Return to Transcripts main page
Dr. Drew
New Developments In The Millionaire Murder Mystery; Prom Date Death, A Teen Is Choked, Her Boyfriend Is Charged And The Mother Is Arrested; A "Rolling Stone" Report About An Alleged Rape As Been Discredited
Aired March 24, 2015 - 21:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[21:00:09] DR. DREW PINSKY, HLN HOST OF "DR. DREW ON CALL" SHOW: Tonight, new developments in the millionaire murder mystery. Will Robert Durst live
long enough to be tried for killing his friend? And prom date death, a teen is choked, her boyfriend is charged and the mother is arrested.
Let us get started with "WTF," the most shocking story making the rounds on Twitter and Facebook. Millionaire murder suspect, Robert Durst, a
complicated dude. I want you to watch this video. Some of it comes from HBO`s "The Jinx." Have a look.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ROBERT DURST, MILLIONAIRE MURDER SUSPECT: Excuse me.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE SPEAKER: Can I have a name for the drink?
DURST: Bob. And, you got a tall Americano, right?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE SPEAKER: Right.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ATTY. DICK DEGUERIN, DURST`S CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: I like Bob. I have gotten to know him pretty well. And, he is actually bashful.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE INTERVIEWER: Has Mr. Durst ever talked to you about Kathie? She is beautiful.
ATTY. DEGUERIN: Come on now.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DURSTS: I do not remember the first time I slapped her, either.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ATTY. DEGUERIN: When he was arrested, he was carrying around with him -- keep in mind, this is 20 years after she disappeared -- pictures of their
wedding. I thought something was probably going to come down because of this damn T.V. show.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(BEGIN VIDEO CAPTION)
Bob`s microphone continues to record while he is in the bathroom.
(END VIDEO CAPTION)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DURST: You are right. This is the bathroom. There it is.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ATTY. DEGUERIN: Bob is being blamed for everything right now. He is an easy target.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PINSKY: Joining me is Sam Schacker, "Pop Triger" on Hulu!, Spirit, psychotherapist and Anahita Sedaghatfar, Anahitalive.com. Sam, big
development tonight involves the -- it centers around this missing girl in Vermont. Tell me about that.
SAMANTHA SCHACHER, HOST OF "POP TRIGGER" ON HULU.COM: That is right. We have learned a little bit more about that case, Dr. Drew, which dates back
to 1971, by the way. Her name was Lynne Schulze. She was an 18-year-old girl, a Vermont college student.
She was last seen at a bus stop right after she had been to a health food store owned by Robert Durst. It took six days for friends to call her
parents, who then reported her missing. Police today said that Durst is not a suspect, but they are investigating because of his proximity to Lynne
and because he is known to have committed, quote, "Nefarious acts in the past."
PINSKY: Anahita, if they do not find this girl`s body or the body of Karen Mitchell who vanished in 1997, can they prosecute him for one of these?
ANAHITA SEDAGHATFAR, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Absolutely. It has been done quite a few times, Dr. Drew. They can still file charges. They can still
prosecute. It does make it more difficult when you do not have the body but right now he is not even a person of interest and I want to talk about
that tape, that alleged confession that you just played in that package right there.
PINSKY: Yes. You bet.
SEDAGHATFAR: I definitely think that is going to come into evidence if this case -- the murder case in L.A. goes to trial. But the prosecution --
PINSKY: Anahita. Anahita.
SEDAGHATFAR: Yes.
PINSKY: It seems to me the reason this arrest was issued is because of that T.V. show and about -- and because of these alleged bathroom
confessions. And, all I see is a guy responding to auditory hallucinations. That is all I see there. How can they possibly consider
that a confession?
SEDAGHATFAR: And, that is exactly, Dr. Drew, what the defense is going to argue and that is why, in my opinion, the prosecution is going to need a
lot more evidence of that purported confession to get a conviction in this case because the defense is going to say, "This is T.V." Obviously, the
producers made edits to this to make it sound really exciting.
PINSKY: Of course. There are no rules. They can twist it any way they wish to make it tell any story they wish. They did a good television show.
Now, listen, I do not want to get critical at all of the D.A. in Los Angeles. They are a great group. But, do not you think it is a little
weird that 15 years they sit on this and then the day after this thing airs magically there is an arrest.
SEDAGHATFAR: Right. They are saying, "Yeah. This is not for rating. It just happen to happen like this." And, again, you are making great defense
arguments and that is why I think in order to prove murder, you are going to have to prove this beyond a reasonable doubt. And in my mind, Dr. Drew,
that envelope, the two envelopes with the matching handwriting --
PINSKY: Yes.
SEDAGHATFAR: -- and the misspelling of the word Beverly, in my mind, that is much more compelling evidence.
PINSKY: Yes, I agree.
SEDAGHATFAR: But, again, jurors are going to want to see a lot more than that.
PINSKY: And, Spirit, I have not talked to you about this case yet. But, I am a little weirded out by how people are running to condemn this guy. He
is a weird dude. He got psychotic features. I am sure he is insufferable as a person, but it does not make him a murderer. And, why do you think
people are jumping all over this?
