Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Newsnight Aaron Brown
New Developments In Smart Abduction Case; New Terror Warnings Announced by FBI
Aired June 21, 2002 - 22:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
AARON BROWN, CNN ANCHOR: Good evening again everyone.
Earlier this week, we mentioned the Jewish historian Josephus when talking about the Middle East, and tonight we'll go back a half a millennium before Josephus to Euripides. "Among mortals," he wrote, "second thoughts are the wisest."
We think of that when we think about a remarkable story we saw in the paper today, something worthy of any Greek tragedy ever written. The time was a month ago. The scene begins in a rickety car picking up two Palestinians, a 20-year-old girl and a 16-year-old boy. They are armed with explosives and dropped off at a pedestrian mall filled with Israelis.
The girl has second thoughts. "I look at the sky," she told a reporter wondering if she really would go to heaven rather than hell. "I look at the people," remembering something she believed as a child, "that nobody has the right to stop anybody's life." She turns back. Second thoughts are the wisest.
She said the 16-year-old boy had second thoughts too, but he did not turn back. He found a group of elderly people playing chess and he killed two of them and himself.
The girl told her story from an Israeli jail and, of course, you have to take her comments with a grain of salt. We can never really know what caused her to reflect on what she was doing, why she changed her mind and the boy did not. Maybe it was looking at the faces of those innocent people or maybe it was simply fear or perhaps a little of both.
But we do know that in Palestinian communities today, many people believe it is the girl who had the fatal flaw in this story, not the boy who went on to kill. He is the hero, while she is being viewed by some, a lot, as a coward. If that is not a tragedy, we do not understand the meaning of the word.
More on the Middle East a little bit later in the program, but we start the whip in a different place. A major development in the Elizabeth Smart case takes us first to Jeanne Meserve in Salt Lake City. Jeanne, a headline from you please.
JEANNE MESERVE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Aaron, an FBI agent and a Salt Lake City detective are on their way to Martinsburg, West Virginia right now. They want to interrogate Bret Michael Edmunds, hoping for clues into the disappearance of Elizabeth Smart -- Aaron.
BROWN: Jeanne, thank you. Bob Franken is already in West Virginia. So, Bob, from your end of the story, the headline.
BOB FRANKEN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Bret Edmunds checked himself into this hospital yesterday morning using an alias. But now police, federal officials have cleared up the mystery of where he is and hope that he can clear up the mystery of where Elizabeth Smart is -- Aaron.
BROWN: Bob, thank you. And more terror advisories from the FBI today, vague and unsettling as they have been. Kelli Arena is on that. So, Kelli, the headline from you.
KELLI ARENA, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Aaron, the Jewish community is on alert, as the FBI tells local law enforcement new information suggests synagogues and Jewish schools may be the target of a terrorist attack.
BROWN: Kelli, thank you, back with all of you shortly.
Also coming up tonight, we'll talk with former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak. We expect he'll have some interesting things to say about the latest offer from Yasser Arafat, an offer to accept a peace plan Arafat rejected two years ago.
And Title IX, 30 years later. Supporters say the soccer stars of 1999, World Cup champs, are direct descendants of the law, but critics say the gains women have made in sport have come at the expense of men. We'll debate Title IX tonight. But as always, we promise no screaming matches, not here.
And the story of a man on death row tonight. The men who fingered him say they lied. One juror has doubts, but the man can not get a new trial. It is "Segment Seven" tonight on this Friday. There is much to do.
We begin in Salt Lake City. Elizabeth Smart has been missing a bit more than two weeks now, and for much of that time so has a man police have long called a witness but not a suspect.
So we don't know if his capture, Bret Edmunds that is, will lead directly to Elizabeth or whoever took her, nor do we know or have much reason to believe that she is safe tonight.
Chances of that began to fade they say, police do, just hours after her abduction. But for the last two weeks, investigators have had a lot of questions and Bret Edmunds may have some of the answers.
The story plays out in two places across the country tonight, Martinsburg, West Virginia and Salt Lake City, Utah. We begin in Salt Lake and CNN's Jeanne Meserve.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) MESERVE (voice over): Bret Michael Edmunds, described by police as a doper and a drifter, wanted for more than a week for questioning in the disappearance of Elizabeth Smart.
CHIEF RICK DINSE, SALT LAKE CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT: He's a question mark and we want to put a period on that question mark and that's all it is at this time.
MESERVE: The questions arose when Edmunds was recognized at a candlelight vigil for Elizabeth Smart shortly after her June 5th disappearance.
Some of the numbers on the stolen license plates on his car matched those on a suspicious vehicle seen in the Smart's neighborhood in the days close to the abduction, but Edmunds fled and police have been looking for him ever since, though they do not describe him as a suspect.
DINSE: He is just somebody we want to talk to. He is a fugitive. He is wanted. He has a criminal background. All of those things are important to us, obviously, and we want to talk to him.
