Return to Transcripts main page

Crime and Justice With Ashleigh Banfield

Cheerleader Shot Dead By A Football Star; High School Cheerleader Found Dead Inside Her Bedroom. Aired 6-8p ET

Aired May 08, 2018 - 18:00   ET

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

[18:00:00] ASHLEIGH BANFIELD, HOST, HLN CRIME AND JUSTICE: Good evening, everyone, I`m Ashleigh Banfield. Welcome, this is "Crime and Justice."

And we begin with breaking news tonight. A jury in Tennessee has just decided the fate of an all-American football player, that teenager on trial

for murdering his cheerleader ex-girlfriend. Shooting her through her bedroom walls as she slept. Law and Crimes, Jesse Weber, has been covering

the case. The verdict just came down moments ago. Jesse?

JESSE WEBER, HOST, LAW AND CRIME NETWORKS: It`s a doozy for lack of a better word. To give you an idea, when it was rendered, there were gasps

in the courtroom.

BANFIELD: Wow.

WEBER: We will let you know what the verdict is later.

BANFIELD: All right. Getting right to that, just a moment. Don`t go anywhere, Jesse.

Also, the parents of a 13-year-old boy discover filthy -- filthy texts from his teacher. It turns out the school staff might have heard that she was

actually dating that child for a full month before she was actually arrested. Kyle Peltz is on top of this investigation. Ow did that

happened?

KYLE PELTZ, CRIME AND JUSTICE PRODUCER: That is right. Kids usually tell on other kids, but these kid reportedly went to the principal telling on

their own teacher weeks before she was arrested. A former teacher of the year by the way.

BANFIELD: What, teacher of the year, no less. All right, looking to the details on that one.

Also, tonight, the end of a five month search for a single missing mom who disappeared leaving behind only her glasses on the sidewalk. Now she is

been found, dead in her car. And that means the search for her killer is just beginning. Justin Freiman, you are tackling this case, who do they

think did it?

JUSTIN FREIMAN, SR. PRODUCER, HLN CNN: That is right. They are not sure yet, but I have to say it was a long cold winter, so could some evidence

have actually been preserve. Evidence that will lead to that killer?

BANFIELD: (AUDIO GAP) -- that one Justin. Also later on, the incredible rescue caught on body cam, going into gator-infested waters. Would you do

this? By the way, we are going to tell you how that car ended up there in the first place and asked you the question? Would you have waded into

those waters knowing that these things, up to 11 feet long, are lurking in the surface below? Think about that.

While we do, I want to get right to that breaking news, that former college football star just declared guilty moments ago, of murdering his

cheerleader ex-girlfriend. Prosecutors saying he was sneaking up to that house in the middle of the night, shooting her dead through her bedroom

walls. Once from the side of her bed. The other time from behind her headboard. They say he drove back to campus, lied to his roommate about

where he`d been, had a nap and asked his buddies to help him get rid of the gun.

With me tonight, let`s get right to it. Two of Law and Crime Network`s legal experts are going to talk us through this, Jesse Weber is with us,

also editor in chief Rachel Stockman, and defense attorney, Brian Claypool, is here to talk about it as well. I don`t know if we weren`t expecting it.

If we were Jesse, but guilty doesn`t surprise me?

WEBER: I don`t think it surprises a lot of people. The jury did not buy the defense`s theory that he fired this weapon only to scare her to get her

attention. When you fire two shots, knowing where she slept, when you have the ability to fire in the air, fire in the ground, fire anywhere else,

they didn`t believe it. First-degree murder.

BANFIELD: Rachel, five hours on a murder trial, a first-degree murder trial, five hours deliberation to me is shocking.

RACHEL STOCKMAN, EDITOR-IN-CHIEF, LAW AND CRIME NETWORK: I thought it was very short actually. I thought it would go on for at least two days,

because this was somewhat a complicated case. You had lots of evidence to go through. Like Jesse, though, I`m not surprised. We got a guilty

verdict.

BANFIELD: How was he, by the way? In this moment? They are locking him up, they are about to walk him out. He is not going to see those parents

in the flesh again unless they visit him in prison. How was this moment? What did it feel like, sound like? All of it?

WEBER: I mean, there were gasps. Literally -- the audience, the whole jury room was, everybody was just shocked, because he is now facing life in

prison, but with the possibility of parole. And there were a lot of different options for the jury. They could have fund a lesser included.

They could have found him at the least criminally negligent homicide. But they found first-degree premeditated murder.

BANFIELD: You know how it works, your back, you are a defendant like this, your back is to the gallery, you are back as usually to the cameras, but

often times, especially a 19-year-old kid will turn around and look at mom, look at dad, and have some kind of reaction. Did it happen? Did he look

back to them at all?

STOCKMAN: I did not see him do that. And what`s kind of interesting about this specifically, this courtroom was packed. Packed with Emma Walker this

time --

BANFIELD: I got breaking news. Sorry to interrupt. I am sorry to interrupt. We just literally got breaking news coming down that the

sentence has just come down. I expected it to be some time. Life. He got life. That is just been handed down this moment.

STOCKMAN: With the possibility of parole, though.

BANFIELD: Yes.

STOCKMAN: The Judge did say that.

BANFIELD: So, not shockingly, was no possibility of parole on the table?

STOCKMAN: It was.

BANFIELD: He could have had that?

STONE: He could have.

BANFIELD: But he got the possibility of parole. So he is -- at least he knows he is not going to be -- what they called toe-tag justice. Toe-tag

justice is you`re not leaving unless you have a tag on your toe.

WEBER: Easier said than done.

BANFIELD: Toe-tag parole, they call it.

WEBER: Right. Easier said than done that he`ll eventually get out.

BANFIELD: Unbelievable, so again, I want to go back to that moment, his looks. This is the moment we -- these are live dramas in courtrooms, no

matter what. And the apex of the drama comes at this moment, when the verdict is read, the reactions after. Because there are two sides in this

story.

One side of the courtroom is devastated by this. Their lives are ruined. Riley Gaul`s family`s life is ruined. Riley Gaul`s life is ruined. Emma

Walker`s life was ruined. Taken from her. Her family`s lives were ruined the night she was shot through the head as she slept. And how did they

both sort of react?

Could you -- I mean, it`s hard to look. It`s like a tennis match, trying to take in the reactions of both sides. But, Rachel, best you can sort of

gather, how were the two sides?

STOCKMAN: Well, what`s been interesting in this is really Emma Walker`s side, the victim in all of this, the courtroom has been packed for her.

Dozens and dozens of people. A lot of times, they`ve been wearing purple in support of her. So as Jesse said, there were really audible gasps. Of

course, we were listening to it like you through a feed. We weren`t in the courtroom. We do have a producer in the courtroom. And you know, we`ve

been just hearing that he didn`t really turn around. No reaction from him.

BANFIELD: I am just getting my -- my producers are just telling me, right now, we got the verdict. I want to play that piece of tape. We are going

to spin that around for you and play it for you right now. Well can try and listen for ourselves. Have a look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Has the jury reached a verdict?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, sir, we have.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Will you please stand. Mr. Gaul, please stand. In count 1, charging the defendant with first-degree murder, did the jury

reach a verdict?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, we did.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What is your verdict?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Guilty.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Count 2, charging the especially aggravated stalking, did the jury reach a verdict?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, sir, we did.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What is your verdict?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Not guilty.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And the lesser included offense of aggravated stalking, did the jury reach a verdict?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We did.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What is your verdict?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Not guilty.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And the lesser included offense of stalking, did the jury reach a verdict?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We did.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What is your verdict?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Guilty.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: In count 3, charging the defendant with theft, did the jury reach a verdict?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We did.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What is your verdict?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Guilty.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And with respect to the value of the property, did the jury find the property to be worth more than $500, but less than $1,000?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We did.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: In count 4, charging the defendant with tampering with evidence, did the jury reach a verdict?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We did.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What is your verdict?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Guilty.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: In count 5, charging the defendant with reckless endangerment, did you reach a verdict?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We did.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What is your verdict?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Guilty.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: In count 6, charging the defendant with employing a firearm with endangers felony, did you reach a verdict?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We did.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What is your verdict?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Not guilty.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And the lesser included the use of possession of the firearm in a dangerous felony, did the jury reach a verdict?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We did.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What is your verdict?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Guilty.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And count 7, charging the defendant with the charge of felony murder, did the jury reach a verdict?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We did.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What is your verdict?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Guilty.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You can be seated. Mr. Gaul, you can be seated.

