Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Newsnight Aaron Brown
Ninth Circuit Commutes 111 Death Sentences; Paul Hill Faces Execution for Murder of Abortion Doctor; Lawyers Argue Tate Should Have Had Psych Eval Before Trial
Aired September 02, 2003 - 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, HOST: Good evening again, everyone. It's nice to see you tonight.
It seems like everyone went back to work today. The courts certainly did. Everywhere we turn tonight there is a judge on the bench, a defendant in the dock, and issues, mostly big issues hanging in the balance.
A convicted spy goes to court hoping to escape one of those life sentences that actually seems to mean life.
A child goes to court in Florida hoping to convince a judge that a life sentence handed down to a young child is the very definition of cruel and unusual punishment.
An anti-abortion terrorist goes to his death tomorrow but not before pleading the rightness of his cause to reporters today.
And, out west, 100 or so people who faced execution may have found their ticket off death row because a judge, not a jury, sent them there, so much for easing our way out of summer.
We begin the whip out west and perhaps the luckiest 100 people in the country today, CNN's Frank Buckley on the story, so Frank a headline from you.
FRANK BUCKLEY, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Aaron, death row inmates in Arizona, Idaho, and Montana have had their sentences commuted because of a ruling today. They will not walk free as a result but the decision does mean that tonight they are no longer among the condemned -- Aaron.
BROWN: Frank, thank you, we'll get to you at the top tonight.
Next stop Stark, Florida, CNN's Brian Cabell on what the killer of an abortion doctor had to say about facing the executioner, Brian a headline.
BRIAN CABELL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Aaron, Paul Hill is scheduled to be executed tomorrow. He has no regrets, no remorse. It appears that he will go to his death with a smile on his face and peace in his heart.
BROWN: Brian, thank you. On to Miami and the case of a 14-year-old boy sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole, John Zarrella covered that so, John, a headline from you.
JOHN ZARRELLA, CNN MIAMI BUREAU CHIEF: Aaron, Lionel Tate's attorneys went to appeals court asking the three judge panel to throw out his conviction or, at the very least send it back for retrial, the attorneys arguing that Lionel Tate never got an evaluation, a psychological evaluation before his trial or anytime during it and the judges themselves wondered is it too young at 12 years old to stand trial for a murder felony -- Aaron?
BROWN: John, thank you, we'll get back to you as well.
It's not all crime and punishment. CNN's Candy Crowley has politics tonight on candidate Kerry, a headline Candy.
CANDY CROWLEY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Aaron, John Kerry launched his official presidential campaign out of South Carolina today. Why do that on a campaign that's been running for almost a year now? Well, because it gives you a little buzz and a lot of attention and at this point former frontrunner John Kerry could use a bit of both -- Aaron.
BROWN: Candy, thank you, back to you and the rest shortly. Also coming up on NEWSNIGHT on this Tuesday night, the case of Jonathan Pollard, the convicted spy, a traitor to many, a hero to some, a political complication when it comes to relations between the United States and Israel.
We'll talk debates and why Arnold Schwarzenegger only wants to take part in one of them, top campaign adviser joins us.
Joining us as well tonight, a man with a very tough job to do, Kenneth (unintelligible) who overseas the compensation fund for the victims of 9/11 with the deadline approaching for victims to register a striking number have yet to sign up.
And, tired of staying up all night just to see tomorrow morning's front pages? Thanks to the miracle of miracle fibers and, of course, a rooster we'll bring you morning papers as well, all that and more in the hour ahead.
We begin tonight with the court's ruling to overturn death sentences against more than 100 prisoners in three states. In relative terms that is a very small number because so many people, 3,700 or so, are currently on death row in the country and most of them will stay there but a few more may not as appellate courts try to sort out what the Supreme Court meant earlier this year.
We begin tonight with CNN's Frank Buckley.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BUCKLEY (voice-over): The ruling by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals will immediately impact death row prisoners in three states in which judges impose the death penalty rather than juries. Under the ruling, 89 prisoners on Arizona's death row, 17 in Idaho, and five in Montana will see their death sentences overturned.
KEN MURRAY, ASSISTANT FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER: At the heart of the case was the fact that if you're going to execute, take somebody's life that you need to have the jury reflecting the social conscience of the community making that decision.
BUCKLEY: The decision followed a June, 2002 Supreme Court ruling that said juries, not judges, should decide death but it left open the question of whether the new rule should apply retroactively to condemned prisoners already on death row. The 8-3 ruling by the Ninth Circuit said the new rules did apply and that the death sentences should be commuted to sentences of life in prison.
ERWIN CHEMERINSKY, USC LAW SCHOOL PROFESSOR: Before a person can be put to death a jury and not just the judge should find the death sentence appropriate. Somebody shouldn't be executed by the accident of timing that they're tried before June of 2002.
BUCKLEY: Arizona's attorney general says he'll appeal.
TERRY GODDARD, ARIZONA ATTORNEY GENERAL: The accident of timing is a fact of life we see many, many times. In this case, the Supreme Court changed a procedural rule for capital cases albeit a very important procedural rule but one that we have argued as not substantive.