MESERVE: There are no sexual offenses on 26-year-old Edmunds criminal record, but there are at least two outstanding warrants for his arrest. One was issued after he fled from police right up the hill from the Smart home near what's called the Block U (ph), and there are other reasons for police to be interested.
Edmunds once worked in the Smart's neighborhood collecting trash, so he knows the local geography and he's been known to loiter in the area. He does not, however, match the physical description of the abductor. Edmunds is taller and heavier. The Smart family said the news of Edmunds' capture continued their emotional rollercoaster ride.
DAVE SMART, MISSING GIRL'S UNCLE: We're not going to hang out hat on it. I mean we're just not going to hang our hat on anything until we have Elizabeth in our hands and our arms.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
MESERVE (on camera): Searching for Edmunds has consumed a lot of time and resources and authorities are glad to have him in custody, whether he is their man or not, but they hope he is -- Aaron.
BROWN: Well, they're going to start to question him and we'll find out, I guess. Just go back to his criminal record. You note there are no sex offenses. Do we know what sort of things? He's had a lot of little brushes with the law, isn't that it?
MESERVE: That's right. He pleaded guilty to the theft of some checks. He had written 11 of them out for the amount of $100. Eventually it was traced to him and he was charged. He pleaded guilty as I said.
There was another incident with police. A neighbor had called in someone asleep or passed out in a car. When police came, he sped away at a very high rate of speed.
And then there was yet another incident where police approached him. They thought he had fraudulent license plates on his car. When they got close, he appeared to drop something between his legs and he then brought up pepper spray and attempted to spray the officer. He then sped off at a very high rate. We're told speeds in that chase reached 100 miles per hour.
But most of these crimes had to do with property theft. Nothing had anything to do with sex, and so that's one reason they're not certain exactly how valuable this man is in this investigation. They want to talk to him and find out -- Aaron.
BROWN: Well, I guess they're going to, Jeanne, thank you, Jeanne Meserve in Salt Lake City.
Quickly now to Martinsburg, West Virginia where Edmunds was captured or taken into custody at a hospital there. CNN's Bob Franken raced to the scene as well and Bob joins us now. Bob, good evening to you.
FRANKEN: Good evening, Aaron. They have no idea why it is he's in Martinsburg, West Virginia, 2,000 miles plus from Salt Lake City, but tonight he is in the sixth floor of this hospital, the city hospital in Martinsburg where he brought himself yesterday morning very, very early, about 5:15 in the morning suffering from what officials say was a drug overdose and very serious liver problems.
He is in serious condition this evening. He brought himself in the green Saturn car that people have been looking for all over the country. The car has been towed away from the parking lot here. It has been taken to an impound lot. Officials are in the process of getting a warrant to search for any evidence that might help in their search for Elizabeth Smart.
Now, once officials figured out that he was here and was not Todd Richards (ph) as he claimed when he checked in, U.S. Marshals and FBI agents came to the hospital a little after one o'clock Eastern today.
They went to his room, compared him to the picture, saw the car in the parking lot, asked him if he, in fact, was Bret Edmunds. He admitted he was. He is lapsing in and out of consciousness. Then, they put very, very heavy security on the hospital ward.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TERESA MCCABE, HOSPITAL SPOKESWOMAN: He has been placed under arrest by the FBI.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Is his room being guarded?
MCCABE: So - his room is being guarded. In fact, as soon as there was suspicion that he could potentially be Bret Edmunds, the unit was secured. State police, local police, hospital security secured the unit. Patients, other patients who were in the unit were transferred out to another area within the hospital, and then the Federal Marshals and FBI did arrive and they have been guarding his room and securing the area since then.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
FRANKEN: There were three people who were on the ward. They were moved to another part of the hospital. That's how heavy the security is. Assuming that he recovers, Salt Lake City officials and FBI agents are coming from that city to this area.
They would take him before a federal magistrate and extradite him back to Utah to decide whether, in fact, he is a witness in the case of Elizabeth Smart or if he would suddenly become the suspect that they no longer or that they don't think he is right now -- Aaron.
BROWN: Well, I don't know what they think he is or don't think he is, but they are treating him as if he were a suspect. You talk about getting a warrant on the car and searching the car. That's a little bit more than you do to someone you consider a witness.
FRANKEN: Actually, I think I did misspeak a little bit. They have always said that, at the moment, they don't consider him as a suspect but, of course, that is something that could change very easily. There is some suspicion, as a matter of fact that they do want to look at him very closely.
And, as you point out, they certainly want to look at the car and, obviously, one of the reasons is to see if they can find any trace of Elizabeth Smart.
BROWN: Absolutely. Bob, thank you. Read between the lines sometimes. Bob Franken in West Virginia tonight.