Ladies and gentlemen, the jury, the verdicts that have just been recorded to the court are in fact the verdict of you and each and every one of you,

please indicate so by raising your right hands now. I count 12 hands. You can put your hands down.

Is the defense requesting polling of the jury?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No, your honor.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Ladies and gentlemen, thank you very much. I`ve worked as long and hard as any jury I`ve seen. And this has been a really tough

case. And you`ve indicated by the way you found the defendant of guilty of some things and not guilty of others, that you thoughtfully considered this

case step by step. I compliment your efforts and I thank you.

You can see that we could not do this work without your help, people like you. So thank you very much. And at this time -- oh, I do accept your

verdict. I do accept your verdict and I do release you at this time.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: That is not easy. That is not easy. To be a juror and to spend that much time looking straight across the room at the young man who is

life basically hangs with your decision. That is not easy to render a guilty verdict, knowing full well that it comes with it, usually up to a

lifetime in prison, and often time death.

[18:10:15] So, when that Judge thanks them for their service, it`s not just a platitude. It is serious. It is devastating. Many jurors walk out of

that moment in tears, because of the torture they`ve had to go through in order to render justice to those they look at and see have tears as well.

You know, this is one of those moments whereas Riley`s led off, his family will be broken, absolutely broken, right?

STOCKMAN: And what`s so unusual, his bond was revoked, he was sentenced on the spot, life with the possibility of parole. A lot of times, you know,

you have these sentencing dates later on. But in this time, he is gone. This is over. The family has closure.

BANFIELD: Honestly, I don`t even know if there`s a minimum. Usually they have 25 years. We can check the statute and just see if Tennessee has a

minimum when you get life with the possibility of parole. Often times it`s 25. Typically it is not less than 25. So for a 19-year-old boy, that is

the better part of your years, he is going to spend behind bars with some very, very hardened people who aren`t like him, you know, not football

stars, not kids who went to great schools.

STOCKMAN: Star football player.

BANFIELD: Star football player who went off to college. He is not going to understand his new life for a long time.

WEBER: He is 19 years old going into the prison system for the rest of his life. I mean, you can only imagine what that is like. And he knew,

though, he knew he was going to jail. I mean he already pled guilty to the reckless endangerment and his attorney said, find him guilty, if you`re

going to find him guilty of anything, find him guilty of reckless homicide, which already carried with it a prison sentence. But the life in prison.

--

STOCKMAN: Well, what I thought was so ridiculous, was the defense attorney during the closing was trying to paint the picture of this boy, a teenager.

I mean, he is 19. But I got to tell you, he knew what he was doing.

BANFIELD: It took a loaded gun and he fired off twice.

STOCKMAN: He went in the middle of the night and shot this girl dead. He knew what he was doing. And so I personally thought it was pretty

offensive.

BANFIELD: Yes.

STOCKMAN: The defense went there saying, that this is just a boy, a teenager trying to gain sympathy.

BANFIELD: That is what you do, that is our constitutional right too. The best possible defense that can be offered. You have to reach down into

every aspect of this life and these arguments. And you`ve got to throw that spaghetti at the wall and hope to tell at least one strand of

reasonable doubt sticks. And that might have been that moment that might have resonated with one of those jurors, and it did not.

It did not. Real quickly, back to Emma`s family. Because I said, as you see him being led off, to be processed now in the penal system, which will

take some time. They got to do this assessment. They got to figure out what your mental capabilities are, what your level is, you know, what you

can handle, what kind of an offender you are, how you might be, you know, reacting with the other prisoners. So there`s a whole classification

system that will happen now for this fellow and that is not a pleasant system either.

And then eventually, he`ll be, you know, he will be clinking through those bars and going into his new home for quite some time. But until that

happens, there`s some processing. So while his family is broken hearted about this moment, he is walking right by Emma`s family too. And I`m just

-- I would love to be sort of the other side of that courtroom where the cameras don`t see, the faces of that family. But you guys have had a sense

for how they`ve been throughout this whole process.

WEBER: I mean, I think the reaction was a combination of shock, happiness, sad. I mean, this doesn`t end the pain that they`re going to be feeling,

but it does provide a sense of comfort that the person who is responsible for the death of their young girl, is now behind bars and they feel that

justice was served.

I think when that verdict comes down, it`s a mixture of shock, disbelief, a culmination of everything they`ve experienced for the past year and a half,

all culminating in that one moment, that one word, guilty.

BANFIELD: Guilty. And by the way, guilty eight times --

WEBER: I am sorry, it actually seven times.

BANFIELD: Let me look at the list real quick.

So yes, seven different -- one thing that is really weird and Brian Claypool, can you hear me? Are you with me?

BRIAN CLAYPOOL, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Yes.

BANFIELD: Yes. So, I want to ask you something. I will read off this list and put up a graphics so our audience can see right away. It almost

in real-time, this has all just happened. What the guilty verdicts were and what the not guilty verdict were. Because something surprising is in

this list.

First-degree, guilty. Especially aggravated stalking, not guilty. Stalking, guilty. Count 3, theft, guilty. Count 4, tampering with

evidence, guilty. Count 5, reckless endangerment, guilty. Look at this Brian, Count 6, employing a firearm during a dangerous felony, not guilty.

CLAYPOOL: Yes.

BANFIELD: I will continue with the list and ask you about that one. The lesser included was the possession of a firearm during a dangerous felony

which they did rendered guilty. I mean for count 7, felony murder that involved the death of a person during the commission of child abuse which

is -- but they decided guilty on that one too.

Go back to count 6 with me, they decided not guilty employing a firearm during the dangerous felony, and decided instead of the lesser possession

of a firearm during a dangerous felony. Is this inconsistent? I don`t understand it.

CLAYPOOL: You`re raising a great point. And as heinous as this crime is, and as much as this young man is going to spend most of the rest of his

life in jail, his lawyers now might actually have an issue on appeal. Because that count 6 verdict is arguably inconsistent. Because clearly he

employed a firearm, a, and b, this is clearly and categorically a dangerous felony. So if I`m his appellate lawyers, I`m champing at the bits on that

issue.

BANFIELD: OK. I thought that was really strange. I highlighted it. I thought maybe I have a misprint. Maybe Brian Claypool will be able to

explain this one away from me. But I smell very strange, you know, happenings in that jury room. And listen, sometimes it works, sometimes it

doesn`t. But if that lawyer is worth his weight, he will -- he will scrape at everything for some kind of a process issue for an appeal. And maybe

that is just the process issue that he wants on this one. Although, you know what, who knows? How much worse could it get? I guess he could get

life, no parole, if that was on the table.

There is one thing to the three of you, I want to talk about after the break. And it is this, this came up today and I didn`t know about this

until today. And it seems like every day there`s another aspect of this trial that boomerangs me somewhere else, and it was Call of Duty. Call of

Duty. Do we have that video of Call of Duty? If we do have it, I know we were trying to scrape it up real quickly.

Call of Duty, is the scourge of so many parents across the country and it`s the favorite thing to do for so many kids and parents across the country.

Call of Duty made its way into this trial, because it`s so realistic. And Riley Gaul played Call of Duty. And if you know a thing or two about Call

of Duty, it teaches you a lot about guns, because it`s really realistic. And guess what you can do with Call of Duty. You can shoot through walls.

It`s a strategy. So now do we believe that Riley Gaul didn`t think those bullets would go through the wall? That is next.

[18:20:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BANFIELD: It is not often you see an all-American football player, the boy next door so to speak, being led out of a courtroom in cuffs being called a

murderer, and making plans to spend the rest of his life behind bars. Even though maybe somewhere down the pike after decades he might just be freed

on parole. That is Riley Gaul, and that is what`s happening on your screen right now. Just within the last few moments, a guilty verdict came down in

this stunning case, where he shot a gun into the wall of his ex- girlfriend`s home. Aiming right for her bed. Not just her bed, her pillow. Not once, from one side of the house outside, but twice. From the

other of the house outside. Both of those shots were aimed at her pillow and one of those shots hit her in the head killing her.

She was just 16 years old, Emma Walker, and she had such a promising future. And she was, I think we can all agree, stunning. By all accounts,

adorable. Delightful. Life of the Party. In fact, it was at several parties where she felt threatened by Riley, because he was stalking her.

And terrorizing her. He tried to tell this jury that it was, because he was trying to win her back into his arms. Scare her back into his arms.