SPIRIT CLANTON, PSYCHOTHERAPIST: Well, because they are buying into the makings of Hollywood, Dr. Drew. This has become now not about the murders
but about a man who was actually able to get away with it. And, unfortunately, they do not understand mental illness when they see this
guy.
So, they think this is a case of cat and mouse. Let us sit back with popcorn and watch all this happen. But this is real life and this is a
very serious situation all the way around.
PINSKY: You know, I am going to -- we are going to interview.
SCHACHER: No.
PINSKY: Hang on a second, Sam. We are going to interview a judge in a minute, who is involved in this case where he did admit he killed somebody
and then dismembered him. He says it was self-defense. It is a bizarre case. The judge was very disturbed by it.
But in the course of that hearing -- that trial, they discovered that, apparently, he is not allowed to see a psychiatrist or be diagnosed with
mental illness or he loses his inheritance. Remember, I kept saying there is something weird.
[21:05:07] He must be exerting his HIPPA privileges? Why we are not hearing about his -- He has a normal pressure hydrocephalus. He has a
ventriculoperitoneal shunt. He has active hallucinations. He has hostility and aggression. All these weird stuff. He has festinating gait
and Parkinsonian features. Nobody says anything about it.
It turns out, I bet you, according to that case he is not allowed because he will actually lose his inheritance. And, so, Spirit, this guy is
walking around with mental illness for 20 plus years. No wonder people see him as weird.
CLANTON: You are absolutely right. Not only would he lose the inheritance, Dr. Drew, but his wife have actually said that she would leave
him, allegedly, if he did get this help --
PINSKY: I heard this.
CLANTON: -- and if he was dropped from the will.
PINSKY: Is that -- that is the craziest thing I have ever heard of.
CLANTON: Money. Money.
PINSKY: I am having the Kim`s reaction -- It is money but --
SEDAGHATFAR: I am not quite sure.
SCHACHER: OK.
PINSKY: Well, Anahita, what do you mean you are not sure?
SEDAGHATFAR: I am not quite sure. I am not sure that is why he is more worried his inheritance. He is being charged with first-degree murder.
But, I did find it interesting that it was the sheriff`s office, the prosecution that went to the judge and said, "Look, he is mentally ill. He
is not competent. Let us move him to the mental health facility."
PINSKY: Yes. There is only two reasons. Only two reasons that happens.
SEDAGHATFAR: I think it was insanity. I think it was a defense well- thought out strategy. We do not know what that is yet.
PINSKY: Wait a minute.
CLANTON: No.
PINSKY: Wait, Anahita, to have the sheriff`s lawyer go to the court and ask to please have him move? Why would the sheriff`s lawyer be involved
with the defense?
SEDAGHATFAR: No. I mean it was the defense strategy to argue against mental illness. I am not quite sure it really hinges on that inheritance.
PINSKY: I see. I see.
SEDAGHATFAR: I think the defense knows what it is doing and they do not want to take that route for whatever reason they may have.
PINSKY: I see. I get it. Well, unless it is his thing about the inheritance. But, Sam, there is only two reasons the sheriff goes to the
judge and asks -- first of all, they have to meet the criteria for mental illness or you cannot admit to a place to a licensed facility. You cannot
dot it. So, he has to have mental illness by definition. That is number one.
Number two, there is only two reasons I have ever seen the sheriffs ask for that and that is active suicideology and the other is playing with their
instrument. Some psychotic patients do them. And the judge, who we are going to talk to in a few minutes, tells us that
is all this guy ever talked about. He talks a lot about that stuff. And, that has been my experience with patients just like this.
SCHACHER: OK. I definitely agree that he definitely has some sort of mental illness. I have said that from the beginning. I think we can all
agree with his odd behaviors. However, Dr. Drew, he knows the difference between right and wrong. I am sick and tired of people using this
documentary as if --
PINSKY: I have not said that, yet.
SCHACHER: As other people have --
PINSKY: I have not said yet that he is insane.
CLANTON: Neither did I. I never said that.
SCHACHER: Can I finish my point, please? OK?
PINSKY: No. No, because the point is wrong. We did not say -- none of us said anything about insanity as a defense. None of us. We are just saying
--
SCHACHER: Let me finish my point, Dr. Drew. OK? OK?
PINSKY: Go ahead.
SCHACHER: So, first of all, you have this television show. OK? I have not even seen the Kelvin show, but I have seen all the reports. I have
read all the circumstantial evidence.
There is so much circumstantial evidence that is pointing at this guy as the killer, OK? And, first of all, his medical condition now is not
representative of what his condition was 40 years ago when his wife went missing.
PINSKY: Right. Yes.
SCHACHER: Second of all, Asperger`s syndrome. That does not mean that, that would make him a killer or not make him a killer. Let us look at the
things that he has done. He has beat his wife. She is so fear for her life. She writes on journal, "If I go missing, guess who it is? It is my
husband."
PINSKY: Yes.
SCHACHER: Then we have this missing neighbor. He admits he killed and dismembered this neighbor.