On to the latest FBI terror advisory, here we go again. In addition to crop dusters and scuba divers and emergency vehicles, you can now add fuel tanker trucks to the things on the list to look out for, and to the list of targets you can add synagogues.
We ought to point out here that the usual cautions apply. This alert went out to law enforcement agencies, not to the general public. It is an advisory. It is not a warning. That would be a higher level of concern. Nothing in it speaks of what will happen or even might happen, only of what could and how. Here again is CNN's Kelli Arena.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ARENA (voice over): The FBI says intelligence suggests Jewish schools or synagogues may be targeted by certain terrorist elements using fuel trucks. The information, according to sources, comes from al Qaeda detainees held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Those sources caution the information is vague and its credibility is questionable. Still, the FBI says it can't take any chances.
GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Well, anytime we get any kind of threat that we think is serious, we'll put it out and people need to respond accordingly.
ARENA: The FBI says: "Out of an abundance of caution, it has shared the information with 18,000 law enforcement agencies nationwide." There were no specific targets mentioned, but intelligence indicates they could include fuel depots, Jewish schools or synagogues.
RABBI AVI WEISS, HEBREW INSTITUTE OF RIVERDALE, NEW YORK CITY: Well, we're concerned. We've been concerned for a long time because this is a high profile synagogue but we have wonderful relations with the local 50th Precinct and there will be private security on premises now that this warning has come forth.
ARENA: In New York City, which has maintained a higher degree of security readiness, police are taking extra precautions, including putting police posts at sensitive locations, patrolling additional locations, placing additional counterterrorism assets in Jewish neighborhoods, and promising increased vigilance of fuel depots and fuel delivery locations.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ARENA (on camera): The FBI did not lay out any specific response plans. Instead, it urged local law enforcement to get in contact with Jewish leaders in their communities and to reach out to companies transporting fuel. The message being, stay vigilant and report any suspicious activity. Aaron.
BROWN: Just slightly tangential here, Fourth of July is coming up, is there in agencies you cover, Justice Department and FBI, is there increased nervousness about the force?
ARENA: There's a high level of concern, Aaron. I wouldn't call it nervousness. As you know, security precautions have been put in place. They've been planning for this for several months. Staffing levels will be very high across the nation, but again no specific information, Aaron, regarding that date or any specific target.
BROWN: Kelli, thank you, Kelli Arena in Washington again for us tonight. Thank you. Up ahead on NEWSNIGHT, we'll go to the Middle East or take a look at the Middle East in any case, and we'll talk with former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak here in New York.
This is NEWSNIGHT on CNN.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BROWN: Again, a lot of developments to report out of the Middle East and again few of them did not involve bloodshed. The day saw Israeli tanks open fire on a market in Jenin, killing four people, three of them children. People were out on the street thinking the curfew had been lifted. It has not been. The Israeli Government today expressed regret, called the incident a mistake.
Elsewhere on the West Bank, Israeli settlers went on a rampage through a Palestinian village, burning cars and killing a 22-year-old man. They had just attended the funeral for a mother and her three children who had been killed by a Palestinian gunman yesterday, and so it goes. There was also an interesting statement or two from Yasser Arafat today about the kind of peace plan he'd be willing to accept. Joining us now, Ehud Barak, the former Prime Minister of Israel and a man with an intimate understanding of how hard it is to make a deal. It's nice to see you again, sir. It sounds to me like Mr. Arafat has some second thoughts two years later. What do you make of this offer today?
EHUD BARAK, FORMER ISRAELI PRIME MINISTER: I'm doubtful whether he's serious about it. It looks more like a smokescreen, facing the possibility of the pressure upon him to do something.
If he's serious, we will have to see him acting immediately against terror, arresting terrorists, put an end to incitement, put an end to suicide attacks. That would be much more convincing than giving interviews to some Israeli journalists.
BROWN: A lot has changed since first you all met in the United States and then you moved these discussions, these negotiations to Egypt at the end of President Clinton's administration. Is it even reasonable to assume that the terms that were laid out then would be acceptable to the Israeli side today?
BARAK: I believe that the basic terms that should be set is that nothing, nothing will begin through these barbaric suicide bombing campaigns, namely the only set of terms should be Camp David, where we were before he turned to terror.
That should be the starting point. It doesn't mean where it ends. It can end at any point that both sides are agreed, but only around the negotiating table and I believe that it's important not just to Israel but also to the United States, especially after 9/11.
BROWN: Let me go back at this. I'm not sure I understood it. Let's assume something here. Let's assume that the terror attacks stop.
BARAK: Yes.
BROWN: I realize that may be a stretch.
BARAK: Yes.
BROWN: But let's assume it. Assuming that, do you believe the terms that you negotiated two years ago would be acceptable to the Israeli side, it was kind of a stretch at the time, acceptable to the Israeli side today given all that has happened in the last two years?