Well, if that was the plan, it went wrong, and the jury didn`t believe it anyway. That young woman is dead. And that picture of the all American

girl with her all American boyfriend, well, it`s a lie. It`s a lie. Because he is a murder, and she is dead. And that young man, now looks

like something else. Now looks like an inmate who`s put on maybe 30 pounds, maybe 40. He doesn`t look at all what he looked like before. And

that is what happens when you spend your time, you know, doing the prison food line.

That is what`s going to happen. He`ll be going to mess to get his lunches and his dinners and his breakfasts with the rest of the inmates for almost

the rest of his life. If he gets parole. Back with me, my panel, Jesse Weber and Rachel Stockman from Law and Crime Network, and also Brian

Claypool, a defense attorney who`s seen this happen a thing or two, a few times in your career, where no matter how hard you try, Brian, no matter

what defense you put forth, sometimes you can just feel it in your bones when you look at that jury, when you look at their faces, when you see them

roll their eyes, when you see them drop their heads, when you see them look away and not meet your eyes. How many times have you watched that jury

walk away and render a verdict that you knew was coming, because of how they would or wouldn`t look at you?

CLAYPOOL: Well, Ashleigh, it just happened to me six months ago in the Dalia Dippolito case in the middle of the trial -- or toward the end of the

trial, where a piece of evidence came in, it was prior bad act evidence, an allegation of Dalia trying to poison her ex-husband in his tri-tea latte.

And I got to tell you, almost every juror looked down. And Dalia and I have to, you know, we had a conversation after that and we felt like it was

probably over there. That issue is up on appeal, by the way. But if I can make a comment about this case real quick. Every good defense lawyer has

to assess the playing field and call an audible if need be. In this case, I think this young man`s lawyer failed to call proper audible on two

counts, Ashleigh.

BANFIELD: Where? Where?

CLAYPOOL: Well, number one, they should have been trying to cop out a plea in this case. I mean, these facts were not in their favor. And they

should -- I`d like to find out this trial whether they tried to negotiate a plea deal for this young man`s opinion.

BANFIELD: You know Brian, I would not be surprised if they didn`t offer one. They had so many facts in their corner, the kinds that we call bad

facts -- (BAD AUDIO) offer them.

CLAYPOOL: OK. Let`s go to my second point, because you might be right. My second point is this, and you made a great point in the first segment

which is, we used the criminal defense lawyers, we got to dig down as deep as we can to come up with the best arguments for our clients. And what his

lawyers should have been arguing are things like, he had diminished capacity. This guy`s 19. He plays football. Maybe he wasn`t mature

enough. She should have had a mental health exam. Maybe getting hit in the head the last seven years playing football had something to do with

this. Maybe it was heat of passion, because he lost the love of his life and he couldn`t live any longer. His lawyers should had been making those

arguments, instead of this was reckless homicide. Because that is a contradiction. In opening statement, his lawyers said, hey wait, you`re

going to hear facts my client shot this young lady, he did really bad things. But it was an error, it was negligent. That is a contradiction.

BANFIELD: Yes. He tried. He tried. But, you know what, some of these bad facts kept creeping in and knocking that down. And by the way, just in

case our audience is wondering, you often hear that cases are won or lost in openings. If it`s not the case, you hear they`re won or lost in

closings. And closings happened right before this verdict. So if you`re wondering what the last thing that jury heard before they had to make this

decision of guilty was, here`s the prosecutor.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KEVIN ALLEN, KNOX COUNTY ASSISTANT DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Emma Walker in this case was asleep in her bed. He knew it, in and out of that window,

sneaking in and out. You wouldn`t have to spend ten seconds in that room to know where Emma slept and where her head would be at night. Having

walked into her backyard and stood right up behind her wall and placed the bullet into the hole where you knew her head would be. This was

calculated. This was targeted.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: Pretty strong. So what would you do if you were the defense attorney? This is what his defense attorney said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

WESLEY STONE, ATTORNEY FOR RILEY GAUL: I do want to say before I move on to the next life, is that for all the reasons that I`ve mentioned, and I

can think of more, Riley Gaul did not have the intent to kill her, did not have the desire to kill her. And I want to say everything the state says

that about him getting the gun, and firing the first shot is consistent with him trying to get her attention.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: So, it doesn`t matter what he said. Because they decided they didn`t believe him. Maybe one of the last things, Rachel and Jesse, was

Call of Duty. Because that was something I learned today that shocked me that the prosecutors say Riley didn`t know when he stood five feet away

from the wall of a house that the bullet would go through. Riley didn`t know? Riley played Call of Duty. A very realistic game that would teach

you a little bit about guns and how they work. A very realistic game. It is not a fantasy game. The defense attorney said, that is ridiculous.

That is ridiculous that he would learn from Call of Duty. I don`t think it is. You play Call of Duty.

WEBER: I do. It is called wall-banging.

BANFIELD: It`s a strategy.

WEBER: It`s a strategy. You see the video right here, especially if when you are playing, so the player -- you shoot the opponent through the wall.

So now the question is, the defense is saying, you can`t translate that into firing a real firearm. But that is not the issue. The issue was, did

you know a bullet could go through a wall?

STOCKMAN: Because the defense was saying he had no understanding of this particular weapon and didn`t know that it had the capability to go through

a wall and hit someone.

WEBER: Wall-bangers know it goes through the wall.

BANFIELD: OK. Wall-bangers, and I am just going to say, if you`re watching right now and you think this is stupid, let`s remember we`re

talking about a 19-year-old young man. All right. And what informs a 19- year-old? Not the same stuff that we all know. We`ve been through the ringer. We`ve been through court cases. We`ve been through horrible

tragedies, 9/11, everything else informs us.

OK? A 19-year-old is informed by a very few things, a pretty girl, your time in class, trigonometry, prom, winning the game, your friends, sneaking

a beer, playing Call of Duty. It was not informed by going shooting with his grandfather. That was never brought up. The prosecutors would have made

great hay of that had he spent a bunch of time shooting guns with his grandfather, but they didn`t. Instead, he knew Call of Duty and he knew

wall-banging, the kind of strategy where you shoot through a wall to get your kill. That is something that informed this 19-year-old.

And that`s why I think it`s particularly shocking that the defense was that he was just trying to scare her because you have the Call of Duty issue,

and then you have the fact too when we showed over and over again that evidence photo of how close, just feet away from her head when he fired

those bullets. Five feet!

ASHLEIGH BANFIELD, HOST, HLN CRIME AND JUSTICE: Five feet away. Can you guys come back in about 30 minutes? I have a whole lot more on this trial

that I want to cover with you because it`s just still breaking. We`re still getting news from the courtroom. We`re still getting reaction from the

family and so if you guys can come back, I got to -- I kind of threw the whole show out. We`re just going to do it breaking news style. See you in

about a half hour.

Brian Claypool, you can`t go anywhere either. You`re going to stick around too because there`s also this. A married teacher, her alleged sexcapades

with her 13-year-old student, sixth grade teacher. But how long did the school know something might have been going on before she was actually

arrested. That`s next.

[18:30:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BANFIELD: Teachers are not supposed to play favorites. And if one of their students is slacking off, they`re supposed to help them succeed. They are

not supposed to have sex with them in school. And they`re not supposed to send them racy texts at home especially if the teacher`s married and

especially if that student is in sixth grade.

That`s what 27-year-old Brittany Zamora is accused of doing, just ten months into her job as a sixth grade teacher at Arizona Las Brisas Academy.

And now Brittany`s in the slammer.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Miss Zamora, did you have an inappropriate relationship with a 13-year-old boy, one of your students?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: Dead silent on that one. And we`re learning tonight that the 13- year-old boy may not have been the only victim in all of this. Although the things she`s accused of doing with that boy are enough to put Mrs. Zamora

away for years. Including the messages that she reportedly sent him while his parents were watching over his shoulder, messages like, if I could quit

my job and "F" you all day, I would. That`s what she sent him, allegedly.

But it turns out that boy`s parents might not have been the first people to put two and two together. The other students at Las Brisas were reportedly

talking about Mrs. Zamora and her inappropriate relationship with a student well before Mrs. Zamora was taken away in cuffs.

We`re hearing tonight that those students went to the principal about her more than a month before the police hauled her in. Something that boy`s

parents are certainly not very happy about. They sounded off to our affiliate KTVK. Their child`s identity and both of their identities are

being protected.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLUP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I want her to spend the rest of her life in prison. I want the school to be held accountable for what they`ve done and changed

rules and make it to where this can never happen to another parent, another parent`s child. And a big thing for us is that we want people to understand

just because it`s a boy it makes no different.