PINSKY: Yes.
SCHACHER: If he was trying to be an innocent person or believed that he was innocent or if he was not in his right mind, why does he hide out? Why
does he go out to try and flee the country with $100,000 cash? I think he also tries to amplify his odd behavior, so he can gain sympathy from people
like you and Spirit and the jury.
CLANTON: Wait --
PINSKY: None of --
CLANTON: -- He gets no sympathy from me.
SEDAGHATFAR: Dr. Drew --
PINSKY: Yes, me neither. Me neither.
CLANTON: So, you have taken it to a whole different level there.
SCHACHER: I think he is an animal.
PINSKY: Yes. I did not say --
SCHACHER: I think he is an animal.
PINSKY: We did not say -- Yes, we did not say anything about whether he did or did not commit murder.
CLANTON: Exactly.
PINSKY: We are saying it is bizarre. We are saying it is bizarre that this is not being talked about honestly. That is my constant, constant
refrain, is that this is not being looked at -- we do not hear the story here. This is not an entitled narcissist.
This is a guy with a tube going from his ventrical in his brain to his abdomen to drain the fluid out because the pressure is too high in his
brain. That is a fact. It is not being discussed. It is a guy who responds to auditory hallucinations.
Why is this being discussed. It is all I am asking. Now, in fact, any of esophogeal cancer, supposedly, also not being discussed. If he was
operated on for esophageal cancer with a knife, his probability of living five years is very low.
If he was operated on with an endoscope, he might do OK. But none of this is being discussed. It is bizarre. All we have is the sheriff putting him
in a facility for a long-standing mental illness, which he is not copping to.
[21:10:00] And, Spirit and I think it has something to do with this agreement, because his wife did not want him to talk about it. His family
do not want to talk about it. And, it looks to me like some somebody has been walking around in trouble for a long time. And maybe that is why he
killed somebody, because nobody came to his aid and have to treat him early. I do not know.
Next up, I have the judge in the dismemberment case. She is here. She says he is not mentally ill, calling his behavior strange and in act.
And, later, a son is accused of calling his mother, and not 911, when his prom date dies. Back after this.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PINSKY: I have a real issue with how this case has been reported in the press. First of all, somebody is arrested because of a T.V. movie. This
guy is hearing voices and responding to them. He had brain surgery. He had Esophogeal cancer, does any of that psychological?
Does any of that have to do with being entitled a narcissistic? What I am saying is, let us stop with looking at this thing on television and not
understanding what we are looking at. It is driving me out of my mind.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[21:15:04] PINSKY: Back with Sam, Spirit and Anahita. If he goes to trial, will Robert Durst be able to win over yet another jury? Joining us,
I got Judge Susan Criss from Durst`s 2003 trial. He admitted he cut up his neighbor, which is --
No regular person can get their head around that, yet he was acquitted of murder. Judge Criss, at the time of the 2003 trial, did you have any sense
or did you believe maybe at the beginning of the trial that he was mentally ill?
SUSAN CRISS, JUDGE FROM ROBERT DURST`S TRIAL: Before the trial started when we were sort of in the jury selection process, I thought he might be
mentally ill.
PINSKY: And now he has all of these neurological problems. I am looking at a picture of him now. For my viewers, I am going to say, you see that
scar right there in front? That is where they put the shunt in. You see that lump under his scalp?
That is a plastic tube that runs from inside his brain down the back of his neck actually into his abdomen to drain cerebral spinal fluid. And, that
causes all sorts of bizarre behaviors. Was any of that evident back then?
CRISS: That was not part of his mental health history back then. That is all things that have happened since.
PINSKY: And what about this business of him not being able to talk about having any sort of psychiatric problem or he loses his inheritance. Is
that factual or just a rumor?
CRISS: No, that was something that was discussed in the tapes when he was in Pennsylvania. He and his wife were recorded speaking and they knew they
were being recorded. And, they were discussing the fact that she did not want him to uses insanity as his defense or to be examined by a
psychiatrist because the trust that the Durst family had would have had a provision that would cut him out if he were ever to be found to be insane
or incompetent in a court of law.
PINSKY: Anahita, I want to go to you because you said you doubted that and here Judge Criss is saying there was and no one has questioned it since.
What do you mean, you say about that?
SDEDAGHATFAR: I was saying maybe back then. But at this point in time, I am not quite sure that is why they are not addressing the mental illness.
PINSKY: I see.
SEDAGHATFAR: And, remember, ultimately it is up to the defendant himself to decide what the defense has presented in the case. It could be that his
attorneys are telling him that we should go with mental illness defense in his case, but he himself does not want that.
PINSKY: Got it. Got it. Well, maybe remnants of this or maybe his family had a weird bias and that is why they put it in the will.
SEDAGHATFAR: Perhaps.
PINSKY: Who knows.
SEDAGHATFAR: Who knows.
PINSKY: Judge Chriss, this case got deep under your skin, did not it? Can you tell us a little bit about how it has affected your life.
