Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

Ben Carson Exploring Presidential Run; Tsarnaev Found Guilty On All Counts

Aired April 09, 2015 - 07:30   ET

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

[07:30:00]

DR. BEN CARSON, FORMER DIRECTOR OF PEDIATRIC NEUROSURGERY, JOHNS HOPKINS HOSPITAL: -- encouraged by the large, incredible numbers of people who are supporting us. And I think maybe that's a better way to do things rather than going around, and trying to cultivate relationships with big money. Letting the people speak about it.

CHRIS CUOMO, CNN ANCHOR: Maybe you should own it as an issue. Give a broader appeal to your candidacy. Something to think about --

CARSON: I'll let you carry that one.

CUOMO: I'd have to leave my job to run your campaign. We have to branch out to some big issues that were on the table. South Carolina you saw the video, have you ever seen anything like that?

CARSON: Well, as I said before, I was aghast looking at that. I mean -- a police officer, you know shooting down a citizen of the United States. It really doesn't matter what the color of them is, it's totally irrelevant in this situation.

CUOMO: It wasn't about race.

CARSON: It wasn't about race. It was about you know, the abuse of power and position and I believe this represents an incredible opportunity for law enforcement across the country to really condemn this kind of activity in the state of where they are.

Because I have an opportunity to speak to law enforcement people across the nation on a regular basis and the vast, vast majority of them are extremely decent people.

CUOMO: That gets clouded in situations like this, especially when the bright light that's on what happened, those horrible final moments is somewhat distracting from some other big questions that remain, Doctor, like what about the other officers, are they being investigated?

What they reported doesn't seem to line up with what we saw in the video and what the about the authorities who seemed to echo the policeman's representation of events early on. How do you address those problems?

CARSON: Well, you know, that's a wonderful thing for you guys in the media to do. You know, one of the reasons that the media is the only business protected by the constitution of the United States is because they are supposed to be on the side of the people. And they're supposed to be the investigative and the reporting arm.

CUOMO: We can reveal, we can expose, but leaders go first, the changes that need to be made criticizing this situation for not having the other officers held accountable yet. Where's the dash cam video? Should police investigate themselves even at the state level when it's local? Those types of changes demand leadership. They haven't happened yet. Where are you on that?

CARSON: Well, again, I come back to saying, I appreciate the fact that the light is being shined on the situation and that's the kind of thing that will encourage the leadership to weigh in. I suspect in the long run this will be thoroughly investigated.

CUOMO: Would you be in favor of changes about independent bodies reviewing these situations not having the police involved, locally state or whatever?

CARSON: I certainly think that having objective individuals involved in this kind of investigation is the right way to go.

CUOMO: You think this is a reflection of a larger policing culture problem, whether if you look at South Carolina, one of two remaining states to fly the confederate flag or what we hear about police forces across the country, do you think there's a culture that needs to be addressed?

CARSON: I certainly think we need to be engaged in conversations between the police and the communities, what I really have found very encouraging, as I've traveled around the country is the whole concept of community policing.

Getting police involved early on, regular parts of the community. So that the first encounter that young man has with a policeman is not a hostile encounter. This is Officer Joe, who I know. That's the kind of thing that's going to make a huge difference in our country.

CUOMO: You know what it's like to grow up in a place where the relationship with the officers is suboptimal. Do you understand, and should you give voice as someone of color especially and a leader to that frustration, that hostility.

That except for cases like this rare cases like this where you have a video showing it, often the victims get doubted, the victims get blamed. Even here I can't tell you how many people are mentioning that Mr. Walter Scott owed child support. Do you give voice to that? Should you?

CARSON: Well, we should give voice to both sides. We should look at things objectively. You know, as I stated yesterday in the conference, you know, the police have to look at the shortcomings in the law enforcement agency and if there is unfairness, we must be willing to look at it. And the community must also recognize that there are people who

don't follow the law and engage in thuggish behavior. We can't make them into heroes, either. So you know, there is give and take on both sides, objectivity is the real answer.