BARAK: You know, I'm doubtful about the real intentions of Mr. Arafat and it's kind of complicated to hypothesize. The moment the Israeli public will see a responsible Palestinian leader, the kind of reach the Egyptians had in President Sadat or the Jordanians in King Hussein, you will see an immediate drift in the Israeli public.
But the proof is now, the burden of proof is now upon Mr. Arafat and the Palestinians, after we are suffering a suicide bombing campaign for several months. You know, girls the age of Elizabeth Smart are blown up in Israel every other day and no government on Earth can accept a big yielding to this kind of terror.
BROWN: All right, let me try this one. I tried twice on the other. It is unclear to me whether the Israeli Government intends to reoccupy parts of the West Bank as it indicated the other night or not. Do you know if the Israeli Government has made that decision?
BARAK: I'm confident that we are not going to reoccupy.
BROWN: For any length of time.
BARAK: For any length, maybe for several days, but it always will depend only on congruent information in regard to interception of terror attacks. We will not go back to reoccupy these areas.
BROWN: How did this come out then the other night? I mean the Israeli Government made a statement. We didn't make this up.
BARAK: No, I would not look at the statements as a kind of sacred commitment. It describes the mood and at least what we will see in the next several days. We are not going to reoccupy. We were there for too many years.
We tried to disengage ourselves through negotiation, bona fide. Arafat refused to take President Clinton's offer even as a basis for a negotiation and turned deliberately to terror.
Now under pressure from Israel and maybe from the world, he begins to hesitate but I'm doubtful. I'm confident that the moment we would see a responsible Palestinian leadership, there could be a peace in the Middle East, but I doubt whether Mr. Arafat can lead it.
BROWN: Well, I think for both of us it can't happen too soon. It's always nice to see you, Mr. Prime Minister. Thank you for coming in tonight.
BARAK: Thank you.
BROWN: Travel safely. A few quick items here from around the world before we go to break. The leader of the group responsible for the kidnapping of the two American missionaries, Martin and Gracia Burnham, has been killed. Abu Sabaya, who's the commander of Abu Sayyaf, was on a boat that was sunk today by the Philippine forces.
In Pakistan, the chief defendant in the killing of reporter Danny Pearl spoke out in court today. Ahmed Omar Saed Sheikh (ph) called the evidence against him a fabrication and his trial engineered to please the United States.
Later on NEWSNIGHT, how women have benefited from Title IX, and they have, but have they done so at the expense of men? Up next, did Martha Stewart benefit from insider trading? Some news about her broker today that is one more piece to that puzzle.
This is NEWSNIGHT on CNN.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK) BROWN: The latest now on the controversy surrounding Martha Stewart. If Ms. Stewart thought the insider trading uproar might die down today, she was mistaken. Merrill Lynch has suspended the broker who handled Ms. Stewart's sale of ImClone shares right before the bottom fell out. Joining us to talk about this development, what it might mean for Ms. Stewart, Charles Gasparino of the Wall Street Journal is part of the team at the Journal who's been working on this story. It's a big story for you guys.
CHARLES GASPARINO, "WALL STREET JOURNAL": One of many.
BROWN: Yes, the whole ImClone thing is a big story.
GASPARINO: Right.
BROWN: And it has a lot of impact on the market. It's not really about Martha Stewart.
GASPARINO: Right.
BROWN: That's a side show to all of this. Nevertheless, the broker gets suspended today. What happened?
GASPARINO: Well, I mean, let's get some of the preliminaries out of the way. Insider trading is very difficult to prove. Martha Stewart says she's innocent.
That being said, this is starting to smell. Over the last couple of days, Merrill Lynch has been grilling her broker, the broker's assistant and their stories just aren't matching up, and so they put him on leave.
BROWN: Now, the story for people who haven't followed it, and I'm going to really shorthand this.
GASPARINO: Right.
BROWN: Ms. Stewart says that she put in a stop loss order. If the stock reached a certain price...
GASPARINO: Right.
BROWN: ... which I think was $60...
GASPARINO: Right.
BROWN: Sell it.
GASPARINO: Right.
BROWN: And she said she did that back in November.
GASPARINO: Right.
BROWN: And long before the bottom fell out.
GASPARINO: Right.
BROWN: A month before the bottom fell out.
GASPARINO: Right. He said he did it in December. Let's forget that discrepancy. Right now, Merrill Lynch doubts whether there was ever a stop loss order put in and that's why this is such an amazing development. Because if there was no stop loss order put in, you have to ask, why did you sell?
BROWN: And why is it so hard to pinpoint when the shares were sold? That can't be the issue.
GASPARINO: That's not the issue at all.
BROWN: Right. The issue is when the order - when she directed that they be sold.