CRISS: Well, this is one of those most fascinating case that we will all ever experience. Especially after seeing. I mean it was the most
fascinating for me, but I think the entire country agrees with me. And, especially after seeing the "The Jinx," Robert himself is fascinating, the
facts of the case are fascinating. We could just talk about this for days. It is just beyond belief.
PINSKY: And, you actually -- beyond belief is true. I think that is why we keep talking about it. You actually ran into him in 2005 after the
trial and he was sort of non plus, is that correct? But, then he left you a present?
CRISS: Well, he was very startled to see me. He was very friendly, but he was quite startled to see me. But, I did not know he was violating his
parole and he probably thought that he was busted because I saw him.
PINSKY: And he was where he was not supposed to be, right?
CRISSL Right.
PINSKY: He was -- yes. And, then he left you a cat head?
CRISS: Well, that was after I found out he violating his parole, a severed cat head was found right on the sidewalk leading to my front door,
perfectly severed, clean cut, no body fluid, no blood left life there for me. It laid out there as if it were a message.
PINSKY: And was there anything about the way he vivisected and the way he -- this is going to be a terrible question but it just occurs to me, and
the way he cut up his neighbor?
CRISS: Yes. I mean, the person who cut out Morris Black knew what they were doing, knew what tool to use for what bone and what muscle and knew to
use a different tool for the head versus the limb versus the torso and had done it before.
That was the testimony and that was clearly what you would surmise from looking at those pictures. Looking at this cat that was taken to a vet,
the vet said it was done by a human. Same thing, perfectly clean, not a body fluid, not a hair out of place -- very, very clean.
PINSKY: And, so it was not as though some animal had torn the cat apart. And, Samantha, he had dogs that disappeared mysteriously, too, right?
SCHACHER: Yes. That was actually brought up by his younger brother, Douglas, Dr. Drew. In an interview just this past January, where Douglas
recalled the death of Robert VII, Alaskan malamute dogs in the months just before Durst`s wife Kathie disappeared.
He said, quote, "They all died mysteriously of different things within six months of his owning them. All of them named Igor. We do not know what
happened to their bodies. In retrospect, I now believed he was practicing killing and disposing his wife with those dogs. That is his younger
brother saying that.
[21:20:10] PINSKY: I get a weird -- Anahita, a weird feeling when I hear this stuff. I mean it is just so -- it is so stunning when you hear the --
some of the circumstances around this case. It does not make me any less clear on what is going on or any more clear because I do not have all the
facts and it is very frustrating. But what do you think about what we have heard so far?
SEDAGHATFAR: Well, I have a question for the judge if she is still with us.
PINSKY: Please. She is there. She is with us. Go ahead.
SEDAGHATFAR: Right. What do you attribute the acquittal to? Do you think it was just a matter of having a great defense team? Did you think that he
himself was believable? Why do you think he was acquitted in that case?
CRISS: I did not think that he was believable, but I think that there were a couple of factors. I think the defense -- they do a great job, they are
awesome, but it was more of the fact that the state dropped the ball. I think the prosecutor came in here.
They are thinking, they had a lay down simply because -- which is what we call a case you cannot lose, simply because of the gruesomeness and the
bizarre facts, the fact that he cut the body up, I think they thought that they had it won already.
They took it for granted and they did not prepare. And, then, I have a suspicion that some of the jurors, perhaps, had motives other than looking
for the truth and justice and looking at that verdict.
SCHACHER: Wow.
SEDAGHATFAR: Oh, wow.
PINSKY: What do you mean by that?
CRISS: Well, this is a very, very sensational high profile case. It was very clear that we -- all over the country there and this was obviously one
of those O.J.-type cases, where the jurors could actually get their own 15 minutes of fame when it was over and you have one of the richest persons in
the country there as a defendant. And, so, not all, but some of them had hopes for gain when it was done.
PINSKY: And, it is interesting to me that a lot of people that have come in contact with this guy end up being quite paranoid about him. He carried
a gun. His brother carried a gun. I mean he makes you feel very unsettled, does not it?
CRISS: Yes.
PINSKY: Yes. Well, judge, I appreciate you joining us. I really do. Thank you. I still think this case is very confusing. I wish the defense
or somebody would let us discuss it more realistically, so we can understand where he was at back then.
Sam is absolutely right. We do not know what his mindset was back then, what his psychiatric condition was. More clarity about what there is now.
Based on what they have told, you have to wonder, and what I see there with his shunt and whatnot, you have to wonder if this guy is going to survive
the next five years.
I have a suspicion he might not. Again, it is complicated from a defense standpoint, why they would be so obscure about all this, but I do not like
that people psychologizing about something that is clearly at least partially if not to a large extent, neurobiological. Do not, everybody, be
an armchair psychologist on this one. This is far more complicated than the average bear.
