Return to Transcripts main page

Anderson Cooper 360 Degrees

Federal Judge Opens Docs Case Hearing To Outside Parties; Georgia Appeals Court Freezes Trump Case Indefinitely; NYPD Preparing To Revoke Donald Trump's License To Carry A Gun After Felony Conviction In New York; Gun Store Employee Testifies About Hunter Biden's Purchase Of A Firearm; Most White Evangelicals Still Support Trump For President Despite Felony Convictions; Polls Show Trump Support Among White Evangelicals Remains Strong; King Charles Pays Tribute To D-Day Veterans Ahead Of 80th Anniversary Of Invasion; Accused Gilgo Beach Serial Killer Expected To Be Indicted In Killings Of Two Additional Women; Israel Scales Down Military Facility After Expose Of Alleged Prisoner Abuse. Aired 8-9p ET

Aired June 05, 2024 - 20:00   ET




ERIN BURNETT, CNN HOST: Tonight, Amanda Knox actually back in an Italian courtroom, once again found guilty. Amanda Knox was wrongfully convicted in 2007 for the murder of her roommate, but today was found guilty of slander for pinning the crime on her former boss. Knox had spent four years in prison for the murder, wrongly, before her conviction was overturned. The slander charge, though, remained. Today, she was sentenced to three years in prison for that crime, but she will not be going back to serve any of it because of the four years she already served.

Thanks so much to all of you for being with us. Anderson starts now.

ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST: Tonight on 360, big legal breaks for the former president. Two of his three remaining trials get pushed back further, one indefinitely.

Also tonight, why Trump's about to lose the privilege of carrying the guns he's had a permit to carry for years.

And later, marking 80 years since the D-Day invasion with some of the last surviving veterans of the operation that turned the tide of World War II.

Good evening. Thanks for joining us.

And how different tonight is from just a few days ago, when a New York jury convicted the former president on 34 felony counts. Six days later, other than all charges being dropped, it's hard to imagine a day going any better for a criminal defendant than this day went for Donald Trump.

First, Aileen Cannon, the judge overseeing his classified documents trial in Florida, today revamped the timetable, pushing a number of pretrial hearings later. She did this less than a day after announcing a June 21st hearing on a defense request to declare Special Counsel Jack Smith's appointment illegitimate. A hearing to which people who are not party to the case are invited to take part.

Then, in Georgia, the other shoe dropped. A state appeals court put Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis' case against the former president on hold indefinitely. Meanwhile, the president - the former president is talking retribution. Here he is last evening on Newsmax floating the idea of using the criminal justice system if re-elected against his opponents.


DONALD TRUMP, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: It's a very terrible thing. It's a terrible precedent for our country. Does that mean the next president does it to them? That's really the question. It's a terrible, terrible path that they're leading us to and it's very possible that it's going to have to happen to them.


COOPER: It's going to have to happen to them, very possible. We'll talk about that tonight. First, though, how today provided powerful evidence that Donald Trump is getting every benefit right now that the criminal justice system provides to the accused. CNN's Zach Cohen joins us now with more on the Georgia ruling.

So what exactly did this appeals court say and what does it mean for the chances of this case going to trial before the election or at all?

ZACHARY COHEN, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY REPORTER: Yes, Anderson, the order today making very clear that the criminal prosecution of Donald Trump in Georgia cannot continue until the appeals court decides whether or not Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis should be disqualified from the case.

And that means, Anderson, the chances of this case and of Donald Trump standing trial in Georgia before the 2024 election are effectively zero. And it also raises questions about whether a trial will happen at all.

Now, typically what happens when the appeals court in Georgia takes up an issue is that the proceedings in the lower trial court are automatically stayed put on pause. But this case was a little bit different, a little bit odd and that the judge at the trial court level, Scott McAfee, allowed the proceedings to continue even if the appeals court took it up.

So that's why we saw today the appeals court officially pausing all proceedings in Scott McAfee's courtroom until the disqualification matter is resolved. And look, that means we have several more months ahead of us of relitigating those allegations about Fani Willis' personal life, about whether she financially benefited from a romantic relationship with her top prosecutor instead of preparing for a trial of Donald Trump and his fellow co-defendants in Georgia. COOPER: And how has the Trump team reacted?

COHEN: Yes, Trump's lead attorney in the Georgia case, Steve Sadow, acknowledging that this was a win for him and his client Donald Trump. He said, quote, "The Georgia Court of Appeals has properly stayed all proceedings against President Trump in the trial court pending its decision on our interlocutory appeal, which argues the case should be dismissed and Fulton County DA Willis should be disqualified for her misconduct."