GASPARINO: Right. I mean, that - I mean this is a conversation between two people. You don't know like when exactly she said it. I mean that's why insider trading is so difficult to prove. This is going to come down to maybe when she told the guy, when he took the order, when he put it in.
I mean there's a lot of human interaction that goes in here. It's going to go by memory. It's going to be a very difficult case to prove, but like I said right now, they're amassing a lot of evidence and it doesn't look that good.
BROWN: Just before we went on...
GASPARINO: Right.
BROWN: You said to me that there's a kind of witch hunt potential here.
GASPARINO: Right.
BROWN: And I said it's a lousy climate right now...
GASPARINO: Right.
BROWN: ... because of Enron and to get caught up in this.
GASPARINO: Yes, that's why I don't want to like convict Martha Stewart. I mean I don't know, and this is so hard to prove, and right now Congress just wants to show that they're on the ball. I mean we had investors lose a lot of money over the last five years, actually the last year based on the stuff they did over the last five years.
BROWN: Yes.
GASPARINO: And right now the public is clamoring for heads and that's why you have to be really careful when you say someone's guilty of insider trading. I don't know that Martha Stewart is. I can just say that there's a lot of evidence here and it's starting to look kind of bad. BROWN: Here's what I think is - one of the reasons this is interesting, this part of it is interesting. We got a lot of mail. We talked about this last night and got a lot of mail from viewers saying it's unfair to talk about her. She didn't do anything wrong or you don't even know if she did something wrong.
GASPARINO: Right.
BROWN: And I have no idea if she did anything wrong either.
GASPARINO: Right.
BROWN: But there are reasons to be interested or suspicious.
GASPARINO: Right. Right a lot of reasons. I mean one of the great things that's coming out now as people are starting to investigate the late 1990s is that, what's emerging is that there was a club.
There were two sets of rules, rules for the little guy and rules for people that were in the inside, and I think that's a problem for the markets because if there are two rules, that undermines the confidence in the markets and that's why it's good to investigate this.
BROWN: Uh huh.
GASPARINO: You know, I hope she's innocent and maybe she is but I think the investigation is good because we really have to find out how people make money in these markets, and is it a game that's rigged against the little guy?
BROWN: Right. Have you written? Have you filed for Monday?
GASPARINO: Not yet.
BROWN: Do you know what the lead, what your lead's going to be?
GASPARINO: Not yet. I wouldn't tell you now anyway.
BROWN: You wouldn't give me a lead? Come on. I'd do it for you. Thanks for coming in.
GASPARINO: Thank you.
BROWN: It's nice to meet you.
GASPARINO: OK, great.
BROWN: It's an interesting story. Thank you. Still ahead on NEWSNIGHT, we'll at the end of the program go to death row in Missouri. It is a fascinating case involving the law and an inmate's struggle for a new trial. Up next the push for quality in athletics, 30 years of Title IX; this is NEWSNIGHT on CNN.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK) BROWN: If you're the father of a daughter - and I am - it is hard to be completely unbiased where Title IX is concerned.
The federal law now 30 years old changed the playing field, if you will, where women's sports are concerned. Those American women who won a gold medal in hockey in one Olympics and a silver in the next would not have won either without Title IX - I'm certain of that. And that's true in lots of other sports, as well.
Giving girls the chance to compete was the goal, and it has succeeded. But it is also true that men's sports, some of them, have suffered.
And so the question is, has Title IX become a form of discrimination against men, an exchange of one evil, if you will, for another?
We'll talk about that in just a moment, but first some background.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BROWN: One shot made the point better than words ever could. One winning shot from Brandy Chastain in 1999, a shot that gave the United States the title, the championship in women's World Cup soccer, a goal which gave enormous attention to women's sports in the United States, and a goal that many believe could not have been scored without something called Title IX.
ANSON DORRANCE, WOMEN'S SOCCER COACH, UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA: I think Title IX had a huge impact on the success in '99. And one of the reasons was it just really accelerated the collegiate game's growth.
Even to this day, women's soccer benefits from Title IX.
BROWN: Signed into law by Richard Nixon, Title IX requires the nation's universities to comply with an array of federal regulations, most centered on the makeup of their student body.
According to the law, the number of intercollegiate athletes from each sex should be roughly equivalent to the enrollment percentages.
To its backers it has worked wonders.
DONNA LOPIANO, DIRECTOR, WOMEN'S SPORTS FOUNDATION: You're looking at, you know, 30 years ago there being less than 300,000 girls playing high school sports. Today it's 2.8 million.
Thirty years ago there were less than 30,000 women playing college sports. It's now 150,000.
You know, women were getting $100,000 in athletic scholarships in '72. They're getting $341 million a year in athletic scholarships now. BROWN: Under Title IX, that requirement for equal numbers of both men and women athletes is called proportionality. It is only one of three benchmarks that schools can use to persuade the government they are in compliance.