And in order to get there, we have to be able to sit down at a table and have an intelligent conversation, rather than getting to our respective corners and demonizing each other.

CUOMO: So when you look at that situation, you don't see it being as a problem that needs a solution, you don't see that there is a culture of policing in this country that needs to change especially with respect to minorities?

[07:35:08] CARSON: As I've said, there are problems. There are problems on both sides and the only way we're going to solve those problems is to sit down and talk about them and create the relationships. Relationships are key to resolution of problems.

CUOMO: Let's look now foreign, Iran on the table. Probably the biggest nexus issue that we have in the United States. You had said this is a little bit like Obamacare. We're not going to know what this deal is until we pass it.

Is that a fair criticism or is it a little bit of a cheap shot because we know it's a framework. You know, we know that we don't know the details yet. Is that a fair basis for criticism?

CARSON: Well, let's put it this way. This is an incredibly important thing and there's a reason that we have a government that's structured the way it is. We have a republic-type government, which is a representative government.

So something that has this much of an implication on the future of our nation, our representatives need to be involved. For the executive branch just to decide we're going to do this our way, we don't care that much what you guys have to say, really is a slap in the face to the founders of this nation and to the way our government is set up.

CUOMO: It would be, but is it true? Because the White House says they've had hundreds of meetings, they've had more discourse with members of Congress on this than they have a lot of other similar situations and this has been turned into a political football.

Whether it's saying this is a bad deal, we shouldn't do a deal or do a different deal with no alternative mention by anybody else or to do what you did, saying it's like Obamacare. We're not going to know what it is until it passes.

CARSON: Well, I think we should have a situation where both sides agree that there's been adequate conversation. If both sides don't agree then obviously we're not doing it the right way.

CUOMO: Do you have a better plan than the one that's on the table right now? Have you heard of a better plan than the one that's on the table right now?

CARSON: The important thing is what do we do with an agreement, we sit down together, we come up with an agreement that is satisfactory and then we make sure that it is enforced. It doesn't do any good, for instance, to have an agreement that says we're going to have unfettered inspections.

With no notice, anytime, anywhere, and then we say we want to have an inspection and we have this group that we want to bring in and they say, well, I don't think we want that particular group. If that's not happening --

CUOMO: But that is what's happening. That's what they are asking for.

CARSON: Well, that's what they say is happening. If in fact that is true and that it is verifiable by all the parties in our government and they all are satisfied that that's happening then I think it's a good agreement.

CUOMO: But because it's so important don't you think that we don't falsely create bases of suspicion when there isn't one. That is what they are asking for is unchecked inspections. The Iranians are pushing back. It's a negotiation.

They say they want all the sanctions let up right away in order to give them what they want, them being the P5+1, that's why I'm asking those questions.

One other topic for you here, Dr. Carson, leadership, leadership as president of the United States, as president of the United States, do you understand that you wouldn't be able to duck issues just because they make you uncomfortable, you don't do well on them. You understand that?

CARSON: Which issues in particular?

CUOMO: Well, it depends, let's say, you say you don't want to talk about gay issues any more. That the liberal media bring it is up only when you're getting momentum, which I think is unfair in the situation the interview we did. But that's a very important issue to the development of an American culture. You couldn't duck it as president, could you?

CARSON: Well, let me put it this way, it seems to be a topic a person's sexual orientation that is of fair amount of concern to you. I don't find it to be anywhere near as interesting. I think it's a personal issue, and we ought to leave it as a personal issue.

I respect the LGBT community. I respect the traditional marriage community. I think that's enough to be said about it. Leave it to the personal issues, to the personal people.

CUOMO: It would be if it were a balanced playing field. The problem is you have the LGBT community feeling that they are discriminated against unfairly as a class and now we have a culture shift going on within our justice system.

You know, we all know about the big case that's coming up, to see if the Windsor case gets extended in gay marriage extended as equal protection for all, and that's what fuelled the RFRA laws, right, it was a creating a legal backstop.