Now, we haven't heard from Donald Trump himself in the aftermath of this order from the appeals court. The District Attorney's Office declining to comment as they sort of weigh their options. But look, Anderson, as we said, if Fani Willis is removed from this case, sources have told me for months that the case effectively goes away. So that's the sort of stakes that we're looking at here.

COOPER: Zach Cohen, thanks so much.

Now, the documents case and how Judge Cannon's latest decisions will slow things down and potentially complicate them as well. CNN's Katelyn Polantz has more on that.

So talk about what Judge Cannon ordered in terms of this hearing about Jack Smith's legitimacy as special counsel.

KATELYN POLANTZ, CNN SENIOR CRIME AND JUSTICE REPORTER: Yes. So Anderson, this is a hearing that she's having over the course of three days in late June, and she's going to be looking at different things on the table before her. Not all of those things, when they're often brought to judges, get hearings.


But in this case, she does want to have a day and a half of hearings about the constitutionality of the special counsel's office, criticizing the Special Counsel and its - calling it illegitimate, that is often in vogue in political circles.

But when that question gets before judges in the modern era of special counsel's offices bringing criminal cases, it's failed over and over and over again. Judges have said, no, special counsels are legitimate. But Judge Cannon, she wants to entertain quite a bit of arguments on this. She wants to have the day and a half long hearing. And then on top of that, she's making this very unusual move in a criminal trial court and allowing third parties to come in and argue to help both sides. Two parties arguing points that Donald Trump's team will be making before her and another side arguing points that the Justice Department is also going to be arguing to her.

COOPER: And what other motions has the judge yet to rule on?

POLANTZ: There's a lot that Judge Cannon still has to deal with. There's this - before her, it is one of five of the different options or attempts Donald Trump's team has made to have the case against them dismissed. There are a bunch of other things that she has yet to do in this case.

She needs to look at his request to throw out evidence gathered in the search of Mar-a-Lago, to throw out evidence gathered in a grand jury from his former attorney. She's going to be looking at the end of June in this three-day hearing proceeding, a gag order request from the prosecutors.

And then there also out there is something she said she would have for the defense team. They've asked for basically a mini trial where they could potentially put under oath investigators that worked on this and question them in her court. That was supposed to be at the end of the - in the end June. But just today, she said, we're not going to have that. I'm going to reschedule it at a later time.

And, of course, over all of this, Anderson, no trial date and no trial date anytime soon based on all of the things that this judge still has to work through.

COOPER: All right. Katelyn Polantz, thanks.

Joining us now, former federal judge Nancy Gertner, best-selling author and former federal prosecutor, Jeffrey Toobin and CNN Legal Analyst, Norm Eisen.

Jeff, how unusual is this for Judge Cannon to - first of all, let's talk about the - allowing third parties in.

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN CHIEF LEGAL ANALYST: This whole way she has conducted this case is wildly, totally, crazily unusual. And the allowing of outsiders to participate in a day and a half hearing that most judges would decide on briefs or maybe give 10 minutes aside to argue is just another illustration that she is trying to kill this prosecution. That's the only conclusion you can draw. No other judge in the federal system that I'm aware of would treat these issues anything like what she's trying to do.

COOPER: Judge Gertner, I mean, you've been critical of Judge Cannon's handling of this case for quite some time. What do you make of her opening up the debate over Jack Smith's authority to some of Trump's outside allies?

NANCY GERTNER, FORMER FEDERAL JUDGE: Well, let's step back. What she's effectively doing is taking a number of - the only way to describe them are MAGA arguments, arguments about selective - vindictive prosecution and in this case arguments about the special prosecutor legitimizing them by giving them hearing time, as Jeff was describing, which is literally unheard of.

I've never heard of a case either in which oral argument was granted to a meekie (ph) to this degree. I think she's rehearsing for a higher position, and that's really troubling.

COOPER: You know - I mean, you think it's a nefarious explanation.

GERTNER: Well, I - you know, I think that that's one explanation. One explanation is that she's inexperienced. The other explanation is she is really legitimizing arguments. These are arguments with respect to the special counsel that have been rejected by the Supreme Court over and over again.