But it has meant, in some cases, eliminating men's teams to pay for women's sports.
MIKE MOYER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL WRESTLING COACHES ASSOCIATION: Statistics show clearly that men have lost over 22,000 opportunities to participate in intercollegiate athletics over the last decade.
And three of the sports that have been most directly affected have been men's swimming, men's track and wrestling, which, by the way, also represents three of the largest medal count sports in our last Olympics.
BROWN: College wrestling coaches have filed suit in federal court trying to dismantle the standard, a sign to women that after all these years, there is now a backlash, a legal backlash, against Title IX.
LOPIANO: No question in my mind that Title IX is a convenient scapegoat, that nobody in a university setting is going to take on the big Kahuna - football or men's basketball.
DORRANCE: I think what's happened is, now that Title IX compliance is taken more seriously, athletic departments are searching for ways to survive.
BROWN: Thirty years ago, seeing this many fans at a women's sporting event would have been unimaginable. But have women athletes gained unfairly at the expense of men? And is Title IX to blame?
MOYER: Quite frankly, the best and brightest student athletes across the country, they just deserve a whole lot better than what's happening right now.
LOPIANO: It all results in this unfortunate environment now of men versus women. And that's not what it should be about.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
BROWN: That's the background. Ahead on NEWSNIGHT some perspective on the impact of Title IX.
Former Olympic athlete, now law professor, Nancy Hogshead-Makar, and author Jessica Gavora join us after this break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BROWN: Maybe a little early to plan your Monday morning. But here it is just the same - Bill Hemmer and what's coming up on "AMERICAN MORNING."
BILL HEMMER, ANCHOR, "AMERICAN MORNING": Aaron, thank you very much.
Thousands of U.S. forces still on the ground in various parts of Afghanistan. But where - where are the al Qaeda terrorists?
On the next "AMERICAN MORNING," with al Qaeda spreading to various countries around the world, is there an American exit strategy in Afghanistan? And should there be one?
We'll look at that issue again Monday morning here on "AMERICAN MORNING." Hope to see you then. Aaron, back to you.
BROWN: Thank you. And the battle over Title IX after a quick break. This is NEWSNIGHT.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BROWN: More now on the legacy and the controversy involving Title IX and women in sport - two different views tonight.
In Washington, Jessica Gavora. She's the author of "Tilting the Playing Field," which argues, among other things, that Title IX is nothing more than a quota regime that hurts men and boys.
And in Jacksonville, Florida, law professor Nancy Hogshead-Makar, an Olympic medalist who says she and countless other women would never have become athletes and never have succeeded had it not been for Title IX.
Welcome to you both.
Jessica, if - why don't we start with you first here. Lay out simply and as briefly as you can - otherwise we'll never get anywhere tonight - why you argue that this is a quota system?
JESSICA GAVORA, AUTHOR, "TILTING THE PLAYING FIELD": Well, George Will wrote that Congress doesn't pass laws, it passes sentiments. And Congress passed a great sentiment in '72, thou shalt not discriminate on the basis of sex and how we spend federal funds.
The bureaucracy, however, injects meaning into those sentiments. And since that time, particularly in the last decade, Title IX has really been twisted and perverted and warped into a quota law.
As you mentioned, the proportionality test, making the ratio of athletes between the genders match the ratio of the student body, is the test of compliance.
And this is a test that ignores interest, ignores the different interests of men and women in athletics, and ultimately resolves itself in the elimination of men's teams and opportunities.
BROWN: Nancy, why don't you take a run at that first. Is proportionality the test? And is it the problem?
NANCY HOGSHEAD-MAKAR, PROFESSOR OF LAW, FLORIDA COASTAL SCHOOL OF LAW: Well, proportionality is one test. And - but it's not the test. There are three different ways that schools can come into compliance, and one of them is what Jessica just referred to, is they can see whether or not the school is meeting the interests and abilities of the student athletes that are on campus.
If it is meeting those interests and abilities, in other words, if it doesn't have a lot of unmet demand, then it's going to be deemed in compliance.
BROWN: So, let me just rephrase that, make sure I understand it.
If the university says, anybody -- any women who wanted to go out for softball, we've got a softball program. And if no one shows up, then I'm obligated to then cut men's baseball to keep the numbers in balance, correct?
HOGSHEAD-MAKAR: Absolutely. Yes, that's correct. Well, if they don't have any junior varsity teams - typically what happens is, you have a junior varsity team, has been pushing for a long time trying to get that varsity status.
Let me just make one more point regarding what Jessica said about Title IX being a quota. Right now, it probably would be close to legal malpractice to tell a client that they could fight Title IX based on the fact that it's a quota.
Nine out of our 11 circuit courts - our federal courts - have ruled that - have upheld the legality of the Title IX regulations. And two of these have ruled that it is not a quota. It just is not.
