulted by this man. The last thing I remember was Bill Cosby in a patchwork robe dropping his robe and getting on top of me.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CAROL COSTELLO, CNN ANCHOR: Cosby has never been charged and has repeatedly denied such allegations. However, back in 2006 Cosby did settle with one of his accusers out of court for an undisclosed sum of money. A man by the name of Bruce Castor was the district attorney at the time. He says because Cosby's accuser did not go to the authorities for a year it ultimately hurt her case.

This morning, Castor discussed the lack of evidence and explained why there were no charges.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BRUCE CASTOR, FORMER MONTGOMERY COUNTY D.A.: I thought that Cosby had done something that was inappropriate. Whether it was illegal in the sense that I could prove it beyond a reasonable doubt became the next question and I didn't have that last piece. I wanted something else. I had no corroborating evidence. I couldn't do a search warrant. I couldn't look for hairs, fibers or anything that would corroborate because of the time delay.

And I was given some information about other potential victims but all of them were from far in the past and none of them had resulted in arrests. So I couldn't use even any stretch of the imagination what we call common scheme, plan, or design because there was nothing unique about it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COSTELLO: Let's talk about this with CNN commentator and legal analyst Mel Robbins; I'm also joined by HLN legal analyst Joey Jackson. Welcome to both of you.

JOEY JACKSON, HLN LEGAL ANALYST: Good morning -- Carol.

COSTELLO: Good morning. MEL ROBBINS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Great to see you.

COSTELLO: Nice to see you too.

So Joey, I want to start with you. Mr. Castor, was it virtually impossible for him not to file charges?

JACKSON: You know Carol, I wouldn't say impossible. What happens is prosecutors bring forward cases in the event that they feel they have enough evidence to prove the charge beyond a reasonable doubt. Now, what Mr. Castor was talking to and about was he was talking about the issue of physical evidence. And when you talk about physical evidence, of course, Carol that's strong because it's corroboration -- ok, so in the event that a woman is raped and she goes forward immediately you have maybe hair and fibers and other samples you can use but there's other evidence that's equally compelling and powerful Carol.

What am I speaking about? Often times when you have rape victim -- and many women are scared or uncomfortable to come forward immediately so they don't. There's really not anything majorly significant about a woman waiting and delaying. There are experts who can explain that in a court of law. But what they do also for corroboration is something called a recent outcry. What happened? In the event something horrible happens you tell a friend, you tell a family member and the D.A. will rely upon them to come forward and prove the case.

And finally, Carol, having done a case like this a year ago in Brooklyn County with no corroboration, the D.A. got a conviction on a ten-year-old allegation against my client. So these recent outcries could be very powerful if the D.A. pieces it together.

COSTELLO: But it's still a difficult road, Mel -- right? Because really what it boils down to is the dreaded he said/she said kind of case.

ROBBINS: You're absolutely right and so is Joey. He's also right in saying that look, if the witness is compelling and she's passionate and she's credible you can still bring that kind of case forward. And if a jury believes her beyond a reasonable doubt he'll get a conviction.

What's interesting is that the D.A. did say he found her credible, Carol and then he went on to say that what he was looking for is he would have loved to have been able to test her for the presence of some kind of drug in her system. Because what we're seeing here is a common pattern in all of these allegations. Every one of these women, including Dickinson who just came forward yesterday said they were drugged. If you're drugged, you might have presence of that drug in your blood, your urine, in your hair, in your fingernails.

So that's something that would be hugely compelling for a jury to hear. Not only that she said hey, wait a minute, this guy raped me, but he drugged me and then you have the physical evidence of that. Even if Cosby were to say, hey, it was consensual which is what a lot of defendants do when they're accused of rape, if you have that kind of evidence of drug in the system, it's game over.

But what I also found compelling about the interview this morning is he unequivocal. Mr. Castor wasn't saying he believed the witness in 2005. He said she had a great job, she was very credible, she lived in Canada that she explained why it took her a year which it does for a lot of victims to come forward, Carol.

COSTELLO: The other thing that strikes me about that is most of these allegations took place, what, 10, 20 years ago? And you really didn't think about someone putting a drug in your drink in those days. So is that something that prosecutors or police would automatically investigate, Joey?