However, Justice - Judge Cannon is living in a world in which the Supreme Court has not been valuing its own precedent. So she's giving it the old college try, which no other judge in her position would have done, rather than, one of the other things that was put off for this hearing, rather than dealing with the various challenges to the classified information, rather than dealing with discovery issues. She's basically leapfrogging over the kinds of things that a judge who really meant to take this case to trial would do, and then legitimizing arguments which really have no legitimacy whatsoever.

COOPER: Norm, are you appalled?

NORM EISEN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Yes. It's pretty bad, Anderson. Remember, George W. Bush called himself the decider. That's what judges are supposed to do. They are supposed to decide. Judge Cannon is the staller. The procrastinator.


And it's just the opposite of what you would expect from, really, almost any other judge in the entire federal system. These arguments ...

COOPER: Any - almost any other judge?

EISEN: Really, almost anyone else. It's one of the worst performances any of us have seen. Her mindset, of course, none of us knows what's going on. There may be an element, not just of currying favor with Trump or of other ill-intentioned goals.

She may also be scared. She sees how Donald Trump can turn on a judge. She sees what he's done in New York. She and her family have to live in Fort Pierce. In a way, if she's doing it out of fear or if there's an element, that's even worse. We look to federal judges ...


EISEN: ... to decide the cases, to move them along. This case should be ...

COOPER: She could like blink with her eyebrows and send a message, you know, of - like a help message.

TOOBIN: I'm a hostage on my bench.

COOPER: Right. Yes. Couldn't she?

TOOBIN: But this is just - I mean, you know, there are a lot of discretion that judges have. And there are conservative judges. There are liberal judges. But what she is doing is really an embarrassment for the legal system. The idea that - you know, as Nancy said, legitimizing these terrible arguments, but at such length and delaying in such way. COOPER: Is there any legal recourse just in terms of like - I mean,

other judges saying like this is just embarrassing?

TOOBIN: Well, this is the question that ...

EISEN: If she does find, despite the fact that in the Paul Manafort and Andrew Miller attacks on Robert Mueller, Hunter Biden just tried throwing out the special counsel. If she flies in the face of all precedent and says either under the appointments clause of the Constitution or the appropriations clause of the Constitution that the appointment of Jack Smith was invalid, yes, there's recourse up to the 11th Circuit.

Part of the reason, I think, in trying to understand her mentality, she seems so scared to make a decision that she scheduled over a day of argument on these ludicrous motions. If she knocks Smith out, that can go up to the 11th Circuit and she can be removed by the 11th Circuit. That's why she's being so careful, so slow. She doesn't want that.

COOPER: Judge, how rare would that be?

GERTNER: If she were overturned by the 11th Circuit?


GERTNER: In Judge Cannon's case, not so rare. She was overturned ...

COOPER: That's true.

GERTNER: ... with respect to rulings she had made ...

COOPER: Right.

GERTNER: ... prior to the - which was extraordinary rulings. No, I mean - but I don't - I think people really have to understand that this is an argument that has been picked over, over and over again. She has not ruled on the gag order question, which Smith wanted her to rule on, because that affected, like, tomorrow.

And rather, she's spending this amount of time on an argument which really no one has taken seriously. But again, she may be playing to a Supreme Court who is taking seriously issues that no one ever anticipated they would. But that doesn't really justify her doing it in this way.

COOPER: And just quickly, Norm, the case in Georgia, I mean, is that just indefinitely on hold? Is this - do you think this thing is just going away?

EISEN: It certainly is not going to go to trial in 2024. The court is supposed to make a decision. Note, there'll be argument in October 2024 and make a decision no later than March 2025.


EISEN: It's not happening then and whether or not it goes depends on whether he's elected or not.

TOOBIN: Well, there's a word for this prosecution, doomed. This is doomed. This case is never going to trial. I think the Georgia case is effectively over. And, you know, Trump has won this.

EISEN: Yes, he always make ...

COOPER: Judge Gertner, do you think DA Fani Willis should be disqualified?

GERTNER: No. I've said from the beginning that she was sleeping with someone on her side. She was sleeping with her co-counsel. I can't tell you how many times that that is likely to have happened. There may be issues with respect to money, which would have been disciplinary charges not affecting her position in this case or ethical issues, which again would be disciplinary. But it's not like she had a conflict of interest. He was on her side. And I have to say I married my co-counsel, so I'm perhaps should be disqualified from this conversation.

COOPER: Judge Gertner, I appreciate your frankness. I want to hear more, but another time. Judge, thank you, Jeff Toobin, Norm Eisen as well.