Next up, prom night, drugs and death. You will not believe what a mother and son are accused of doing. And, later, a "Rolling Stone" report about
an alleged rape as been discredited. What is next for the accuser? We are back after this.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
[21:27:09] UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE REPORTER: Eddie Hererra is facing assault charges in connection with the death of his prom date. He told
investigator, she died after a night of drinking. And, the choking marks on her neck were from a consensual sex act. Now, his mother is behind
bars, too, accused of supplying the couple with drugs and alcohol.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PINSKY: Back with our Behavior Bureau. Sam, Spirit and Anahita, the mom allegedly provided the hotel room, the whiskey, the Vicodin to her under-
aged son and his girlfriend. What could possibly go wrong with that? Sam, is there any more of this story? Is this just a mom trying to be cool?
SCHACHER: I think this is a mom trying to be cool, who is also a really crappy person, Dr. Drew, OK? I mean if she is supplying drugs and hotel
rooms and alcohol to her teen, can you imagine what other types of behaviors this kid had witnessed through all the years that he has grown up
with this mother.
I mean look at the behavior after the fact. He, the son, he did not call the police when he discovered his girlfriend was dead. He calls his
mother, and then the mother comes over. They dress her and then they call the police. So, it is the behavior afterwards that I find highly
suspicious.
PINSKY: Bizarre. And, Spirit, how many kids do you have?
CLANTON: Five.
PINSKY: Five kids, everybody.
SCHACHER: Wow.
(LAUGHING)
PINSKY: And, what is the age range? Yes, God bless you. God bless you, God bless you. What age range?
CLANTON: My oldest is 18. My youngest is 4.
PINSKY: All right. On what planet -- a planet without an atmosphere would you imagine giving your 18-year-old whiskey, and vicodin and a prom hotel?
CLANTON: Never.
PINSKY: Is there any solar system, any universe where that could happen to you?
CLANTON: Look, he is lucky if he gets to go to prom and that is because I know some of the things that happen at prom. You would never think that a
parent would do this. But, Dr. Drew, this is the problem when parents are trying to be cool.
They are trying to be their kids` friend and they are thinking this is prom, I am going to live vicariously through you and give you the best time
of your life that I probably did not have in high school.
And, unfortunately, what happens is, instead of being the responsible party to make sure that everything goes according so these two can graduate and
go on to live their adult lives instead, now this young lady is dead and mom is trying to cover it up to protect her son.
PINSKY: Tragedy.
SCHACHER: Yes.
PINSKY: And how about the other parent? Listen, everybody, you should not necessarily trust other parents. But lots of parents have terrible
judgment and they want to be cool. Anahita, why not murder or manslaughter for the boy or for the mom?
SEDAGHATFAR: A lot of people are asking that question and I suspect it is because the D.A. could not find enough evidence to go after him on a murder
charge because we know that he admitted to choking her. There is evidence that her neck was injured, but there is no evidence that that is what led
to her death.
There was three times the amount of legal limit of alcohol in her system. There were drugs in her system. It could be that she had an O.D`d and that
was the cause if her death. So, clearly they just did not think they have the evidence to prove the case.
[21:30:06] PINSKY: Why so long in the charging? The mom took the liquor store. The mom gave him the Vicodin. The mom got the hotel room. Offered
apparently to sell Jackie more the pills. And, I do not know how they know that, that is kind of interesting to me, but why did they take so long to
charge her?
SEDAGHATFAR: They probably had to wait until they gathered enough evidence. This was kind of a complicated case and I know it took some time
for the autopsy report to come out, and that is the other thing. The autopsy stated the cause of death is inconclusive.
PINSKY: Inconclusive, but she had deep hemorrhaging on her neck. I mean, to cause a deep hemorrhage in the muscle of the neck, you really have to
choke somebody. Now, that does not necessarily mean that she died by choking, because they were both wasted, also.
She had a very high level of alcohol. She had hydrocodone. I am certain, he did, too. It does not mean necessarily that he killed her with the
choking. It is possible that she aspirated during the night or stopped breathing. There are other things that can happened.
As Sam said, the morning after the prom, when Eddie could not wake Jackie up, he called the mother, not 911. She dressed Jackie`s body. She called
the hotel desk for medical help. You know, this is a bizarre behavior, at best. And, as I have already said, hemorrhaging around the neck,
hydrocodone in her system, blood alcohol content 0.21. We do not know whether it was overdose.
My question here is, can you really, Anahita, hold somebody responsible when there is so many questions here and the situation -- I mean,
responsible for murder, really, can you hold them responsible for murder? You could like to, but I am not sure you can.
SEDAGHATFAR: I do not think they can and that is clearly why the D.A.is not charging him with a murder crime right here. They believe that it was
an assault again. There was evidence to show that there was injury to her neck.
He confessed that he grabbed her. But he is saying that it is consensual and you better bet that is what his defense is going to be in this case;
that he did not assault her, that she consent it to the choking, that it was a part of their sex act.
PINSKY: Now, next, we have more on the mom is alleged role in this case. And, later, a college woman says that she was raped but police find no
evidence now. No evidence to support her claim. So, where is the truth in this story? We are back after this.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
[21:36:25] UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE REPORTER: Jackie Gomez died on prom night. Her date, Eddie Herrera, says they fell asleep after a night of drinking
and she never woke up. He also told investigators that the choking marks on Jackie`s neck came from a consensual sex act. Now, Herrera`s mother is
arrested accused of providing the couple with drugs and alcohol.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PINSKY: Back with the behavior bureau, Sam, Spirit, and Anahita. Another case where being the cool mom goes wrong. And, Sam, you now have some
conflicting info about reports to the cops. Tell me about that.