JACKSON: You know what happens Carol is everything is on the table. When you're investigating these cases, whatever evidence you can glean could be important to your case but often times, as the prosecutor rightly said, Castor, it was too late in time and so they couldn't do the analysis and the test that Mel was speaking to.

But, again, that's where you rely upon other evidence. In terms of credibility, it's a very evasive and elusive thing. Because it's hard for me just as we sit here to judge an individual's credibility as you interview them. It needs to be subjected to cross-examination to see whether it's credible or not and that's why you often need corroboration. But that corroboration often comes in the person you say I can't believe this happened to me, what should I do about it? The D.A. calls them in and says hey, did you have a conversation? They say yes, the jury, you know what? It's very compelling to them.

COSTELLO: Now Mr. Castor also said that celebrity had absolutely nothing to do with this. That this woman was accusing Bill Cosby didn't sway him. Do you believe him?

ROBBINS: I don't believe him. And I don't believe him in this regard. I think that, like Joey was talking about, when prosecutors everyday across this country, men and women, are making these judgment calls they are looking at the facts of a case, they're checking their gut and saying "do I believe there was a crime that was committed here based on the decades of experience that I have?" And then they're asking that question "Can I prove this case beyond a reasonable doubt?"

And those are the things that you weigh in deciding whether or not you can bring a case. And so I think that celebrity didn't sway him in terms of his desire to -- his decision to not prosecute it. I do think it was one of the things that he considered in the balancing act of, well, who is a jury going to believe and can I prove this case when we're talking about a guy in 2005 like Bill Cosby where people are going to not want to believe it.

Interestingly, when we look at the case that we've all been discussing, Ferguson, the D.A. and the jury is making the same kind of call in terms of deciding is there proof here in a case like this. Which is why I think they took it to the grand jury so that the grand jury would weigh the case and say, ok, do we have probable cause to make an arrest? But district attorney's make these calls every single day. Do I believe these people and can I prove this case -- Carol and Joey?

COSTELLO: Right. Mel Robbins, Joey Jackson, thanks to both of you. I appreciate it.

JACKSON: Thank you, Carol. Take care, Mel.

COSTELLO: Still to come in the newsroom, air bags like this one are designed to save your life but for millions of Americans they could be a ticking time bomb. Are you in danger?

Rene Marsh is following that story for us this morning.

RENE MARSH, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Carol, millions of cars on the roads right now with potentially dangerous air bags inside. U.S. safety regulators, they are demanding a nationwide recall but the maker of the air bags, well, they are resisting. We'll tell you what you need to know on the other side of the break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COSTELLO: The feds are playing hard ball with air bag maker Takata. They're demanding it expand its recall to include millions more vehicles across the entire nation. But the Japanese company is balking, at least for now. Rene Marsh is following that story for us this morning. Good morning.

MARSH: Good morning, Carol.

You know, NHTSA is saying millions and millions of additional cars on the road right now may have potentially dangerous air bags inside. It wants to expand the recall for vehicles with the faulty Takata air bags once again. This time it's a nationwide recall.

Until now, all of the recalls were limited to hot and humid states, but we want to get to the focus here. The focus is on five automakers. We're talking about Ford, Honda, Chrysler, Mazda, and BMW. The graphic that you're looking at there, that's a total of all 10 of the auto makers who were involved in the previous recall.

Up until now, you know, the situation was nearly eight million vehicles have been recalled. As well as 10 auto makers because of these faulty air bags. You're looking at video there. The problem is the metal canister explodes and it shoots out metal, shrapnel at either the driver or the passenger inside of the vehicles -- Carol.

COSTELLO: And there's going to be a Senate hearing on this matter tomorrow. Can you tell us more about that?

MARSH: Right. Tomorrow we are going to see representatives from Takata as well as Honda and NHTSA all there on Capitol Hill to answer some very tough questions about who knew about these defects. When did they know about the defects? Was anything done to cover up these defects? They want to get to the bottom of why this delay? Why this delay in issuing the recall notices and letting drivers know that there are potential problems with it? I do want to point out one last thing. Takata, I've been in touch with the air bag manufacturer today and they are resisting this call for the national recall. They say that what is in place right now, which is focusing just on those hot and humid states, they believe that's sufficient. They don't believe that they need to fix all of the air bags for all of these vehicles across the country -- Carol.