Well, it`s the same. It`s a 13-year-old child that got taken advantage by a monster. We teach our kids there`s no such thing as monsters, at all.

There`s none. But in the real world, there are monsters, and Brittany Zamora is a monster.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: Well. She`s still cooling her heels in jail because she couldn`t post the $250,000 bond. With me now, Crime & Justice producer Kyle Peltz,

also Russell Richelsoph. He`s the attorney for the minor`s parents. And Marc Saltzman is the technology expert. Still with me is defense attorney

Brian Claypool.

First to you Kyle Peltz, am I to understand that a number of students at this school went to the principal with all sorts of comments about the

teacher dating potentially this child? Spending inappropriate amounts of time with this child, favoring this child?

KYLE PELTZ, CRIME & JUSTICE PRODUCER: Yeah, you`re exactly right, Ashleigh. Mrs. Zamora, she was arrested in late March, but we`re now

learning the school was apparently made aware of that possible inappropriate relationship as early as the beginning of February. Now, our

affiliate, KVOA, they obtained what are said to be the principal`s handwritten letters from these interviews he conducted with other students

at the school.

And it`s not clear exactly which student is being talked about in these letters because they`re heavily redacted. But the documents mentioned a

possible relationship between Mrs. Zamora and another student.

BANFILED: I have them. I have some of the notes apparently, the hand- written notes from the principal. Let me read a few of them. Some of the accusers were pretty specific to the principal in what they said. Here`s

one of the comments from a student. He doesn`t do any work and he gets straight A`s.

[18:35:00] And another comment, everyone talks about them having an inappropriate relationship outside of class and at recess. Recess! And then

another comment, she needs to act a bit more professional with -- and the student`s name is redacted. Students think it`s unfair. He gets warnings

and is let off the hook. Other students get detentions right away.

We don`t know necessarily, Kyle, if those students are speaking of this particular child, but that`s what all the directions point to, correct?

PELTZ: Yeah. I mean, we don`t know the exact child that`s referenced into these documents, but that`s not only -- the accusations aren`t all. There

were actually students that went to this principal and defended Mrs. Zamora, saying that`s not the woman we know.

BANFIELD: I have some of those as well. Let me read them. Some of the defense that these students gave this principal, and again, these are notes

the principal was handwriting that now are in court documents. So one of the kids said, not an appropriate relationship, but he definitely gets

special treatment. Another kid or at least another comment from a kid said, it`s going around the school that they have a relationship, but I feel that

Mrs. Zamora wouldn`t do that.

And then yet another comment says, I`ve heard other kids in my class say that they think they`re dating. I don`t think that because I know Mrs.

Zamora and I know she wouldn`t do that. I have to say when I was in sixth grade, I didn`t even think teachers could get married and have children.

Your sixth grade teacher is your hero. They are a form of life unlike any other. So of course, why wouldn`t these children not believe it for a

minute if they were hearing those rumors in school, and why on earth would they hear those rumors in school.

Russell Richelsoph, if you would weigh in on this for me. How is this -- this child, how is he doing now?

RUSSEL RICHELSOPH, ATTORNEY FOR MINOR`S PARENT: He`s doing OK. He`s been going to counselling and they`ve been getting - the kid has been getting

schooling at home. The parents are very obviously concerned about, you know, protecting their children, protecting their children`s identities in

this matter. You`re exactly right when you say a sixth grade teacher is, you know, supposed to be your kid`s hero.

This is really a difficult time in a child`s eyes. You know, they are on the, you know, kind of the cusp of puberty there and making that transition

and it`s a tough time in a kid`s life. And for a teacher to victimize a child-, you know, at this sensitive time in their life is really damaging.

BANFIELD: And I`ll tell you what, Russell, I wouldn`t even want my children, you know, partially exposed to some of the pornographic writing

even if it was phantom (ph) and fiction, I wouldn`t want my sixth grader seeing this, but I`m going to read for you the alleged messages that this

woman sent this boy, your client`s child.

By the way, it`s a sting operation. His parents made him text her in a realistic way just like they would normally text in order top see her text

back. That`s what they alleged. And the boy says this, I want to "F" so bad baby, those times weren`t enough for me. And Mrs. Zamora is alleged to be

fond of him, I know baby, I want you everyday with no time limit.

She is then alleged to go on and say, if I could quit my job and "F" you all day I would. The boy says, I need more blank from you. And Mrs. Zamora

says allegedly, I`ll give you whatever you want, baby. And I`m assuming, Russell, that those are going to make their way into the case against her

because that`s pretty strong and damning evidence.

There is other evidence as well that I understand you clients have. Early on in the case, it`s my understanding before Mrs. Zamora`s husband knew the

extent of the evidence against her and knew the extent of the alleged relationship between her and her sixth grader. They made an overture to

your clients saying please go easy on her. You`ll ruin her career. There was a phone call and they recorded the phone call, am I correct?

RICHELSOPH: Yes, you`re correct. My client`s parents did make a recording of the phone call from Brittany Zamora`s husband to them.

BANFIELD: And so what was the nature of the call when you think about what he was saying then as relates to what we know now?

RICHELSOPH: He -- the husband clearly didn`t know the extent of what his wife had done. You can tell from what he says in the phone call that he`s

under the impression that all she`s done is send some inappropriate text messages. In the course of the phone call, though, my client`s father then

explains to, you know, Mr. Zamora what the extent of the relationship is and there`s this pause.

There`s this gasp and this pause where, you know, Mr. Zamora is just absorbing this information.

[18:40:02] and it`s very clear from listening to it that his wife hadn`t been honest with him about the extent of the relationship.

BANFIELD: Of what is alleged to have happened. Is it true, Russell, that Mrs. Zamora offered at some point to babysit for these parents, to babysit

the alleged victim, their son.

RICHELSOPH: She did. She had offered to -- there was an event at the school and the parents happened to be at the event and she approached the

parents at this school event and said, oh, you just have such great kids. You know, if you ever need any help, I`d be happy to come over and babysit.

I`d be happy to come over and tutor. And she was really trying to inject herself into this family.

BANFILED: Into their lives. This is before obviously -- this is before all the accusations came to light. But I would like to ask you about these

other kids because we`re also hearing from the prosecutor, he says, plural. He says kids, plural, victims, plural. Do you know anything about others

and what they may have seen or what might have happened to them?

RICHELSOPH: There is another male victim in the case. He`s another student who was in Mrs. Zamora`s class and he was present during a sexual act that

took place in the classroom after school hours.

BANFIELD: Wow. All right, I`m going to ask Marc Saltzman to weigh in, but not before I ask the control if you could cue up the sound bite that has

Mrs. Zamora pleading her case to the judge and I just want to see that last portion if they can. Give me that sound bite that shows her pleading her

case to the judge, asking to go home to her husband. I`m going to roll that for about 10 or 15 seconds.

But before I do that, Marc Saltzman, these parents were very clever. They used something called sentry parental control -- parental control, excuse

me, sentry parental control on their kid`s phone so that they could catch dirty language, et cetera. Is that the only app that you know of or are

there other apps and many apps that parents can get a leg up on trying to police that their kids are safe?

MARC SALTZMAN, TECHNOLOGY EXPERT: So Sentry (ph) is one of the more popular ones for android devices. It does not work on iPhones, which is the

other big platform of course. But there are others -- there are other ones like it. There is a couple that does and they`ll do pretty much the same

thing. It`s a subscription service that you -- that lets you monitor what your kids are doing on their mobile device remotely.

You don`t need to be with them, and that boils down to a few things, images, texts, phone calls, web activity, app activity, and then finally

location. They all kind of do the same thing. So whether this was part of the sting operation or this was installed before the authorities were

brought on board to get proof, this is what the parents used. It is called Sentry (ph).

BANFIELD: Well, I highly recommend it for any parents out there and obviously this I a case where it`s proof positive that you can`t be too

careful. Thank you to Kyle Peltz. Russell Richelsoph, I appreciate your time as well and your information. And Marc Saltzman, always good to have

you. Brian Claypool, you still can`t go anywhere. I still have work for you to do because caught on camera, Texas cops rush to rescue a woman from a

sinking SUV in gator-infested waters. Would you race into the water if you thought something this big and this scary could be lurking just below the

surface?

[18:45:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BANFIELD: Texas police officers race into a gator-infested lake, all to rescue a woman trapped in a sinking SUV.