Coming up next, why the former president may no longer be able to stick to his guns, at least not the ones he's got a license to carry in New York.


And later, devastating testimony in the Hunter Biden firearm trial from people close to him about the drug abuse they witnessed.



COOPER: If there was a glitch in the former president's otherwise winning day in two of the trials he's facing, it came as fallout from the one he lost, specifically concerning his license to carry a concealed firearm in New York. Details now from CNN Chief Intelligence and Law Enforcement Analyst, John Miller, who's also a former New York Police Department deputy commissioner. So what have you learned about this?

JOHN MILLER, CNN CHIEF LAW ENFORCEMENT AND INTELLIGENCE ANALYST: Well, what we learned today was that very quietly, right around the time that President Trump was indicted on the 34 counts of felony fraud in Manhattan, his license to carry firearms, and he was licensed for three guns, was suspended on April 1st 2023.

That, of course, took us through the pendency of the trial and all of that. But with his conviction now under New York state law and federal law, he's a convicted felon, which means it is a state and federal crime for him to possess a firearm or even ammunition. Now, there's a third gun, Anderson, that after the NYPD received these two, they said, where's the third? And they said, well, that was legally transferred to Florida.

So we don't know about the third gun. We know the NYPD has two. But if former President Trump is still in possession of that third gun, technically he's ...


COOPER: So they've actually taken two of his guns.

MILLER: Yes. And that happened when he was charged.

Now, what would have happened was had he been acquitted in the New York state case, he could have applied to get those guns and his carry license back. The real question is about the gun that went to Florida, what is the disposition of that weapon? Was it turned into authorities? If so, when? If so, to whom? Is that on record?

COOPER: Though would he - if it was in Florida - I mean, if it's a New York license, does he - is he fine to have it in Florida?

MILLER: Well, he would need a Florida license. Now, the standard for getting a license in Florida is much - a lower bar than New York. But regardless, if you are a convicted felon, it doesn't matter if you have a license. That's a felony to possess that gun or the ammunition.

So through Kristen Holmes, we've reached out to the Trump camp. They have basically indicated that they are not going to answer any questions about this.

COOPER: That's not a surprise.

MILLER: So I mean, we're going to keep pressing because it makes a difference.

COOPER: And if he had a conviction overturned, would he be able to get the license back?

MILLER: So he would have to apply to the New York State Supreme Court here to get a certificate of relief saying you were acquitted and then he'd have to ask the police department and they would do an investigation and a hearing and either return it to him or not.

COOPER: All right.

MILLER: But I mean, it would be complicated by the fact that he's under multiple indictments in different places.

COOPER: John Miller, thanks very much. Appreciate it.

MILLER: Thanks.

COOPER: Coming up, Hunter Biden's ex-wife, as well as an ex-girlfriend he met at a so-called gentleman's club testified about his past drug use. Day three of his federal gun trial is next.


COOPER: Today, Republican-led House committees behind the impeachment push against President Biden referred his son Hunter, as well as the President's brother, to the Justice Department on charges of making false statements to Congress.


Now, this occurred the same day the testimony in Hunter Biden's trial on breaking federal gun laws featured candid testimony from his ex- wife, as well as an ex-girlfriend about his past drug use. Paula Reid has details.


PAULA REID, CNN CHIEF LEGAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT (voice over): On day three of the Hunter Biden trial, the jury listened attentively as two of Hunter's former romantic partners described what they witnessed of his addiction.

His ex-wife testified briefly that she first learned of his drug use in 2015, saying, "I found a crack pipe on an ashtray on the side porch of our home." She also described searching his car for drugs. When my daughters would use his car, I would check to make sure there were no drugs in it. But when asked if she ever saw Hunter use drugs, she said she had not.

Next up was an ex-girlfriend who he first met at a gentleman's club in Manhattan, where she worked in late 2017. And the two spent long stretches together in hotels in 2018, where she observed his drug use. "He would smoke every 20 minutes or so." And, "He would want to smoke as soon as he woke up."

She also testified that Hunter's demeanor never changed even after he smoked crack. "He was super charming. Everybody loved him." She testified that she saw Hunter doing drugs as late as mid-September 2018, several weeks before he bought the gun at the heart of the case. But under cross-examination, she said she had no idea what Hunter was doing between September and November, which covers the month Hunter bought the firearm.