COSTELLO: Rene Marsh reporting live for us -- thanks so much.

And I want to remind you, you can go to the nhtsa.gov Web site, enter your car's VIN number, then you'll be able to see if your car is part of the recall and if your car still needs to be repaired.

Still to come in the NEWSROOM, the Keystone Pipeline may live to fight another day in the upcoming Republican-controlled Senate, but can the same be said for the bill's biggest champion, Democrat Mary Landrieu? We'll talk about that next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COSTELLO: The defeat of the Keystone Pipeline in the Senate, at least for now, could also soon spell defeat for long time Louisiana Senator Mary Landrieu. Landrieu who is in a runoff next month to keep her job has staked her political fortunes to the bill's passage and her ability to make it happen. But now that her colleagues have blocked the bill, observers say this could be the end of her time in Washington. The "National Journal" says Democrats are giving up on Mary Landrieu. The "Washington Post" calls the bill's failure quote, "Mary Landrieu's final indignity" while the "Huffington Post" writes "Landrieu's Keystone XL Hail Mary falls short." Ouch.

Joining me now to talk more about this: CNN political commentator and Democratic strategist Maria Cardona, and former special assistant to President George W. Bush Ron Christie. Welcome to both of you.

MARIA CARDONA, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Thank you, Carol.

RON CHRISTIE, FORMER SPECIAL ASST. TO GEORGE W. BUSH: Hi, Carol.

COSTELLO: Thanks for being here. So Ron, you say this is an embarrassment to Mary Landrieu. She says she doesn't blame anyone but should she?

CHRISTIE: I think she should, Carol. I mean we talked about this last week, I called this the Mary Landrieu Preservation Act and she has really been lobbying her colleagues in the United States Senate, 41 Democrats voted against this. They voted against an effort in the last-ditch move to keep her in power and I think it shows that as the would have been chair of the Senate energy committee that she really doesn't have the power and the clout that she claims that she did to bring it home for Louisiana. So I think we've seen the last of Mary Landrieu.

COSTELLO: Perhaps more hurtful, and just to show the ugliness of the political game, Maria, the Democratic committee has pulled all the money out of the race in Louisiana. Democrats are abandoning Mary Landrieu, sure that she's going to lose. So they're sort of saying, yes, don't let the door hit you on the way out. Which is -- I mean, is that just politics? It's kind of sad. She's in the Senate for 18 years.

CARDONA: Well, exactly, Carol. And I think if there's one thing we've learned about Mary Landrieu is to never count her out. She is a tough cookie. She is smart, she has been behind the way that she is now.

COSTELLO: She's behind by 16 points -- Maria.

CARDONA: And anything can happen, Carol, in politics. You and I know that very well. And when you're talking about somebody like Mary Landrieu who is a fighter, who has a lot of allies back home in Louisiana, even as we speak, even in the oil and gas industry I think she can actually go back to her home state and talk about how if it wasn't for her leadership and if it wasn't for her focus on the importance of this issue for Louisiana it would never have been debated in the first place.

And, in fact, her liberal democratic Senate colleagues have said that on the floor that if it wasn't for her insistence on this, this never would have been debated in the first place. So I think it's a huge oversimplification to talk about how this is the one issue that could take Mary Landrieu to defeat because first of all a day is a lifetime in politics, anything can happen. She could turn this around. It's clearly a tough uphill battle but you never know what can happen.

COSTELLO: Ok so --

CHRISTIE: You know Carol --

COSTELLO: Go ahead.

CHRISTIE: The only thing I'd say to this is the most perhaps damaging blow came from North Dakota Senator Heidi Heitkamp yesterday when she said "It's taken more time to approve the Keystone Pipeline than it has to liberate Europe from Hitler." I think that really gives you a demonstration that the Democrats have had no interest in really moving this along and it's all been politics rather than getting people back to work.