(VIDEO PLAYING)

BANFIELD: Wow. Body-cam video shows in fact that that SUV sank shortly after the driver was pulled to freedom, in alligator-infested waters. All

along the gulf coast from Florida to Texas, it seems like law enforcement is getting as many calls about gators as it is from bad guys. And not just

little gators -- big, big, big, gators.

This is alligator mating season after all. And while it looks like these guys are hardly breaking a sweat as they capture and relocate this massive

guy from the side of a Texas highway, or wrestling another guy, 11 feet long. Look at that! Out of a Sarasota pool.

How would you like that to be your job tonight as you head out on the beat. It really makes you appreciate all the more the job that police officers

are asked to do on any given day. Oh, man. Bad guy, alligator. You can have it. Thank you for your service.

Caught on camera, a suspect hauled into jail and some people say he looks a lot like a familiar movie character. I`m going to ask you if you can guess

which character I`m referring to. That`s next.

[18:50:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BANFIELD: One more thing for you tonight. A Tennessee inmate seems to be channeling his inner Captain Jack Sparrow of the Caribbean for his mug shot

no less. Police reportedly say that Brian Zalinski got that bandaid by banging his head on the sidewalk after telling officers to kill him.

[19:00:00] Not a good thing to do. He was behaving oddly in the downtown area and allegedly kicked at the police and tried to run away when they

slapped the handcuffs on. But then he seemed to be sort of in a sinister way enjoying the Processing and the booking and the photo. And it does

look like Captain Jack Sparrow, or the Joker in batman.

Next hour of CRIME & JUSTICE starts right now.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BANFIELD (voiceover): A jury has made its decision.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Made the world a better place.

BANFIELD: A 16-year-old cheerleader shot dead in her sleep.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Her head is right where those trajectories cross.

BANFIELD: Now her ex is on trial for murder.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: His plan was never to be caught.

BANFIELD: He insists it was an accident.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Even with everything that`s happened before. I don`t know how I got here. I was kidnapped.

BANFIELD: So is he the innocent ex-boyfriend who made a terrible mistake? Or was this the murderous end to a bitter break-up?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: She was reputing him. She was sending him away.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Did you have an inappropriate relationship way 13- year-old boy?

BANFIELD: She looks like an angel, but she`s accused of doing devilish things with her sixth grade student.

And other kids reportedly told the principal.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Brittany Zamora is a monster.

BANFIELD: So how did she stay on the job for weeks until he was arrested?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I want the school to be held accountable for what they have done.

BANFIELD: And what did she tell the judge about her quarter million dollar bond?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I want to go home to my husband.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BANFIELD: Good evening, everyone. I`m Ashleigh Banfield. And welcome to the second hour of CRIME & JUSTICE.

We are going with breaking news tonight. It is not the kind of news a 19- year-old football star from Knoxville wants to hear, and that`s because a jury just stared down Riley Gaul at his murder trial and dropped seven

thunderous guilty verdicts right on his head.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: In count 1, charging the defendant with first-degree murder, did the jury reach a verdict?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, we did.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What is your verdict?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Guilty.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: You heard it, an audible gasp. Because no longer is this the all-American couple. They called that boy a first-degree murderer instead,

among other things for heartlessly shooting two bullets into the bedroom walls of his 16-year-old ex-cheerleader girlfriend Emma Walker.

Emma was struck in the head and was dead by the time her parents came to wake her up. She had just broken it off with him two weeks before and that

may have been the motive but the jury needed to seal his fate. That is a hell of a closing argument.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This guy, his personal responsibility, his actions, everything that he did caused Emma to suffer and every person in here who

she touched, in their lives. Will never be the same again because of him. And his selfishness and his lies and possessiveness and manipulation.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[19:00:00] Riley`s defense lawyer tried to convince the jury that it was just a terrible accident. That he`d only been trying to win her back by

firing those bullets and scaring her right back into his loving, safe arms.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

WESLEY STONE, RILEY GAUL`S ATTORNEY: My client was her hero. So may somebody`s hero to rescue somebody. He had to have contact. The only way

to have contact is to get their attention. When Riley Gaul fired that shot in the backyard, as crazy as it is bizarre as it is, he hoped that he`d

come to her rescue.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: Want to bring in my panel, two of Law and Crime Network`s legal experts host Jesse Weber and also editor in-chief Rachel Stockman. On the

phone with us, Jamie Satterfield, crime and legal journalist for the Knoxville News Sentinel. She was in the courtroom for the verdict when it

happened just over an hour ago. And still with me is defense attorney Brian Claypool.

You know, Jamie, first to you, you were in the courtroom, you heard that the audible gasp. Take me to that moment and give me that color in the

background. What did it feel like in that courtroom?

[19:05:12] JAMIE SATTERFIELD, CRIME JOURNALIST, KNOXVILLE NEWS SENTINEL (on the phone): You know, I think that Emma Walker`s parents were relieved. I

think that her family and friends had been waiting for this verdict and so I think they felt some measure of justice. I think that Riley`s parents,

though, and grandparents, you know, obviously were unhappy about the outcome, but it wasn`t unexpected, given how it was going.

BANFIELD: Yes, I can`t say that I`m completely surprised either. Although I will tell you, if you can get a verdict in an O.J. trial the way we did,

I do not second-guess any possibility. I always think it can go either way. And I`m sure that people in that courtroom, at least one side wanted

it to go the other way.

Tell me a little bit about Riley`s side of the courtroom. You know, all the support seems to be on Emma`s side of the courtroom and not as much for

Riley. You said his grandparents, his mother, his parents there. Describe how this moment went down for them.

SATTERFIELD: Well, I mean, they reacted as anyone would if your child or grandchild has just been convicted of first-degree murder. They were

upset.

BANFIELD: You know, I will be honest, Jamie, I can`t imagine. I absolutely cannot imagine my child being convicted of a first-degree murder

right before my very eyes. I really don`t know how I would react. I don`t know if I would be stoic. I don`t know if I would collapse into my lap. I

just can`t imagine what they did. What did happen?

SATTERFIELD: You know, there was shock. They reacted with shock. And you know, his grandparents especially, it just tore them apart. They are good

people. You know, Riley, up until this time, had seemed to be, you know, a good kid.

BANFIELD: Good people, yes. The pictures, here he is in his cap and gown graduating. Here he is in a mugshot. And actually, I want my producers to

clarify if that`s the mugshot or his driver`s license. They often times they look the same. Here he is the all-American boy next door with his

cheerleader girlfriend and happier times. The two of them dated for two years. The pictures are beautiful. They looked perfect, like a Hollywood

couple. And I can`t imagine how those parents, you know, interacted with each other, Emma`s parents and Riley`s parents in the courtroom. What was

that like?

SATTERFIELD: You know, they have been very respectful of each other. You know, you got to remember that Riley`s family knew Emma, and this was tough

on them as well. So I have to say, Emma Walker`s family has been wonderful in the sense of being very gracious and kind. I mean, they are not hanging

together, don`t get me wrong, but they certainly, there`s been a lot of respect shown on both sides, and to understand this is a tragedy no matter

what happened.

BANFIELD: Yes. And I just got confirmation that is indeed not his driver`s license. That was his mugshot. He will be getting re-

photographed, too. In fact, this a new system that he`s in. Once you are in the penal system, you get a regular mugshot that shows your progression,

especially when you have a life sentence. We have watched it with some lifers, especially like Charles Manson, who died in prison. You got to see

him every couple of years and how he changed.

And we are now starting to see the progression of Riley Gaul. Here he is, a fit, healthy, young, probably a 16, 17, 18-year-old graduate right there.

Here he is getting photographed. And look at the difference. Look at him there. Already, I think what, a couple of years now, Jesse. He has been

waiting this trial locked up. You don`t often get, you know, a bond when you are facing first-degree murder.

JESSE WEBER, HOST, LAW AND CRIME NETWORK: The combination of the prison food and the stress is not good for any diet, let alone someone who is on

trial. I mean, this was two separate people. And really, his life has been changed between before and after the shooting. That is not the same

man that you see in the nice, smiling picture right there. It is just two different things. And he knew he was going to jail, but he didn`t know how

much time he would face. So as much as you can look at his face and not know what`s going through his mind, that life sentence, that first-degree

murder conviction, his heart probably dropped.

BANFIELD: Well, I can imagine. Or maybe he is just as stunned. I mean, I look at that picture and I think I can`t see -- we are looking at the back

of his head, but I can`t see any reaction. I can`t see devastation. I can`t see anything.