And it's a buzz word that people use right now. Oh, quotas are bad. We don't want quotas. It simply is not one, and has been, you know, it's hard in, you know, we've got six minutes here to ...
BROWN: Yeah.
HOGSHEAD-MAKAR: ... you know ...
BROWN: I know.
HOGSHEAD-MAKAR: ... to fight it out. But, you know, in courts across the country, in the other two courts out of the 11, simply haven't ruled on the issue.
BROWN: All right. Let me - let me pass the ball out here to Jessica on that point.
How then do you explain the fact that the courts have looked at this, and they have said, it may be a lot of things, but it is not a quota.
GAVORA: Well, that precedent...
BROWN: Because there are these other options.
GAVORA: ... well, the precedent stands as long as it stands, and maybe Nancy will agree when the courts start to rule the other way. I mean, the challenges have been brought in certain, I think, carefully considered district courts. So, we'll see.
There's a new lawsuit out there that actually challenges the legality of the regulations themselves. It doesn't...
BROWN: This is the wrestlers' lawsuit.
GAVORA: That's right, and doesn't sue the school who made the cut pursuant to Title IX. So it's a different approach. We'll see if this has better luck in the courts.
The courts, however, defer to administration regulation. And this is where we really get into trouble. The Clinton administration issued some new regulations under Title IX, and really shrunk that three-part test, which did used to exist, to one test.
HOGSHEAD-MAKAR: You know, that's a little bit misleading. The...
BROWN: OK.
HOGSHEAD-MAKAR: ... the Clinton administration clarified a policy that had been existing since 1975, 1979. And there have been several attempts by the Congress to try to exclude athletics from Title IX, or try to limit Title IX's impact.
The wonderful gains that we've seen right up until this day - and all of those failed. So it's not like the Congress has never looked at this, like, hmmm, you know, do we really think that we want Title IX to apply to athletics? Do we really want to give women these opportunities, for them to be able to learn all the lessons?
The reasons why we know that sports is important for little boys is the same reasons why they're important for little girls.
You know, it's - I think it's a tragedy that 170 men's wrestling programs have been cut over the past several years. But at the same time, 100 women's gymnastics teams have also been cut during that time.
BROWN: Yeah.
HOGSHEAD-MAKAR: And when you look at kind of big picture, overall, women - or, excuse me - men's athletics has gained. The department of - the General Accounting Office said that there had been 34 new teams that have been added since Title IX.
So both men and women have gained under these regulations. But that GAO study included all four-year colleges. So whether or not they were the NCAA or the NAIA or whatever, ...
BROWN: Right.
HOGSHEAD-MAKAR: ... right, all of them, they - both men and women are both increasing. BROWN: Jessica, we're getting towards 90 seconds here. I assume that what you don't want to see is to go back all the way.
I mean, you don't want to see a world where women don't have...
GAVORA: Look ...
BROWN: ... opportunity and no one should...
GAVORA: ... absolutely not.
BROWN: ... look at you that way. So what do you want to see?
GAVORA: What I want to see is Title IX reflect interest. I want to see Title IX, which applies to all education, applied in athletics in a way that we judge every other aspect of education.
We don't demand that physics departments be 50-50. We don't assume that women are being discriminated against because they're less than 50 percent of engineers at any given school.
So why don't we do this in Title - with athletics under Title IX, have it reflect the interests? And if a majority of the people who are interested in playing athletics are women, great. That should be the standard.
Today the law ignores interest and imposes a formula that hurts men.
BROWN: And may - I thank both of you for working this - working through this in such a thoughtful way tonight. We appreciate that a lot. Nice to meet you both.
HOGSHEAD-MAKAR: Thank you very much, Aaron.
BROWN: Thank you. Title IX at 30 years old.
Quickly, a national roundup tonight. It begins with judgment day in Charlotte, North Carolina for two brothers accused of being part of the group Hezbollah, the Lebanon-based terrorist group.
The brothers found guilty today on all charges involving immigration fraud, money laundering and cigarette smuggling. One brother was also charged with providing material support for Hezbollah.
A late update on a story from earlier in the day. The FBI has investigated claims from a man who says he overheard a cell phone conversation about a possible Fourth of July terrorist attack on Las Vegas.
The FBI has not - has found the story not credible, and the man told the Associated Press, at least, that he failed the lie detector test. Don't know why he decided to tell that, but he did.
And now on to wildfires. And tonight we're talking about someplace other than Colorado - a wildfire that could burn more than 300,000 acres in east-central Arizona.
As one fire official put it, quote, we are very much not in control. Nature is in control.
And just for the heck of it, who's in control here? Oh, my. The annual belly flop contest in Denver, Colorado. Who says there's no good news?
Anyway, we just thought we'd do this, because it's summer.
One more segment and we'll be right back to do it.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BROWN: Finally from us tonight, "Segment Seven," and it comes from death row.