SCHACHER: Yes. So, in the report, the police mentioned -- or the investigator mentioned that the boyfriend gave some conflicting reports
about the choking, that first he strangled, he did not and perhaps maybe he brought it up because there was bruising.
So I -- I do not buy his story, Dr. Drew. I mean, for him to change it, either it happened or it did not. Either you had consensual choking sex or
you did not, so what is he covering up? Did he choke her because perhaps she was not consenting to sex? Did he choked her, because they got into a
fight? I do not know, but something does not pass the smell test.
PINSKY: Anahita, what is your defense?
SEDAGHATFAR: I was going to actually ask you, Dr. Drew. I know we have not read the autopsy report but if this girl did die from O.Dieng on drugs
or alcohol, would that not be determined in the police report through the autopsy?
PINSKY: It is sometimes hard to tell. It is.
SEDAGHATFAR: Oh, OK.
PINSKY: Neither were conclusive. If there is not aspirate in the lungs, if there is enough circulating alcohol and vicodin to may be cause trouble
this way, if there is also evidence of choking. If I were betting, I put money down on choking.
SEDAGHATFAR: Right.
PINSKY: That is what it seems like to me. And, it seems bizarre. Maybe he was wasted. I do not know. It sounds like a very bizarre situation.
What it drives me -- SEDAGHATFAR: He only has --
PINSKY: Go ahead, Anahita.
SEDAGHATFAR: I was going to say, he only had to defend himself against an assault charge. Remember, he is not being charged with murder.
PINSKY: I know, yes.
SEDAGHATFAR: I think his defense is going to be, it was consensual.
PINSKY: It is crazy. The person I feel sorriest for, the beautiful girl that died and her mom.
SEDAGHATFAR: Right.
PINSKY: Her mom trusted another mother to care for her daughter on her prom night. And, Spirit, I want to tell you what I told my kids. And, you
tell me if I am too harsh. Because I talk to parents all the time and I go, "Look, why in the world would you ever give alcohol or substances to
kids? Because anything that happens in that household is on you then.
And, if you want to look out for any kind of unwanted outcome for an adolescent, whether it is a pregnancy, or an accident or an STD, you name
it, you find alcohol. And, if you providing the alcohol as a parent, you are the one responsible. You are it."
CLANTON: Every time. And, Dr. Drew, that is why this really has to be a cautionary tale. You know, we are getting ready for prom here all across
the country here in another month or two. And, so parents, please take notice. Do not be the friend. Be the parent.
Meet your dates other parents. You guys collaborate, speak, have a plan, understand where your kids are, understand what they are doing. And, at
the end of the day, stand up and be responsible. Yes, prom is supposed to be the greatest night of their life. Be right.
PINSKY: God help you if there is a parent like me in the group and you are giving alcohol to the kid. Because I told my kids on the record, I said,
"Look, you can go to parties but it is -- you know if I find out that as an adult is giving you alcohol, I will show up with the sheriffs and I will
have their asses hauled off and I will stand out in the lawn laughing my butt off." That is what I will do. So, try me. Go ahead.
CLANTON: That is right.
PINSKY: What, Anahita? Good or bad?
SEDAGHATFAR: Good for you, Dr. Drew, taking charge. The D.A. in this case actually made a statement and he said the same thing. He said, "Look, it
is not cool to give your kids alcohol." He is going to make an example of this mother and let it be known that this is illegal. And, if you give
alcohol, you give drugs to minors, you will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
[21:40:06] PINSKY: And, now, mind you, my kids did not get invited to a lot of parties.
(LAUGHING)
SEDAGHATFAR: I wonder why.
CLANTON: But, you still have your children.
PINSKY: But they believed what I said.
CLANTON: That is the point. They are alive and well.
PINSKY: I do. I do. they are.
SEDAGHATFAR: Right. Right.
PINSKY: Next up, scandal at the University of Virginia. Was there a gang rape at a fraternity house or not? We will discuss after this.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE REPORTER: The story of an alleged gang rape on a college campus makes national headlines after it is reported in a popular
magazine.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE REPORTER: An explosive article in "Rolling Stone" recounting in graphic detail the alleged gang rape of a female college
student named Jackie.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE REPORTER: But there are numerous discrepancies in the alleged victim`s story.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
[21:45:02] SCHACHER: Discrepancy number one, Jackie says she was raped at the fraternity house party. The fraternity says they did not have a party
that night.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE REPORTER: Now, following a 4-month long investigation, police say they cannot confirm that a rape occurred and have suspended
their investigation.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE SPEAKER: That does not mean that something terrible did not happen to Jackie in the evening of September 28, 2012. We are just not
able to gather sufficient facts to conclude what that something may have been.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(ENDV IDEOTAPE)
PINSKY: Back with Sam, Spirit and Anahita. It is our most tweeted story of the night. Investigators spoke to nearly 70 people and they say no one
could corroborate the alleged victim`s story. They say they were hindered by this girl, Jackie`s refusal to cooperate. And, Sam, give me some more
of the back story here.