RACHEL STOCKMAN, EDITOR IN-CHIEF, LAW AND CRIME NETWORK: And the amazing thing about what happened in Tennessee, they literally revoked his bond

that minute. You saw that video, they put those cuffs on him and hauled him away. And the judge actually issued the sentence of life with the

possibility of parole that minute, right after the verdict was read. I mean, it`s very unusual, and you can just imagine this boy, if you want to

call him that --

[19:10:00] BANFIELD: He`s 19.

STOCKMAN: -- whole life has changed now as he is going to be in prison for a very, very long time.

BANFIELD: He was 18 in the mugshot. He is now 19. It`s been about a year, little over a year. I didn`t even know actually if he was given a

bond pending trial. He wasn`t out on bond, was he?

STOCKMAN: I believe he was locked up for the entire time.

BANFIELD: Yes. I always say this, only Phil Specter and O.J. that get bond.

STOCKMAN: Right.

WEBER: You know, what is interesting is watch him during the course of the trial, particularly when family members like his grandfather was

testifying, he looked down. He had a sense of shame, I think a sense of shock throughout the entire process. You know, being on trial, and we are

talking about you are being on trial, picture yourself being on trial for this.

BANFIELD: I can`t.

WEBER: And the whole world is watching, your whole family is watching, Emma`s family is watching. He couldn`t look up at a lot of times,

particularly during the closing arguments today when that prosecutor was hammering at him constantly. He didn`t have nothing to say.

BANFIELD: Kevin Allen -- I`m going to ask our controller to play something for us. Because we are re-racking (ph) some of these incredible argument

until today. And the first sound bite I want to give you is about the lies and the denial that he hammered away at -- if you want to believe this guy,

if you want to believe Riley Gaul was just a love-sick puppy who wanted to scare his girlfriend into his arms, if you really want to believe that,

maybe you should hear a few of the other things that he told. Because they are doozies. Have a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KEVIN ALLEN, KNOX COUNTY, ASSISTANT DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Deny, deny, deny. The kidnapping story. The man in black story. It was a homicide and

murder of that 16-year-old girl when she slept. When David wise, trusted friend, (INAUDIBLE), the guy creeping around, that just doesn`t sound

right.

The gun is mining. Yes, I never take it out of the holster. Yes, I knew. Did he know Riley had taken it? Pretty much. This web of lies that this

person has been weaving is constant. It`s a constant drum beat on this family. I`m sick of the lies.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: All right, so that`s one side of the argument. When you have closings, there`s always another one. Prosecutors start, defense attorney

goes second, and then prosecutor gets the last kick at it because they`ve got the burden, right? So the last word usually goes to the prosecutor.

But not before a defense attorney gets a chance to put forth the case.

And I have this one moment from Wesley Stone, Riley Gaul`s defense attorney. I`m going to play it for you. It`s all about the love that Emma

was the love of his life. I don`t think anyone denies that. It`s what you do when you`re crazy in love or sick in love. But this is what Wesley

Stone tried to convince the jury of. You be the judge. Would you be convinced?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

STONE: You are the love of my life. (INAUDIBLE) you fell in love with this (INAUDIBLE). I have so many precious memories of you that say I know

you`re the one. God, I love you so much. That`s also what he had in his car. That note and those contents are inconsistent with wanting her dead

and wanting her gone.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: Jamie Satterfield, the love of his life, the love notes, the photographs of her in his car. I don`t think anyone denies that he was

absolutely crazy in love with Emma, but he took a gun to her home and he shot it twice through her bedroom wall and he aimed both of those bullets

at her pillow, and he knew that bedroom intimately because he snuck in the window all the time. Parents didn`t want him around, so he sneaked in to

see her. And he sneaked into that bedroom regularly. And he knew the layout of that bedroom. And he knew where her pillow would be. And he

knew her head would be on the pillow, in the dark hours of the night, and he fired twice at her pillow. And he struck her and he killed her.

I know that you had a chance to see some of the crime scene photos. This is something that the court did not want going out publicly. Did not want

going out -- the images weren`t release. But maybe you can describe for us a little bit about the scene that those parents were forced to witness and

they will never forget.

SATTERFIELD: Well, one of the most stunning photos for me was the initial shot that they took of Emma in the bed. And she`s there, you know, with t-

shirt and underwear and covered up and laying on her pillow. And she looks like she is asleep. You don`t see blood. We saw some white residue on the

pillowcase. You know, her parents thought that perhaps she overdosed herself, that she committed suicide. And it was only when they tilted her

head that we were able to see the gunshot wound and the blood matted on her hair.

But most significantly, in terms of this verdict, the precision with which the shots were fired, you know, the bed was parallel to her wall. And so

there`s one shot that`s aimed exactly where her head would have been.

[19:15:24] BANFIELD: Yes.

SATTERFIELD: You know, as she`s laying. And then you have a second shot on the other section of the wall. Where the headboard would have been.

And he would know that.

BANFIELD: He would know it.

SATTERFIELD: And again, aimed her perfectly.

BANFIELD: So his argument though, Jamie, was I never thought for a moment the bullet would actually go through the wall. I just wanted it to lodge

in the wall to scare her. Never thought the bullet would go through the wall, even though I was standing four to five feet away from the wall.

And when we come back after the break, the plausibility of that argument, the jury wasn`t buying it. And maybe it was because of something else they

heard today, that he played call of duty all the time. And that one of the strategies in call of duty is actually something called wall-banging, where

you shoot through a wall.

And I want to thank Rachel Stockman for being with us. I know you have to get home to the kids. Rachel, thank you very much for your insight and for

your coverage on this trial.

I`m going to ask the rest of my guests to stay tuned. We`ll talk about that call of duty part in a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:21:20] BANFIELD: We`re still talking about that bombshell verdict that was just announced in a Knoxville, Tennessee, courtroom. The 19-year-old

football star found guilty, first-degree murder. Of stalking and murdering his 16-year-old ex-girlfriend, shooting her dead through two different

walls as she slept. And then being led out of the courtroom, the murderer that he will be now for the rest of his life. Life in prison immediately

imposed on him. He will have the opportunity for parole maybe someday, a long, long time down the road.

My panel is still with me, Jesse Weber, Brian Claypool and also Jamie Satterfield from the crime and legal journalist from the Knoxville News

Sentinel with me as well. She is on the phone.

Jamie, just really quickly, more color from the courtroom, it is just -- it`s beyond me how this family, Emma Walker`s family, has been able to sit

through the details in this trial and sit literally feet away from the man they know shot their daughter. It was just a matter of the motivation

behind it.

They were in the front row as this moment on camera happened, as he was asked to stand, he was cuffed and led out of the courtroom. And he

actually walked right by them. You can see the man, I think in blue. He had to walk right by them, the father and mother of Emma Walker. What was

that moment like?

SATTERFIELD: Well, I think they were in a bit of shock. You know? Because even though this is the outcome that they wanted, you know, there`s

something about him walking off into prison. It doesn`t solve their hurt. It doesn`t stop their pain. And so what I saw was a lot of pain. I think

they also have expressed some compassion for him, which is extraordinary to me.

BANFIELD: Have they really?

SATTERFIELD: Yes, they have. They have not been at all angry or vicious. I have seen all kinds of reactions in my 30 years in the courtroom. And

these folks had real com -- they wanted justice and they think he did this intentionally and that he should be punished, but they weren`t mean or ugly

about it, frankly.

BANFIELD: Well, they probably, I mean, that`s the kind of Grace that we always hope to see, but we rarely see. But they probably also know he has

parents too. And the parents have nothing to do with this. And they are losing a son, not in the same respect. They will get to visit him and see

him behind glass more than likely. And they will get to talk to him. They will get letters. But knowing that your child is going away for the rest

of his life, that`s a lot. That`s a lot to take in. And I`m sure that`s not lost on Mr. And Mrs. Walker, who never get a visit with Emma again.

Brian Claypool, I want you to come in on this topic that we were talking about from the last hour. I think we may have resolution to it now. As

the verdict was coming down, we were all surprised. Seven guilty, three not guilty. And the not guilty verdict that really stuck in our craw was

not guilty of employing a firearm during a dangerous felony. And I would say for the lay people among us, that was a dangerous felony and he sure as

well employed that firearm. Instead he got convicted of a lesser, which was possession of a firearm during a dangerous felony. We thought that

might be an inconsistent verdict that could lay ground work for an appeal. I think we might have solved it. What is it?