Capital punishment is one of those topics that is so polarized, and so little common ground between the opposing sides.
But there is one thing that is safe to say, we think that everyone agrees on. If the death penalty is involved, we have to be as close to 100 percent convinced the guilty person is in fact guilty, as humans can be.
We have seen in recent years DNA evidence prove that the system is not foolproof.
Tonight we have a story that does not involve science, but witnesses. It is about a man who is on death row, who cannot get a new trial, even though the critical witnesses in his case now say they lied.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
JOE AMRINE, MISSOURI DEATH ROW INMATE: You know, I'm a realist, you know. And I'm tired of thinking to myself, it's looking good. I've been thinking that for 16 years now, and it ain't never come out the way it's supposed to.
BROWN: Joe Amrine is 46 years old and a resident of Missouri's death row. And like all the others in his small universe, he wonders when his number will come up.
AMRINE: It's draining to me. There's not a day go by you're not thinking about getting executed. You know, you think about things that you should have did, or you didn't do that you wanted to do, or you wish you can get out to do. You know, stuff like that. You know, it's pretty - it's hard. It's hard.
BROWN: In 1985, Amrine was charged with killing a fellow inmate. Like so many others charged with crimes in prison, he claims he was innocent.
But three inmates testified against him and the one guard supported his story, he was convicted and sentenced to die. Now the state's star witnesses say they lied. Randall Ferguson.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I was forced to testify, I felt, you know. And I was - to all my testimony was lies, and I was scared he was going to die because I lied on him.
BROWN: Jerry Poe.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Now, you ended up testifying for the state at Joe Amrine's trial...
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: ... that you saw Joe Amrine stab Gary Barber in the back. Do you recall that?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Was that testimony true?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No, it wasn't.
BROWN: And Terry Russell.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: ... and I couldn't see myself, you know, in his place on death row for something, you know, by (UNINTELLIGIBLE) said they had a guard, and they got a witness come and testifying, saying that I done it, which I didn't do it, you know.
And I said, because (ph) they know who, you know, who did it. But they got the wrong person.
BROWN: Former juror Larry Hildebrand (ph) now believes that Joe Amrine is an innocent man waiting to be executed.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Based on what we know now, the system failed Joe Amrine seriously. It failed all of us, really.
BROWN: But in Missouri, none of this matters now. That's because the law requires that new evidence must be filed within 15 days of the jury's verdict.
Anything after that remains in uncharted legal waters, directly where Amrine is swimming today.
There has yet to be a new evidentiary hearing allowed in Missouri after that deadline.
SEAN O'BRIEN, AMRINE ATTORNEY: Time has kind of been on our side, but at the same it's been kind of an enemy of us, because over time the truth emerges. But we've lost the case in the courts because it just took too long for the truth to emerge.
It emerged in little tiny bits, piece by piece by piece.
BROWN: And so, despite the witnesses' recantations, Joe Amrine has been denied a new trial. It is a technical dispute over what new evidence means.
At issue - if it could have been introduced to trial, the law states is the evidence is now inadmissible.
JUDGE TOM BROWN, FORMER COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI PROSECUTOR: Our system affords a fairly exhaustive opportunity to present theories of innocence or fallibility of the individuals, or weaknesses in the law, or any number of other things, at all points along the way.
A. BROWN: But since the deadline for new evidence is long gone, and all appeals have been exhausted, Amrine's fate now lies with the governor. The governor's options to grant clemency or a pardon, or to allow the execution to go on.
The governor and the attorney general of Missouri both turned down our requests for on-camera interviews, but the attorney general issued this statement to NEWSNIGHT saying, "The courts have specifically addressed the issue of the post-trial recantations of the three inmate witnesses, and have not found those recantations to be credible. The courts have continued to uphold the verdict and the sentence handed down by the jury and the judge at trial."
And the statement goes on, "We will continue to oppose legal efforts to undo the findings of the jury and the judge more than 15 years ago."
T. BROWN: Obviously, if these inmates had testified at the time of trial, that while they originally had said Amrine was involved, he's not now involved - it could have completely changed the state's case. Might have even meant we didn't have a case.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Is Joe prepared to die?
O'BRIEN: Boy, that's a hard question. I'm not prepared for Joe to die. I don't - I don't think he's prepared to die.
I think he's resigned himself, but I don't think that's the same as being prepared.
I think there's still an element of disbelief that he just can't believe what's happening to him.
AMRINE: I don't think there is no way of preparing yourself for that. I just look at it like this here, you know, if it comes down to that, hopefully I can handle it. You know what I mean. I'm not - I don't know if I can. I might break down and start crying. I might do anything, I mean, you know.
I don't know what I'm going to do.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
A. BROWN: From Missouri's death row, have a good weekend, and good night from all of us at NEWSNIGHT.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
