Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsnight Aaron Brown

Found Guilty of Murder, the King Brothers Now Face Sentencing; U.S. Special Forces Train With Afghan Soldiers to Strengthen Army

Aired September 06, 2002 - 22:00   ET

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.
It's not often you get a story that can break your heart and give you a migraine at the same time. We're talking about the two verdicts in Florida for the murder of the same man, the father of two very young brothers.

Alex and Derek King went on trial this week. The man accused of abusing one of them, Rick Chavis, went on trial last week. Both verdicts read today; the boys guilty of second degree murder, the man not guilty.

We've been dumbfounded all week by how the prosecution has gone about all of this, two sets of defendants arguing two different theories all the while knowing they had to be wrong about one of them.

We'll go over all the ins and outs of this with the prosecutor in both cases and former prosecutor and now our legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin in a little bit, but there's a more basic question a bit lost in this whole mess about whether kids, and they were kids, should be tried as adults.

We thought you might want to see the love notes that Alex King wrote when he was 12 years old to Mr. Chavis, a man convicted of child abuse years in the past. Here's a few.

"Alex David King loves Ricky Marvin Chavis so much and forever. I love you Rick. Before I made friends with Rick I was confused. Rick let me see what I didn't and life isn't about having a job. My ultimate goal in life now is what his is. Before I met Rick I was straight but now I'm gay."

This was some of the evidence in the case. To us it seems like evidence that this is a child. A terrible crime yes, but a crime committed by a child, one by the way who didn't live with his mother, spent time in foster care, and clearly was under the sway of a convicted molester.

The prosecutors argued it would be a miscarriage of justice to let sympathy cloud your view, so maybe we are not objective. This page is not about objectivity. We've never pretended otherwise but we think this is a miscarriage of justice and the miscarriage was trying these children as adults in the first place.

The extraordinary scene in that courtroom in Florida begins the whip tonight, two different juries, same crime.

David Mattingly was there. David, whatever headline we haven't stolen from you tonight.

DAVID MATTINGLY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well there probably isn't one, Aaron, but we'll try.

The two young brothers gave us two very reliable stories but in the end two juries, two verdicts lead to one conclusion that they killed their father and tried to pin the blame on someone else -- Aaron.

BROWN: David thank you, back with you in a moment.

To Afghanistan next and how to bring security to a place that just saw an assassination attempt of its new president. Christiane Amanpour is working that for us, so Christiane a headline from you please.

CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: The president continues his official duties. Arrests have been made. The investigation continues. At the same time, the United States is trying to get a proper army and security force up and running here. We'll report on how painfully slowly that's going.

BROWN: Christiane thank you.

A lot of bipartisanship on display here in New York City, the first joint meeting of Congress in the city since the 1700s, but the issue of Iraq has the power to divide and Judy Woodruff is here with the politics of that, so Judy welcome, and a headline please.

JUDY WOODRUFF, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Aaron, we'll be talking about this president who's been criticized for not consulting enough with Congress or with America's allies. Now he's doing both as he builds the case for what to do about Iraq.

BROWN: Judy thank you, back to you, back to all of you shortly.

Also on the program tonight on the Florida case, we will talk to the prosecutor David Rimmer and our legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin.

In loving memory tonight of a guy who made the small screen glow, 75 years ago tomorrow everything from Springer to Masterpiece Theater and for them you can credit Philo T. Farnsworth. He didn't get the credit when he was alive. He will tonight; a look at the man who really was "Mr. Television."

And the wisdom of children, that may sound like a cliche but it's impossible not to think about when you hear kids who lived through 9/11. What they thought about then and what they have to say now. This is a terrific piece of work. It comes at the end of the program. We don't want to oversell these things to you but we hope you'll stay around to the very end. It is worth it.

So it's a good hour that's coming up. We begin in Pensacola and what has to be one of the rarer moments in American jurisprudence when a prosecutor just might have been happy to actually lose one case. After all, it would have been pretty sticky for the prosecutor to win both cases brought against two different defendants for the exact same crime, meaning someone had to be innocent.

As it turned out that didn't happen. Ricky Chavis was found not guilty and the jury, in less time than we actually talked about this story today, decided the fate of two young brothers, guilty of second degree murder. The question we'll put to prosecutors in a moment is why two trials for the same crime were held in the first place. That's in a moment.

First, back to David Mattingly in Florida.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

MATTINGLY (voice over): There were two juries but in the end they were of one mind. First, young brothers Derek and Alex King found guilty of killing their father and setting their house on fire.

COURT CLERK: Verdict: We the jury find as follows as to Count 1 of the indictment; guilty of second degree murder, a lesser included offense without a weapon.

MATTINGLY: The verdict bringing tears to their choirboy faces, the jury deciding the boys were lying when they accused family friend and convicted child molester Rick Chavis of the murder and of convincing them to confess.