Gordon Cleveland, the gun shop employee who sold Hunter Biden the gun, took the stand next and testified how Hunter came into the store looking for a firearm. He testified that he told Hunter to read the ATF background form carefully and saw him check no, next to the question about whether he was an addict or used illegal drugs, the alleged lie at the center of the case.


REID (on camera): On cross-examination, Abe Lowell, one of Hunter's defense attorneys, got that employee to admit that he is a, quote, "whale hunter." Someone who upsells customers to buy more expensive guns. Now, that contradicts the grand jury testimony that employee gave. So clearly, a point scored by the defense there. This cross- examination will continue tomorrow. Anderson?

COOPER: Paula Reid, thanks very much.

Returning now to the former president and his trials, we want to explore one factor underpinning every step of his journey through the criminal justice system. The seemingly unwavering support he enjoys from white evangelical Christians.

On Fox over the weekend, he said, quote, they are so committed and they're so believing. They say, sir, you're going to be okay. I pray for you every night.

Well, today, Ralph Reed, chairman of the Faith and Freedom Coalition was asked by The Washington Post about how his fellow evangelicals reconciled their faith with the former president's behavior.


RALPH REED, CHAIRMAN, FAITH AND FREEDOM COALITION: Character does matter, and individual voters will make those assessments. But I think that the idea that either voters of faith or all voters disqualify someone because of moral failings in the past is just out of step with who the American people are.


COOPER: Russell Moore is editor in chief of Christianity Today. Character matters is what he said after the New York verdict and what Ralph Reed was reacting to in his answer.

Russell, it's good to have you on the program. Ralph Reed went on to say that voters make a nuanced differentiation between private character and public character. And he said, I'm not voting for this person to be my daughter's husband or to be my pastor. Does that argument - I mean, is that an argument you accept? Is there a difference between private and public character with Mr. Trump or should there be?

RUSSELL MOORE, EDITOR IN CHIEF, CHRISTIANITY TODAY: That's not an argument that I accept, and it's not an argument that we as evangelical Christians have made over the last 50 years. Instead, what we've always said is that if you can't trust someone with your daughter or your wife, you shouldn't trust that person with the nuclear codes. The sort of argument that we hear there, I've heard before, but I heard it from the left in the Clinton era. I never would have imagined then that I would be hearing it now from us.

COOPER: I mean, I would understand an argument of, yes, this person is morally bankrupt, but politically he does what I want and therefore I'm going to bankroll him and I'm going to vote for him. That to me would be a, you know, you can disagree with it or not, but that would be a seemingly a more honest answer of this current situation.

MOORE: Well, and also we're not talking about moral failings in the past. If we were dealing with someone who is repentant and whose character has changed, we would be talking about an entirely different thing. Instead, we're talking about somebody who denies that he had the affair, even though he paid the hush money, is denigrating and calling these women names and calling them liars.


I mean, we've had years and years and years of this. Somewhere out there in the multi-verse, there is a timeline where we don't have to think about Donald Trump's sex life or what that has to do with the future of our country. And sadly, we are in this timeline.

COOPER: You know, the Donald Trump when he first ran needed Mike Pence to -- one of the reasons he needed Mike Pence was to kind of shore up his support among white evangelicals and to have somebody vouch for him, which Mike Pence did. He doesn't really need that anymore, does he?

MOORE: He doesn't need that anymore. I mean, Mike Pence served two really critical functions. I don't think that Mike Pence convinced people who were skeptical of Trump's character to vote for him. But I do think that it eased some uneasy consciousness of people. They knew that they could trust Mike Pence. A lady who taught me Sunday school when I was a kid lambasted me after I criticized Trump after Access Hollywood, and the reason she gave is look at his vice presidential candidate, he is such a Godly man.

So it helped some people to work through the question of, am I really voting for Donald Trump? I don't think any of those people would have voted for Hillary Clinton, but it helped them along. And the second thing was that Mike Pence understood and knew the evangelical world. He knew how to communicate with evangelical leaders and how to sell the administration's agenda to them. I don't think that'll Trump needs that anymore. I think instead, he goes directly to his base. They hear from him and they respond to him and the evangelical leaders then hear from the base, not the other way around.

COOPER: Is there room for growth among evangelicals for Donald Trump? I mean, not -- I mean, he has white evangelicals. What about others?