BRIAN CLAYPOOL, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Yes, the finding by the jury, the felony that they were referring to was the stalking charge, so it wasn`t the

actual murder. You and I thought in the first segment that it was the actual murder.

But while I have a moment, may I comment briefly on the entire defense strategy in this case, Ashleigh? The best criminal defense lawyers think

outside the box in tough cases. No question this was a really hard case. But if I was representing Riley Gaul, I would have taken the prosecution`s

opening statement as well and said look, this was a young man. He was smitten by Emma. He fell in love wither had. He loved her to death. But

something snapped, something went wrong when they broke up. And used -- remember you played couple of minutes ago, prosecution saying this guy was

talking about kidnappers, being kidnapped, guys in black outfits. I would have used that to his benefit. And said look, this is not the first Riley

that you learned about in his first 18 years. Had a mental health exam on this guy. And then argued either diminished capacity or heat of passion to

defeat the intent. This silly argument that he shot and didn`t intend to hit her was failed from the get-go.

[19:26:03] BANFIELD: I don`t know. He had me actually -- he had me last week up until Thursday, I think it was. I really did believe that a 19-

year-old, at the time 18-year-old kid, so love sick over this beautiful young woman, his girlfriend of two years, who had rejected him, so madly in

love and desperate, he would do anything to get her back. He has scare her into his arms. And firing a gun at the house just might have been the

scare tactic that would have worked. But the kidnapping and the stalking and all that worked, until I learned that those aims were right at the

pillow. He knew that bedroom and he took aim from five feet away on the other side of her bedroom wall and fired once through one side of the house

at the bed where the pillow is, and fired a second one from the other side of that corner of the house. You know, into the headboard, right where her

-- and that`s when I thought, no, you`re not love sick trying to scare someone firing at their head. You are love sick trying to scare someone

firing in the air, or maybe firing at the top of the house, or firing away from anybody who could possibly get hurt, but that was not what happened.

And this is what`s really interesting, Jesse. The notion that he stood four to five feet away from the bedroom wall and fired that gun, his

grandfather`s gun. None of the prosecutors ever suggested for a minute that he knew about firearms, that he had been out with his grandfather

shooting guns. So this isn`t a wise 18-year-old. But they did talk about call of duty. And call of duty is extremely realistic and this kid played

call of duty a lot. Riley liked call of duty, a realistic, you know, game in which you deploy weapons and kill people. One of the tactics is actual

called wall-banging and it`s a tactic where you fire your weapon through walls. Let me hear it.

The defense attorney said, that`s ridiculous. Don`t suggest this kid could learn about weapons by playing a video game, but you`ve played this and

used that tactic, wall-banging.

WEBER: I`m a certified wall-banger, I am. But that`s the point really. It`s not about playing a video game doesn`t translate into firing a real

gun. That`s not the issue. The issue was, could you know that a bullet would go through a wall? And as kid, you said it yourself, he identifies

with a lot of things. He`s 18 years old. He identified with playing with this video game. He knew that it`s possible, when the game is built to be

as realistic as possible, that if the bullets can go through the wall in a video game, what makes him think it wouldn`t go through a wall in real

life?

BANFIELD: Right. And I`m really serious about this, Call of Duty is not like fortnight. And I got to (INAUDIBLE) all the fans in the world, the

mass hysteria over fortnight right now. Fortnight is fantastical. You fire, you know, your weapons and you can take an RPG to somebody and as

long as they got a drink, they drink. And they got another couple of health, they can survive your RPG. Call of duty is realistic. And so

that`s what informed this 18-year-old kid. So the possibility that a bullet could go through a wall is actually a strategy in that game.

WEBER: I mean, if the defense wants to say he wanted to fire those bullets into the wall because that`s the closest she would hear to it, as opposed

to firing in the air or in the ground, what`s more common sense. You are going to fire it so close that she can hear it, or you`re going to fire it

so close because you`re aiming for her? And at the end of the day, it`s about common sense. Isn`t Ashleigh? And here it makes more sense that he

fired those two shots, knowing where her bed was, fired parallel to the headboard, four to five feet away because he intended for a certain result.

BANFIELD: It is hard to get pass that. This jury was probably torn, looking at this kid the whole time and then they are looking at Emma`s

family the whole time. They are probably torn, devastated and they need a good meal and a good sleep and they need to hug their loved ones and we

thank them for their service.

And please do your jury duty.

[19:30:00]

It is the least you can do as an American. You are lucky to live here -- here endeth the lesson. Thank you so much to all my guests.

Straight ahead, a married teacher`s alleged sexcapades with her 13-year-old student. But just how long did her school know about what might have been

going on and just how many kids came to the principal to say, something`s going on, it`s weird, with Mrs. Zamora and that kid. And guess what,

there`s notes.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[19:35:34] BANFIELD: Teachers are not supposed to play favorites. And if one of their students is slacking off, they`re supposed to help them

succeed. They are not supposed to have sex with them in school, and they`re not supposed to send them racy texts at home, especially if the

teacher`s married, and especially if that student is in sixth grade. That`s what 27-year-old Brittany Zamora is accused of doing, just 10 months

into her job as a sixth grade teacher at Arizona Las Brisas Academy. And now Brittany`s in the slammer.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Miss Zamora, did you have an inappropriate relationship with a 13-year-old boy, one of your students?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: Dead silent on that one. And we`re learning tonight that the 13-year-old boy may not have been the only victim in all of this.

Although, the things she`s accused of doing with that boy are enough to put Mrs. Zamora away for years, including the messages that she reportedly sent

him while his parents were watching over his shoulder, messages like, if I could quit my job and f you all day, I would. That`s what she sent him,

allegedly. But it turns out that boy`s parents might not have been the first people to put two and two together. Now, the other students at Las

Brisas were reportedly talking about Mrs. Zamora and her inappropriate relationship with a student well before Mrs. Zamora was taken away in

cuffs. We`re hearing tonight that those students went to the principal about her more than a month before the police hauled her in. Something

that boy`s parents are certainly not very happy about. They sounded off to our affiliate, KTVK. Their child`s identity and both of their identities

are being protected.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I want her to spend the rest of her life in prison. I want the school to be held accountable for what they`ve done and changed

rules and make it to where this can never happen to another parent, another parent`s child. And a big thing for us is that we want people to

understand just because it`s a boy, makes no difference, it`s the same. It`s a 13-year-old child that got taken advantage by a monster. We teach

our kids that there`s no such thing as monsters, at all. There`s none. But in the real world, there are monsters, and Brittany Zamora is a

monster.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: Well, she`s still cooling her heels in jail because she couldn`t post the $250,000 bond. With me now, Crime & Justice Producer Kyle Peltz.

Also, Russel Richelsoph, who`s the attorney for the minor -- the minor`s parents, and Marc Saltzman is a technology expert. Still with me, is

Defense Attorney Brian Claypool. First to you, Kyle Peltz, am I to understand that a number of students at this school went to the principal

with all sorts of comments about the teacher dating potentially this child, spending inappropriate amounts of time with this child, favoring this

child?

KYLE PELTZ, CRIME & JUSTICE PRODUCER: Yes, you`re exactly right, Ashleigh. Mrs. Zamora, she was arrested in late March, but we`re now learning the

school was apparently made aware of the possible inappropriate relationship as early as the beginning of February. Now, our affiliate KVOA, they

obtained what are said to be the principal`s handwritten letters from these interviews he conducted with other students at the school. And it`s not

clear exactly which student is being talked about in these letters because they`re heavily redacted, but the documents mention a possible relationship

between Mrs. Zamora and another student.

BANFIELD: I have them. I have some of the notes, apparently. The hand- written notes from the principal. Let me read a few of them. Some of the accusers were pretty specific to the principal in what they said. Here`s

one of the comments from a student. "He doesn`t do any work and he gets straight As." And another comment, "everyone talks about them having an

inappropriate relationship outside of class and at recess." Recess. And in another comment, "she needs to act a bit more professional with -- and

the student`s name is redacted -- students think it`s unfair, he gets warnings and is let off the hook. Other students get detentions right

away."

We don`t know necessarily, Kyle, if those students are speaking of this particular child, but that`s what all the directions point to, correct?

PELTZ: Yes, I mean, we don`t know the exact child that are -- that`s referenced in these documents, but that`s not only -- the accusations

aren`t all. There were actually students that went to this principal and defended Mrs. Zamora, saying that`s not the woman we know.