SCHACHER: OK. So, let us go over the timeline. First of all, Jackie is not her real name. She was reportedly an 18-year-old freshman when she
alleges she was gang raped on the UVA campus by seven fraternity members in September of 2012.
She reportedly talked to three friends immediately after the alleged rape and says they collectively decided not to report it. The friends dispute
that, saying they insisted she report the alleged rape.
In May 2013, Jackie reportedly talked to a dean about the alleged assault. The dean brought in police, but the case was dropped because Jackie did not
want them to investigate.
In 2014, Jackie shares her story with "Rolling Stone." They published the story in November. Discrepancies in Jackie`s story make national headlines
and article becomes catalyst for the police investigation that just concluded.
PINSKY: And, Anahita, you know, I am sure you have seen plenty of police investigations. What is your hunch on this? Is somebody obfuscating or
nothing happen, do you think?
SEDAGHATFAR: I am not surprised the police came to this conclusion, Dr. Drew. I think it became clear early on when the post did their
investigation after this "Rolling Stones" article that this girl is fabricating this entire story. They found zero corroborating evidence.
They found numerous discrepancies.
PINSKY: Now before -- hang on. Hang on. Before, Anahita, you are somebody that represents women that are sexually abused -- and you
represent women and women`s issues.
SEDAGHATFAR: Thank you, Dr. Drew.
PINSKY: And, is it not true you have had women fabricate stories and bring them to you as well?
SEDAGHATFAR: I have. And, thank you for that disclaimer. Yes, I do represent victims with sexual assault and sexual harassment. And, I think
that is why this case troubles me even more. Because she has now made it more difficult, that much more difficult for true victims of sexual assault
and rape to come forward and to be believed.
PINSKY: And, what do we do with this? Do we -- I mean, I do not even know how to talk about it, because I do not want to diminish people who have
been victimized. I do not want in any way adds to the likelihood that is someone is not going to come forward. I do not want to further traumatize
this girl because something may awful have happened to her.
SEDAGHATFAR: Well, no. No, no.
PINSKY: How do we talk about it?
SEDAGHATFAR: The police conducted a five-month investigation, Dr. Drew. They interviewed 70 witnesses and they found zero corroboration for her
claim. So, I think it is important that we do draw attention to situations where women do lie and we reprimand women and they pay the price for doing
this. Because like I said, it minimizes the true victims of sexual assault and rape when you have incidents like this.
PINSKY: Spirit, it gets more complicated.
CLANTON: It absolutely does. It absolutely does.
PINSKY: Let me frame it a little bit this way, which is sometimes when people have had previous trauma, they amplify things that have happened to
them, but there no less traumatizing to them. They can distort it. They can fabricate it. It can happen. But, sometimes it is somebody who, you
know, the perpetrator does not realize that they are experiencing a trauma. It does not look like a traumatic event but it is.
CLANTON: And, you know, dr. Drew, to take it one step further, and I have to get this. I am glad that you gave Anahita`s disclaimer. But, I still
have to say, shame on you, Anahita. Because the type of language that you are using, you are saying that she fabricated it, that she lied, that she
did all of these things that even law enforcement will not stand behind that strong of a stance.
And I think it does a real disservice to this woman and so many other women who, as you have said yourself, it is difficult for women to come forward.
And so what that they did not find what they needed two years after. Of course, there is not going to be any evidence there.
Of course her memory and everyone else`s memory of these events are going to be tainted and there is going to be discrepancies two and even three
years after this event. And,I think it is deplorable for to us do this.
PINSKY: And you could argue that she was too ashamed, too freaked out to get the forensic examination and that is why she is in the position that
she is in. Sam, do you agree with that?
SCHACHER: Listen. I agree with you, Spirit, on maybe every other case that we have talked about when it involves sexual assault and rape, but
unfortunately not in this case, OK?
I looked through the report and this girl not only did 70 people as Anahita said who were interviewed, who this girl pointed out -- this girl pointed
out other people is feelings have been hurt, because she pointed out people that were involved.
[21:50:03] She slammed and threw her friends, her three friends under the bus, wrote about them in a "Rolling Stone" article and painted them to the
world as rape sympathizers when that was not the case.
CLANTON: Sam, listen --
SCHACHER: So, people there is collateral damage here. There is collateral damage here.
CLANTON: I am not talking to you about the collateral damage. I am not talking about what happened in the --
SCHACHER: Shame on this girl. Shame on this girl.
CLANTON: I say not just shame on her. I say shame on "Rolling Stone" for writing the article.
SCHACHER: Of course. Of course.
CLANTON: Shame on everybody who did all of these things without the facts being in place.
SCHACHER: Yes.
CLANTON: But at the end of the day, I will still stand behind the point that when a woman speaks up and says, listen, this is what happened to me.