MOORE: Well, I think the key question this year is going to be that of Hispanic evangelicals Journalist Harvest Prude has a major story coming out in "Christianity Today" in a few weeks about this question of what does it look like with Hispanic evangelicals and will they be the swing vote? And I think that very well may be the case, because we tend to think of Hispanic voters in Florida and Texas, Nevada, and we tend to think of evangelical voters, but not many people are thinking about where those two come together. And there are a lot of Hispanic evangelicals in especially places like Arizona and Nevada and places that will decide this election. So, it may be that Hispanic evangelicals are the ones who decide this race ultimately.

COOPER: Russell Moore, good to talk to you. Thank you.

Coming up, marking 80 years since D-Day, the allied invasion on the beaches in Normandy that turned the tide of World War II. Christiane Amanpour is in Normandy for us tonight, next.



COOPER: It's already June 6 on the beaches of Normandy, France. And in just a few hours, a ceremony will take place there to mark the 80th anniversary of D-Day, the largest amphibious invasion in history. More than 150,000 American, British, and Canadian, and other allied troops stormed the beaches on that day, parachuting in as well. More than 4,000 lost their lives in the first day alone, many more would go on for us to liberate France, then defeat Hitler's army. About 150 American veterans are expected to be on hand, including about two dozen who were part of that invasion.

CNN's Christiane Amanpour is there for the ceremony. Christiane, talk about the events planned there in Normandy. I mean, this is such an extraordinary moment in history.

CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL ANCHOR: I mean, it really is 80 years since those incredible fighters stormed ashore on the beaches not far from me. And you know, I'm here in a Normandy village. This is the kind of thing that they would have found as they finally got up and climbed the high, high cliffs and started to liberate these villages. And it is extraordinary. Tomorrow, at the ceremony, will be President Biden, will be the French President Macron, will be the King of England, Charles III, and also the prime minister, also the Canadian prime minister, all the representatives of those forces that stormed ashore June 6, 1944.

So, it's going to be pretty dramatic. Probably, the last of the surviving veterans, I mean, I don't think we are going to get a lot of veterans five years from now, because every five years, they celebrate. And I think it is going to be very difficult (ph), about two dozen American veterans, some 30 or so British veterans, and the like. And they will really be the stars of the show for sure.

COOPER: Who are -- you are talking about some of the world leaders who will be there, who will not be there?

AMANPOUR: Well, Anderson, President Putin will not be here. And the truth is, the Russians didn't always come, but he has been invited in the past and most particularly, because I covered the 2014 anniversary, Putin was invited in order to try the world leaders, the allied leaders tried to knock some sense into him then because it was just a few months after he had annexed Crimea. And they were trying to get him in back rooms and to deal with a peace agreement. The whole Minsk process started. But of course, it led nowhere.

And now for the first time, honestly, in 80 years since the allied invasion on D-Day, the fate of Europe hangs in the balance, almost like it did then. And Russia is with its war in Ukraine, threatening everything that those heroes fought and liberated on June 6, 1944. So it's a huge, big deal, the defense of democracy, the defense of freedom, these are not just empty words anymore. It's not just a nice commemoration and a celebration of the heroes who are left standing. It is really everything at stake, if the international rules of the road that the United States really led after the end of World War II are to continue.

COOPER: I know one of the veterans that you are going to be speaking with is someone you spoke with five years ago, tell us about him.

AMANPOUR: So, his name is Jake Larson. He's now over 100-years-old, about 101. He's become, guess what, a TikTok star in the last several years and that is because he is teaching generations who are obviously much younger to understand what happened, and what he and his comrades did are 80 years ago.


Now, we are hoping to have him. Apparently, we are being told that the Pentagon, the White House, you know, all the sort of administrative stuff that gets in the way, are controlling the veteran's movements. So we had five years ago, he's dying to talk to us and he's a really amazing person. I mean, he brings tears to your eyes and he is really beloved here in the French countryside.

I've seen the French journalists here, he's been with the descendants of those people who they liberated, and telling stories and just trying to make sure that what happened 80 years ago is not just a memory and is not lost on you because, right now, as I said, it is vital.

COOPER: Yeah. I so wish I was there, Christiane. I'm so glad you are there and I'll be watching. Thank you so much, Christiane Amanpour.


COOPER: As you just heard, President Biden and other world leaders will be in Normandy, also Britain's King Charles in his first overseas trip since being diagnosed with cancer. Today, at a ceremony on Britain's southern coast, he paid tribute to D-Day veterans. Here is CNN's Max Foster.