DAVID RIMMER, ASSISTANT STATE ATTORNEY: They did do it and a jury found that they did it and the jury returned a verdict they thought was appropriate and I deeply respect that verdict.

MATTINGLY: Defense for the boys would not comment. Next, over an hour later, Chavis is before the same court.

COURT CLERK: We the jury find as follows as to Count 2 of the indictment; not guilty.

MATTINGLY: Shedding tears himself as this time the verdict from another jury sealed since last week is read.

MICHAEL ROLLO, CHAVIS' DEFENSE ATTORNEY: The public needs to be aware of the grand jury system. They need to understand that, you know, you could indict a cabbage for just about anything in front of a grand jury. They're only there to find probable cause, so the grand jury system in my opinion really needs to be looked at.

MATTINGLY: On trial in the court of public opinion state prosecutor David Rimmer criticized for pursuing both the brothers and Chavis for the same crime, seemingly vindicated by two agreeing verdicts.

RIMMER: And the grand jury chose to indict Mr. Chavis and so therefore the boys' credibility was at issue. I put them on the stand and the jury is the one that determines whether or not they believe a witness is telling the truth. If they had believed the boys were telling the truth in court, they could have found Chavis guilty. They didn't believe them.

MATTINGLY: But Chavis now faces charges as an accessory in the murder as well as charges of lewd and lascivious conduct with a minor. According to Alex's testimony he and Chavis were involved in a sexual relationship when Alex was just 12 years old. That is now just part of the nightmare that his yet to end for friends and family of Terry King and the sons who are now convicted of killing him.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I hope that they will get a lighter sentence; that they'll be rehabilitated, and that someone will sit down and talk to them and they can finish their education.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

MATTINGLY (on camera): How much of their young lives that will be spent behind bars is now up to a judge and sentencing, Aaron, will be handled sometime in the middle of October.

BROWN: And, David, just quickly the range of possibilities in the sentence.

MATTINGLY: The judge has a lot of latitude in this case. The prosecutor could probably give you a better idea where he might be leaning but if you just look at the arson case that carries a maximum of 30 years in prison, so a lot of time possibly behind bars if the judge would like to do that.

BROWN: David thank you very much, David Mattingly who's been down in Pensacola this week covering that. We've already said an awful lot about the story. We'll dispense with any big windup as we introduce our guests.

In New York we're joined by our friend, former prosecutor and legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin who's been shaking his head a bit over this one all week.

And, in Pensacola tonight the prosecutor in both cases David Rimmer; nice to have you with us.

Let me start with some specific questions here about the case. Did you know the verdict in the Chavis case while you were trying the two boys?

RIMMER: Yes, I did.

BROWN: You did know that and did that impact in any way, shape, or form how you tried that case?

RIMMER: No, it did not.

BROWN: If you had known it was a guilty verdict, would you have continued to try the case?

RIMMER: Yes. BROWN: When Mr. Chavis took the stand, he did didn't he?

RIMMER: No, he did not.

BROWN: He did not take the stand in the boys' case?

RIMMER: No. He invoked his Fifth Amendment right.

BROWN: When he invoked his Fifth Amendment rights you knew that he had, in fact, nothing - he could have been asked did you kill this man and he could have answered yes and he was under no jeopardy at all, correct?

RIMMER: That's true.

BROWN: And you knew that?

RIMMER: Well yes, I mean that applies to any witness. Any time a witness has immunity when they testify, immunity means you can not use what they say against them, so that applies to anybody and with Chavis, I mean, so many different lies and things he's told.

BROWN: I'm not a lawyer here, sir, and I'm just trying to understand something. This isn't an immunity question. This would be a double jeopardy question, wouldn't it? He had been acquitted of the murder and that's something you knew. He gets on the witness stand and says he doesn't want to testify because he doesn't want to incriminate himself but, in fact, in the eyes of the law he can't, correct?

RIMMER: Well yes, that's true too but he didn't know that. He didn't know what the verdict was.

BROWN: Let me bring Jeff Toobin in. Jeffrey.

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: But you did. You knew the verdict.

RIMMER: Yes.

TOOBIN: So you knew that he was under no jeopardy at all. I mean isn't that unfair? Shouldn't he have been...

RIMMER: Well, that's another...

TOOBIN: I'm sorry, go ahead.

RIMMER: So I'm going to put him on the stand. I'm going to put him on the stand knowing that he can say whatever he wants to say and it can't be used against him in any way. I'm not going to do that, jeopardize his credibility.

TOOBIN: Well the defense could have done that. The defense could have called him.

RIMMER: I don't know if they could or not. I don't know. TOOBIN: Well it sure seems like they could have.

RIMMER: Well, I mean they knew the verdict too, so I don't know. I really can't answer that question.

BROWN: All right, let me broaden this out a little bit. What happens in this case if you get two guilty verdicts? You know you're wrong on one, don't you?

RIMMER: No because see my theory on Chavis was that he was a principal, that he probably influenced and encourag