I will take that with a grain of salt and believe her each and every time. Because the number of women that will stand up and come forward is so small
in number. There is no way that you are going to rake her over the coals again.
(CROSSTALKS)
PINSKY: Wait. I cannot hear anything. I have too many voices. We have this silly delay that makes it impossible for us. Anahita, very quickly,
Anahita, then Sam. Anahita then Sam, has been trying to are a while. Go ahead.
SEDAGHATFAR: Just to respond to Spirit. No, I do not think it is shame on me here. I think it is shame on this girl. And, let me tell you why. As
an advocate for true women that have really been raped and sexually assaulted, it is cases like this that take away from our cases. It makes
it that much more difficult for us to get juries to believe us. That much more difficult to get the other side to believe us. So, shame on her.
PINSKY: OK. Hold on. I am runnig out of time. Ladies, hold on. Sam`s turn. Hold on. Sam`s turn.
SCHACHER: Thank you, Dr. Drew. OK, yes. Spirit, 80 percent of college sexual assaults and rapes are unreported because they fear people will not
believe them. Well, guess what, this girl is lying and she is taking away from all of the other people who really are victims. Five months ago, I
was not --
CLANTON: You were in the room.
SCHACHER: Because I have done the research.
CLANTON: You say it like you were there.
SCHACHER: Because I done the research. Oh my God --
CLANTON: Years later, outside of the room in L.A. not there.
SCHACHER: Read all the research. Read all the research.
CLANTON: It is not about the research.
PINSKY: We have to head for the door and I think I am grateful that you ladies are -- first of all, I do not think a man should be talking about
this. I am grateful that it is you guys talking about this. I am grateful for that. Notice I kept my mouth shut, because this is an issue that it is
very hard for a man to talk about and it is a serious issue.
It is particularly serious in college campuses. It needs to be taken very seriously. I think debate like this is healthy. But, we have got to make
sure we do not do anything that diminishes or makes women feel unsupported. If they do even wonder if they have been through a sexual assault.
And, here is the deal, please, go to the health care provider if you even think something has happened. Collect the data. They are sympathetic.
They are not going to shame you. They are there to help. So, even if you are wondering, what was that, am I going to feel bad about that? Get things
checked out. At least you will have the evidence. We are back after this.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE SPEAKER: They beauty come with a surreal experience. I think they had 5,000 plus people there and the majority of them were there
to see our daughter.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE SPEAKER: The panel I was on was with a bunch of YouTubers that are really passionate about what they do and this panel was
about like how we do things online and how to get our viewers out there like we are.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PINSKY: "Beautylicious: Offline" is the HLN`s new show about a young YouTube star who gain fame with a beauty blog. It premiers tonight right
after this show. Whole family is on Chelsea Crockett`s success. I met her actually. I had my picture taken with her. And Chelsea spoke to Robin
Meade this morning. Take a look.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
ROBIN MEADE, HLN HOST OF "ROBIN MEADE EXPRESS" SHOW: In the show, we are going to see how you and your dad work together running this business of
yours, which did not start out as a business. How did it start, Chelsea?
CHELSEA CROCKETT, YOUTUBE STAR/BEAUTY BLOGGER: No. I was very entertained by comedy videos when I was going into eighth grade. So, I was just into
that, whole world. And, then I realized that there was not very much beauty online. So I kind of wanted to take that in a different way and
then inspire girls. Eventually, now I feel like I am more into advice, you know, videos.
MEADE: You make money from this. Does the entire family make money from this?
CROCKETT: It started off as, you know, not making any money at all. But then, as people started viewing it, you get revenue from that. So, I just
started getting a little more money as the views increased so it has benefited my whole family.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PINSKY: Sam, this is not a dude thing. Help me understand what this movement is all about.
(LAUGHING)
SCHACHER: OK. So Chelsea, better known as beautylicious. She is a 17- year-old. She is a YouTuber. I followed her for years and she is awesome, Dr. Drew. And, I think what makes her resonate with her fans and why she
has become so successful is that she opens up to them. She treats them like her friends.
So, she started out doing these beauty tutorials. Now, she is known as a beauty guru. But, as she stated in the interview with Robin Meade, she is
also really funny and she talks about her family and her day. So, it is almost -- her fans, her legion of fans, they feel like that they are one of
her best friends.
PINSKY: Well, that is what the whole offline show is going to be about how this whole family gets wrapped up into this.
SCHACHER: Right.
PINSKY: I met her and her dad. Do not you have guys had a picture of that. I was in the cafeteria today with her dad this afternoon. There
they are. We were just hanging out and I discovered, I said, "We will be pushing for your show tonight."
So everybody, "Beautylicious," be sure to watch that tonight. DVR us, then of course, you can watch us anytime. Sam, is your Beauty YouTube coming
out soon?
SCHACHER: No. I need somebody to help me with that. That is why we have Jeanne here at CNN.
PINSKY: Well, we have just the person for you. It is Beautylicious: Offline and it starts now.
[22:00:08]
END