MAX FOSTER, CNN LONDON CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): A royal wave from a 99-year-old British World War II veteran. D-Day soldiers who are still here to tell their stories, revisiting their past as a lesson for the future, some even traveling across the sea from Portsmouth in England to mark the 80th anniversary of the U.S.-led landing in Normandy, France.

They were joined by British royals and a handful of world leaders who celebrated their allied efforts, urging the next generation to listen to those who came before.

CHARLES III, KING OF THE UNITED KINGDOM: Our role is not purely passive; it is our duty to ensure that we and future generations do not forget their service and their sacrifice.

FOSTER (voice-over): The ceremony, the first major event since King Charles' cancer diagnosis saw him side-by-side with his wife, Queen Camilla, who shed a tear amid the somber occasion, as well as his son and heir, Prince William. Their rare family show of force a representation of unity amid a time of global division. Charles and William using the moment to remind their country and the world of the need for civic duty, sacrifice, and the strength of allied cooperation.

WILLIAM, PRINCE OF WALES, DUKE OF CAMBRIDGE: I am deeply honored to join you today, to recognize the bravery of all of those who participated in the D-Day landings. The start of the liberation of France and Europe that led to victory of the allied powers.

FOSTER (voice-over): Royal ties to the Second World War are far from forgotten, keen not to be hidden during the war, after bombs dropped on Buckingham Palace, the then King George VI and Queen Elizabeth decided to stay put, in solidarity with those living through the blitz. And at just 19-years-old, a teenage Princess Elizabeth carried out her first public duties during the war, joining the women's military, training as a driver and mechanic.

Former reflections will mix with this week's commemorations, rich in symbolism and resonance of current times, a commitment and plea to learn from the past.

FOSTER: The king's doctors are advising him on how many events he can attend. He won't be able to go to all the events he wants to in France. So, Prince William will probably have to step in for him, so it's not too much for his father at this stage in his recovery. Anderson?


COOPER: Max Foster, thanks so much. Next, back here at home, a major development in the Gilgo Beach killings, the suspect expected in a New York courtroom tomorrow and according to multiple sources, he'll be indicted in the killings of two more women, details coming up.



COOPER: Tonight, we've learned from multiple sources that the accused Gilgo Beach serial killer is expected to be indicted on two additional murder charges tomorrow. He was arrested you may remember, last July and has already been charged with murder in the deaths of four women who disappeared between 2007 and 2010. These new charges come after his Long Island, New York home was searched over several days by local and state police for a second time last month. CNN's Jean Casarez has been following the case, joins us now with more. So, what's the latest?

JEAN CASAREZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, CNN's John Miller confirmed that we do expect tomorrow, there will be a superseding indictment in Suffolk County court and prosecutors are alleging that there are two more victims of this alleged Gilgo Beach serial killer. We want to show you who they are. First of all, Jessica Taylor, at 20-years-old, she went missing. It's believed she was killed. And then in 2003, her partial remains were found in Manorville. That's a wooded area in the east part but of Long Island. It is 40 miles away from Gilgo Beach, and then in 2011, the remainder of her remains.

Also, Valerie Mack, 24-years-old when she was killed, her remains -- partial remains found in the year 2000 in that wooded area, and then 2011 on Gilgo Beach, other remains of hers were found. We do not know how, forensically, they are connecting these women with this alleged serial killer out of Long Island. But what we do know is they have had a lot of investigation in the last month. I want to show you a video of the wooded area, Manorville, because that -- they have been actively investigating that area and it is very wooded.

Now, they have the remains. They know who these women were, but they were still out there in May searching. But then they went to the home, the family home, big investigation. Remember, last year, they were out there for like two weeks?

COOPER: Oh, yeah.

CASAREZ: Well, here they are. There were so many law enforcement just last week and the week before, so many cardboard boxes, crime scene vehicles. But at the back of the home, very interesting, because there was a lot of law enforcement, dug up earth in the back of the home.


The whole backyard was dug up. Now, we can't confirm that that's law enforcement. There was a backhoe, but they're all standing right there on the dug-up backyard. One, who appears to be police officer, had that old old-fashion type of camera, you know, which they still use to take pictures that can become evidence in court.

COOPER: So this investigation, I mean, it is still very much ongoing?

CASAREZ: You know what they say, it's just beginning. It is just beginning. We cannot forget the 'Gilgo Four' because they began this prosecution and they are Melissa Barthelemy, Megan Waterman, Amber Costello, and Maureen Brainard-Barnes. So, this is now -- after tomorrow, with the presentment of this indictment, there should be six victims.