CARDONA: That's something you cannot blame on Mary Landrieu because the process of approving the Keystone Pipeline is not in the Senate's hands, it's right now in the State Department, as it should be.

CHRISTIE: The United States House of Representatives and the Senate had the opportunity to vote on this and it's been held up by Harry Reid to protect President Obama, to protect him from --

CARDONA: But again, that's not a reflection on Senator Landrieu, Ron. So she can go back and talk about how she has been a huge defender of this project in her home state.

COSTELLO: Ok. So we know that come January, though, Republicans will control both houses of congress and I thought politico had an interesting take on that. Ron, I'll pose this question to you. Politico says "The Republican sweep marks the rise of the "hell no" liberals and perhaps the death of the "just say no" Republicans. Do you buy that?

CHRISTIE: I do, actually. I think with the emergence of people like Elizabeth Warren, the senator from Massachusetts who now has a seat at the leadership table for the Democratic incoming minority, I think it indicates the Democrats are going to band together to protect the green lobby, to protect those who would inhibit job growth in this country and move forward with a pro-growth agenda. And I think that the Democrats are soon going to find having a band of minority that decides they don't want to move legislation forward. It's going to be very, very difficult for them to work in a bipartisan manner.

COSTELLO: And Maria, just to bolster the argument that Ron just put forth, here's what Rhode Island Senator Sheldon Whitehouse said. He's a member of that so-called "hell no" caucus about what lies ahead. He said quote, asked if he could ever envision himself performing a Rand Paul style talking filibuster in the Republican Senate, Whitehouse of Rhode Island replied "Oh, of course, we'll have more tools in the minority than we had in the majority." Seriously.

CARDONA: Carol, what I think this underscores is that you're going to have now leaders in the Senate that are going to be fighting for the causes that they believe best represent the middle-class in this country, which, frankly, the "hell no" caucus from the Tea Party in the right has been able to block growth projects on and things that would actually help the middle class.

I've talked to a lot of these so-called liberal senators, Carol, and to their staff and they have no interest in becoming the poster people like the republicans have to be obstructionists. So will they stand up for causes where they believe the middle-class is being harmed? Absolutely. Does that mean that they're going to say no to everything simply because the Republicans bring it up? Absolutely not. They are ready to work for solutions to this country, which is exactly what our leaders should be doing.

COSTELLO: Well, we'll see come January. Maria Cardona, Ron Christie, thanks to both of you. I appreciate it.

CARDONA: Thank you, Carol.

CHRISTIE: Always a pleasure.

COSTELLO: I'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COSTELLO: A Texas pit bull apparently is terrified of going through doors. So how does he get into a room? Well, you might say by moon walking.

Jeanne Moos is on its trail.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) JEANNE MOOS, CNN SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT: What's a dog to do when it's scared to walk through a doorway?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Come on, Queso.

MOOS: This is the story of a pit bull who puts his fears behind him by going in backwards. His name is Queso, Spanish for cheese.

RHIANNON HAMAM, QUESOS' OWNER: Goofy silly weirdo Queso. So my husband and I were just like, what is he doing?

MOOS: Rihannon Hamam says when he moved into their new house in Austin, Texas their shelter dog Queso refused to go into any of the upstairs bedrooms except for theirs and that one he had to force himself to enter backwards.

HAMAM: He's come up with this little genius technique to overcome the fear and it works for him and it's awesome.

MOOS: He's being called a moon walking pit bull in the style of Michael Jackson.

Queso's owners don't think it's the doorway that scares him, they think it's the floor -- something about transitioning from the slippery hard wood to carpeting. But once he gets in, does he back out the door?

HAMAM: No. Going out the door, exiting the bedroom he's just fine. He goes straight. I can't explain it. Queso is a weirdo.

MOOS: A happy weirdo with tail wagging as he backs in. There's no hint of trauma involving doors or abuse in his past.

For his perseverance, we pronounce Queso the Rocky of pit bulls. Rocky knows a thing or two about jogging backwards and both boxer and pit bull shine at the top of the stairs.

MOOS: Jeanne Moos, CNN, New York.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

COSTELLO: Thanks for joining me today. I'm Carol Costello.

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