CARSON: You know what I would like to see?

CUOMO: Please.

CARSON: I would like to see as much emphasis on the rights of Christians and people who are members of the faith community, as there is to some of the other groups.

CUOMO: Who gets more protection, Christians or LGBT under the law?

CARSON: As I said, I would like to see a much greater conversation about Christians and their rights, why are we not talking about that?

[07:40:09] CUOMO: I think we are right now, Doctor. The LGBT community gets far less legal protection under the constitution as you know than Christians.

CARSON: Not as I know.

CUOMO: How do you not know that? A protected class includes religion, not LGBT.

CARSON: Again, the important thing is for us as a nation to recognize that all citizens of the United States are protected by our constitution. We need to stop deciding that one group versus another group is the flavor of the day and we need to do things that provide for justice and liberty for everybody. That's the way our constitution was written.

CUOMO: So I think everybody would agree with that. The question is --

CARSON: Well, they might agree with it, but that's not where the emphasis is.

CUOMO: That's the only point I'm trying to bring out of you here is where you don't see that happening because this idea that Christians are under assault. I don't understand it under law right now. They're a protected class. Under the constitution, that means they get equal protection. LGBT is not. That's why they're vulnerable to laws like the RFRA law.

CARSON: I have a suggestion for you.

CUOMO: Yes, sir.

CARSON: Why don't you have an hour-long program on CNN, and bring in some Christian leaders, bring in whatever other groups you want to bring in, and let's talk about it with facts, with numbers, with clear-cut examples rather than just make statements. CUOMO: One last question on it, the White House just came out about conversion therapy saying that they don't think it should happen. They don't think it works based on studies and it should stop, your position?

CARSON: My position is that that kind of thing should be left to therapists and to individuals.

CUOMO: You think it could work?

CARSON: I don't think it's anybody else's business.

CUOMO: But either it could work or not.

CARSON: As I said, I don't think it's anybody else's business.

CUOMO: So you don't see it as a danger?

CARSON: I think it's their business.

CUOMO: All right, Dr. Carson, thank you very much for coming back on the show. These issues matter, that's why we talk to you about them and we appreciate you taking the opportunity.

CARSON: Thank you.

CUOMO: John.

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: All right, thanks, Chris. Boston bomber, Dzokhar Tsarnaev, found guilty on all 30 counts against him. Now the next step, the jury will decide whether he will live or get the death penalty. Our experts weigh in.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:45:00]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

OFFICER RICHARD DONOHUE, MBTA POLICE OFFICER INJURED IN SHOOTOUT: It's not a day to celebrate. I guess you could call it a bittersweet victory. Not out there cheering for what happened but I'm satisfied.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: That was one of Dzokhar Tsarnaev's victims, Officer Dic Donohue reflecting on Tsarnaev being found guilty on all 30 counts. The jury must decide if he gets life in prison or death.

Joining us, from just outside Boston, Newton, Massachusetts is Juliette Kayyem, CNN national security analyst, and former assistant secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, and Mel Robbins, CNN commentator and legal analyst.

Ladies, it's great to have both of you proud Bostonians here with us to talk about this morning. Mel, I want to start with you. The verdict was not a surprise. It was expected that he would be found guilty. What happened in Boston when the word went out that he was found guilty on all 30 counts?

MEL ROBBINS, CNN COMMENTATOR/LEGAL ANALYST: Well, you know, Alisyn, it was interesting. I was in my car when the verdict was read and every single news station that you could switch the dial to was in unison covering this.

It was not unexpected, but there was a very kind of somber, holding on to every word as the verdict was read. And I do think there was a collective sigh of relief as we heard all 30 counts come down and knew that the victims had stood strong.

That the families had stood strong. That the justice system had stood strong and now we're bracing for what's going to happen next because it truly is about the sentencing phase -- Alisyn.