COOPER: And are there other remains yet to be identified?

CASAREZ: There are other remains and you know, Anderson, think about how many families have missing loved ones during this time because, now, everything is enlarged, right? 2000 -- year 2000, now, remains were found, and then 2007 to 2010 were the Gilgo Four. So look at that span of time now. Think of how many people never had their relatives come home. They have no answers. And this is an active investigation to not only find more remains, but to identify who those remains may be of. Families could get answers here.

COOPER: Yeah. Jean Casarez, thanks so much, appreciate it.

Still to come, a major development and CNN Exclusive Report that Matthew Chance brought us last month about evidence of alleged prisoner abuse in an Israeli military facility. Matthew is back with new reporting, next. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)


COOPER: I want to bring you a major update on a CNN Exclusive we first reported last month. It involves alleged prisoner abuse at an Israeli military facility near the border with Gaza. One Israeli guard in that report told our Matthew Chance, the prisoners are routinely beaten. Here he is again, and we kept his voice and identity hidden.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You can take them out and hit them maybe four or five times with a club. The detainees lie belly down being hit and kicked, people screaming and dogs barking at them. It's terrifying. Some detainees are taken away and beaten really hard, so bones and teeth are broken.

MATTHEW CHANCE, CNN CHIEF GLOBAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: You saw people who are subject to these beatings, who had their bones broken and who had their teeth broken?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes. It's a practice which commanders know about. They want intelligence, but they also want revenge and punishment for what happened on October 7th.


COOPER: Another Israeli whistleblower told CNN about detainees viewed as "problematic people" who were allegedly zip-tied to the fence. The Israeli military at the time said detainees were handcuffed based on risk level and health status. But the whistleblower's account does track with photographic evidence obtained by CNN of Palestinian detainees inside the military facility and with hand and wrist injury shown to CNN by dozens of Palestinians released back into Gaza. Matthew Chance joins us now with the new development in the story. Matthew?

CHANCE: Thanks, Anderson. That's right. Well, today, the Israeli supreme court, the highest court in Israel, heard a case brought by an Israeli human rights group about this exact story, and much of CNN's reporting was used in that human rights case to bring the court action, basically saying that keeping Palestinians in these conditions without access to proper medical care, in abusive conditions, as we heard there, and without even being named publicly, that's not just against international law, it's against Israeli law as well. So that's an ongoing court case that's being held in the Israeli supreme court.

Well, today, a state attorney representing the government of Israel basically said that, look, we are already taking steps to move hundreds of Palestinians out of that facility to other better facilities elsewhere in Israel and in the West Bank, the Palestinian territories. And so, they haven't decided yet exactly what to do with this (inaudible) facility near the Gaza border, but there was in there somewhere a kind of tacit acceptance that this situation that we exposed now reporting can't continue. And so, that's really positive development for human rights activists and of course, for the inmates inside that detention facility, Anderson.

COOPER: And what has the IDF said about the allegations?

CHANCE: Well, as you mentioned, the IDF said about the original allegations that there's nothing illegal that they're doing. They say they strip people, for example, to make sure they haven't got explosives on them. They say they handcuff people and shackle them because it's for security reasons. And obviously, all this is taking place in the context of the aftermath of the Hamas attacks on October 7th. And so, there's a real mood in Israel that persists today that everything needs to be done to get to the bottom of who is responsible for that and to find the hostages that are, of course, still being held inside the Gaza Strip.

And so, many Israelis believe this kind of treatment is justified. But, as we saw, there is a growing number of citizens of that country that believe that the country has gone too far in the prosecution of this war in Gaza.

COOPER: Yeah, I mean, in your original report, there were Israelis who were outside the facility protesting the treatment of Palestinian prisoners. What's been the reaction from people inside Israel?

CHANCE: Yeah, I mean, I think that's very much the point. Remember, the whistleblowers who we spoke to in the report, they were also predominantly Israelis, serving members of the military or medical officials that worked alongside the military in this detention center. And then you are right, the protesters outside the detention center that we met, they are predominantly Israeli as well. It was an Israeli group and it's all about a debate that Israel is having internally. What's the correct way for the country to proceed in its battle against Hamas? No one is sympathizing with Hamas amongst this group of people. But it's just the idea that Israel has certain standards, that many people in Israel, a growing number, believe are being not met by the military, by the authorities in its pursuit of Hamas in Gaza.