[19:40:00] BANFIELD: I have some of those as well. Let me read them, some of the defenses that those students gave this principal. And again, these

are notes the principal was handwriting that now are in court documents. So, one of the kids said, "not an inappropriate relationship, but he

definitely gets special treatment." Another kid or at least another comment from a kid said, "it`s going around the school that they have a

relationship. But I feel that Mrs. Zamora wouldn`t do that." And then yet another comment says, "I`ve heard other kids in my class say that they

think they`re dating. I don`t think that because I know Mrs. Zamora, and I know she wouldn`t do that."

I have to say, when I was in sixth grade, I didn`t even think teachers could get married or have children. Your sixth grade teacher is your hero.

They are a form of life, unlike any other. So, of course, why wouldn`t these children not believe it for a minute if they were hearing those

rumors in school? And why on earth would they hear those rumors in school?

Russel Richelsoph, if you could weigh in on this for me, how is this child -- how is he doing now?

RUSSEL RICHELSOPH, ATTORNEY FOR MINOR`S PARENTS: He`s doing OK. He`s been going to counselling and they`ve been getting -- the kids have been getting

schooling at home. The parents are very obviously concerned about, you know, protecting their children, protecting their children`s identities in

this matter. You`re exactly right when you say a sixth grade teacher is, you know, supposed to be a kid`s hero. This is really a difficult time in

a child`s life. You know, they`re on the, you know, a kind of the cusp of puberty there and making that transition, and it`s a tough time in a kid`s

life. And for a teacher to victimize a child, you know, at this sensitive time in their life is really damaging.

BANFIELD: And I`ll tell you what. I wouldn`t even -- Russell, I wouldn`t even want my children, you know, partially exposed to some of the

pornographic writing, even if it was phantom and fiction, I wouldn`t want my sixth grader seeing this. But I`m going to read for you the alleged

messages that this woman sent this boy, your clients` child. By the way, this was a sting operation. His parents made him text her in a realistic

way, just like they would normally text in order to see her text back. That`s what they -- that`s what they alleged. And the boy says this, "I

want to f so bad, baby. Those times weren`t enough for me." And Mrs. Zamora is alleged to respond to him, "I know, baby. I want you every day

with no time limit." She`s then alleged to go on and say, "if I could quit my job and f you all day, I would." The boy says, I need -- I need more

blank from you." And Mrs. Zamora says allegedly, "I`ll give you whatever you want, baby." And I`m assuming, Russell, that those are going to make

their way into the case against her because that`s pretty strong and damning evidence.

There`s other evidence as well that I understand your clients have. Early on in the case, it`s my understanding, before Mrs. Zamora`s husband knew

the extent of the evidence against her and knew the extent of the alleged relationship between her and her sixth grader, they made an overture to

your clients, saying, please go easy on her. You`ll ruin her career. There was a phone call and they recorded the phone call, am I correct?

RICHELSOPH: Yes, you`re correct. My client`s parents did make a recording of the phone call from Brittany Zamora`s husband to them.

BANFIELD: And so, what was the nature of the call when you think about what he was saying then as relates to what we know now?

RICHELSOPH: He -- the husband clearly didn`t know the extent of what his wife had done. You can tell from what he says in the phone call that he is

under the impression that all she`s done is send some inappropriate text messages. In the course of the phone call, though, my client`s father then

explains to, you know, Mr. Zamora what the extent of the relationship is, and there is this just -- there`s this pause. You -- there`s this gasp in

this pause where, you know, Mr. Zamora is just absorbing this information and it`s very clear from listening to it that his wife hadn`t been honest

with him about the extent of her relationship.

BANFIELD: Of what is alleged to have happened. Is it true, Russell, that Mrs. Zamora offered at some point to babysit for these parents, to babysit

the alleged victim, their son?

RICHELSOPH: She did. She had offered to -- there was an event at the school and the parents happened to be at the event and she approached the

parents at this school event and said, oh, you just have such great kids. You know, if you ever need any help, I`d be happy to come over and babysit.

I`d be happy to come over and tutor. And she was really trying to inject herself into this family`s lives.

[19:45:01] BANFIELD: Into their lives.

RICHELSOPH: Yes.

BANFIELD: This is before, obviously -- this is before all the accusations came to light. But I would like to ask you about these other kids.

Because we`re also hearing from the prosecutor, he says, plural. He says kids, plural, victims, plural. Do you know anything about others and what

they may have seen or what might have happened to them?

RICHELSOPH: There is another male victim in the case. He`s another student who was in Mrs. Zamora`s class. And he was present during a sexual

act that took place in the classroom after school hours.

BANFIELD: Wow. All right. I`m going to ask Marc Saltzman to weigh in, but not before I ask the control room. If you could cue up the sound bite

that has Mrs. Zamora pleading her case to the judge, and I just want to see that last portion if they can, give me that sound bite that shows her

pleading her case to the judge, asking to go home to her husband. I`m going to roll that for about10 or 15 seconds. But before I do that, Marc

Saltzman, they -- these parents were very clever. They used something called Sentry Parental Control -- parental control. See, the Sentry

Parental Control on their kid`s phone so that they could catch dirty language, et cetera. Is that the only app that you -- that you know of, or

are there other apps and many apps that parents can get a leg up on trying to police that their kids are safe?

MARC SALTZMAN, TECHNOLOGY EXPERT: So, Sentry is one of the more popular ones for android devices. It does not work on iPhones, which is the other

big platform. Of course, but there are others -- there are other ones like it. There`s a couple of dozen. They all do the pretty much the same

thing. It`s a subscription service that you -- that lets you monitor what your kids are doing on their mobile device remotely. You don`t need to be

with them, and that boils down to a few things. Images, texts, phone calls, web activity, app activity, and then, finally location. So, they

all kind of do the same thing. So, whether this was part of the sting operation or this was installed before the authorities were brought on

board to get proof, this is what the parents used. It was -- it is called Sentry.

BANFIELD: Well, I highly recommend it for any parents out there, and obviously, this is a case where it`s proof positive that you can`t be too -

- can`t be too careful. Thank you to Kyle Peltz. Russel Richelsoph, I appreciate your time as well and your information. And Marc Saltzman, as

always, it`s good to have you. Brian Claypool, you can`t go anywhere. I still have work for you to do. Because caught on camera, Texas cops rush

to rescue a woman from a sinking SUV in gator-infested waters. Would you race into the water if you thought something this big and this scary could

be lurking just below the surface?

[19:50:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BANFIELD: Texas police officers race into a gator-infested lake all to rescue a woman trapped in a sinking SUV.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: Wow. Body cam video shows, in fact, that the SUV sank shortly after the driver was pulled to freedom in alligator-infested water. All

along the gulf coast from Florida to Texas, it seems like law enforcement is getting as many calls about gators as it is from bad guys. And not just

little gators, big, big, big, big, big, big, big gators. This is alligator mating season after all. And while it looks like these guys are hardly

breaking a sweat as they capture and relocate this massive guy from the side of a Texas highway, or wrestling another guy, 11 feet long. Look at

that, out of a Sarasota pool. How is it like that to be your job tonight as you head out and beat. It really makes you appreciate all the more the

jobs that police officers are asked to do on any given day. Oh, man. Bad guy, alligator, you can have it. Thank you for your service.

Caught on camera. A suspect hauled into jail, and some people say he looks a lot like a familiar movie character. I`m going to ask you if you can

guess which character I`m referring to. That`s next.

[19:55:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BANFIELD: Got "ONE MORE THING" for you tonight. Now, we have seen some mug shots that make you do a double take before. But this one earned the

suspect the nickname "Captain Jack," as in Captain Jack Sparrow from "Pirates of the Caribbean."` Police reportedly say that Brian Zielinski

was arrested after some very, very strange public behavior that included banging his head into the sidewalk. Might be why the Band-Aid there is on

his head. Captain Jack Sparrow probably would have swash buckled his way out of that one, otherwise, but he didn`t and he brought himself into the

Knox County Sheriff`s Office for this very nice picture. And for a moment, on television. I say he looked a little like Heath Ledger`s Joker but

that`s a picture of your nightmares.

We`ll see you back here tomorrow night 6:00 Eastern. Also, you can now listen to our show anytime. Download our podcast on Apple Podcasts,

iHeartRadio, Sticher, TuneIn, or wherever you can podcast for your CRIME & JUSTICE fix. Meantime, thanks for watching, everybody. Stay tuned.

"FORENSIC FILES" is up right now.

END