CAMEROTA: Let's talk about that because Juliette, there's this curious paradox, that happens often in death penalty cases where when you believe that the convict wants to be a martyr. Then the jurors think maybe to punish him more, we should not give him the death penalty, we should let him rot in jail. Do you think that that calculation is in the minds of these jurors?

JULIETTE KAYYEM, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Well, it absolutely should not be. What he wants is irrelevant to the deliberation about whether they will impose death so just from a legal matter. I actually take issue with the notion just as a national security expert with the notion that he wants to die and be a martyr.

In fact, in counterterrorism what he did was typical of someone who doesn't want to die. I mean, he puts that bombs down, they try to hide. They try to escape. They were not suicide bombers. The only evidence we have of his desire to die is probably when he thought he was going to die, which was in the boat on that Friday.

So this idea that we know what he wants is both irrelevant and I think we might be erroneous. So the jury has to look at the facts and decide.

CAMEROTA: Such interesting points. Mel, Bostonians in large part do not believe in the death penalty. Let me put up a poll that was taken by WBUR radio there. This was just two weeks ago, 62 percent of the respondents believed he should get life in prison. Only 27 percent believed that he should get the death penalty.

Similarly this morning, the "Boston Globe" has put out an editorial and it was called spare Dzokhar Tsarnaev the death penalty. It says for jurors who believe execution should be reserved for the worst criminals, the lawyers laid out a clear path to conclude Dzokhar wasn't even the worst of the Tsarnaevs. Mel, does this mean that he will not get the death penalty?

ROBBINS: No, it only matters what the 12 jurors think in this particular case and what they ultimately vote and look, this is if there ever was a case where Bostonians and Massachusetts residents who are in the majority against the death penalty would vote for the death penalty, it would be this case.

[07:50:10] And there are people like me that don't believe in it for cost reasons, for humanity reasons, for where Bostonians and Massachusetts residents, who are in the majority against the death penalty would vote for the death penalty, it would be this case.

And there are people like me that don't believe in it for cost reasons, for humanity reasons, for legal reasons, and then I was sitting yesterday, you know, in a store and talking to somebody about this case and a woman turned to me and just glared at me and said, were you there? I hope he dies. I wish we could stone him to death.

And so you do have people in this state that have on one side a very measured approach and a philosophical approach about the death penalty, like myself, and you have people that are extremely emotional and want retribution and want a punishment that involves death. But it only matters what those 12 jurors are going to decide -- Alisyn.

CAMEROTA: Juliette, do we know how those 12 jurors are leaning?

KAYYEM: No. All we know is that they would be willing to impose the death penalty. Otherwise, they wouldn't have been seated in the original jury. That was part of the (inaudible) process.

And just picking up on what Mel said at the beginning, you know, we're going to get to the probably more emotional in some way stage, more contentious, more controversial stage. I just think we can't say it enough how remarkable it is that this case took place in a federal district court, you know, just like every other criminal case.

We've done a great job in demystifying terrorism in bringing Dzhokhar down to earth. I think it's important to say that because the national security circles there are a lot of questions about whether there should be military courts, U.S. courts.

And I think that Boston and that court and the lawyers, all of them, proved that our justice system can handle this.

CAMEROTA: Such a great point. Boston proved that this can work in a regular federal court. Juliette Kayyem, Mel Robbins, thanks so much for coming to us from Boston this morning. Obviously, we will wait to see what the jury decides. Thanks so much, Ladies. Let's get over to Chris.

CUOMO: All right, Alisyn, the man who captured the shooting of Walter Scott on camera is speaking out for the first time and talking about what happened before he started recording, very important stuff. Listen to it ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[07:55:50] CAMEROTA: The South Carolina Police officer caught on camera fatally shooting an unarmed black man has been fired. That police department is now making sweeping changes, they say, including ordering body cameras for the entire force.

CUOMO: This is going on as the witness who captured the killing on his cell phone is explaining what else happened when the camera wasn't rolling. We have the latest for you on that at the top of the hour.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He just want to get away of the taser.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I was sickened by what I saw.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What would have happened if there wasn't a video released?