BUCKLEY: But opponents of the death penalty say the procedure that a jury should decide death is fundamental.
RICHARD DEITER, DEATH PENALTY INFORMATION CENTER: This was a decision about a person's right to jury, the Sixth Amendment, and the court said that this should apply in death penalty cases and it should apply to people on death row as well as to future cases. That has the potential of affecting a lot of death sentences and is a very important decision.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
BUCKLEY: Now, the immediate effect of the decision is that the 111 death row prisoners in the three states of Arizona, Idaho, and Montana will not be executed for now but their convictions still stand and they will not walk out of prison.
What could happen next, though, is that the individual jurisdictions that convicted these inmates can decide to retry the penalty phase of each person before a jury. Before that happens, though, it's likely, Aaron that this will all go to the Supreme Court.
BROWN: And just in listening to the Arizona attorney general, he didn't necessarily tip his hand as to whether they'll ask to re- sentence all of these people. Is there something there we ought to know?
BUCKLEY: Well, we talked about that and he said that he is going to await the ruling of the Supreme Court and ultimately it's not his call. It's up to the D.A. in whatever county sentenced one of the 89 people who were on death row in Arizona.
BROWN: Frank, thank you very much, Frank Buckley out in Los Angeles tonight.
We're joined here in New York by CNN Legal Analyst Jeffrey Toobin, nice to see you again. Before we get into the legal complexities here, the underlying case was so bizarre here.
JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Unbelievable. Just, I'll give you the key facts in this case. Mr. Summerlin, the defendant, a debt collector came to his house. The debt collector disappeared. No one knew what happened to the debt collector.
Someone calls the cops and says my daughter has ESP. She can tell you where the body is. In fact, that's how they found the body. Plea negotiations are going on in this case during the trial. It turns out during the plea negotiations the defense attorney is sleeping with the prosecutor.
OK, the case finally goes to trial. There's a penalty phase. The judge has to determine part of the sentence. That's what this case is all about. The judge is stoned on pot during much of the trial, later convicted, disbarred, I mean all of this it's no wonder that this crime took place in 1981 and it's taken 20 plus years to get it through. I mean you can't make this stuff up.
BROWN: Just one question then I want to go to the bigger issue.
TOOBIN: Sure.
BROWN: How is it that a judge who is high on marijuana at the time of the trial and the penalty phase, I mean long ago why wasn't that thrown out?
TOOBIN: Well, that is -- they had a hearing about it and they determined that the judge did not do anything that was indicative of being stoned but the government really didn't argue that this guy, that this judge who later was disbarred was a serious pothead during this trial. That's a separate hour.
BROWN: Right, on to the broader issue.
TOOBIN: Right.
BROWN: In the court, the Supreme Court's original decision did it give guidance to the appeals courts on how to deal with these older cases?
TOOBIN: No, it really didn't. There are these procedures in place for decisions about constitutional rights. Are they retroactive or not? And, the rule is if it's procedural it's not retroactive.
If it's a substantive ruling it is retroactive. What's the difference between substantive and procedural? Lawyers fight about that all day long and that's why this is such a confusing mess.
BROWN: Would Miranda be procedural, for example?
TOOBIN: That would be procedural, yes.
BROWN: So, when the court issued Miranda, the ruling on Miranda, you have to be -- you're entitled to be told of your rights.
TOOBIN: Right.
BROWN: Retroactively, were people not informed of their rights?
TOOBIN: I believe they -- I believe on Miranda they were not. Other decisions like, for example, I mean there are certain death penalty decisions that like when they struck down all the death penalty in 1972...
BROWN: Right.
TOOBIN: ...that was considered so important it was retroactive that, you know, everybody got off death row not just people who were subsequently sentenced.
BROWN: And it's a little point but in those cases they were not re-sentenced. The court said then that the law as applied was fatally unconstitutional.
TOOBIN: So, everybody on death row got life sentences. They were not executed.
BROWN: So, where do we go? Who takes this to the U.S. Supreme Court?
TOOBIN: The Arizona attorney general has said that he is going to appeal and it's worth noting that this was a decision by the famous Ninth Circuit, the most liberal court in America. The eight judges, five Clinton appointees, three Carter appointees, all Democratic judges, I mean so this was a liberal group.
Two other circuits have considered this issue, more conservative circuits and they have said it should not be retroactive. They came to the opposite conclusion so there's a split in the circuits. The Supreme Court has to take the case to resolve it.
BROWN: Has anyone been executed who was -- since the Supreme Court ruled who was sentenced by a judge?
TOOBIN: No, no, no one has gotten that far in the process but it won't be long because the circuits that approved this process have a lot of people on death row. That's why the Supreme Court will definitely take this up this fall.
BROWN: Thank you, nice to see you.
TOOBIN: Nice to see you.
BROWN: It's a strange case. On to Florida now and the saga of Paul Hill, barring any last minute developments he'll be executed tomorrow for murdering a doctor and his bodyguard outside an abortion clinic nearly ten years ago.
Today, he spoke with reporters. He called himself a martyr and some might agree. He spoke some words, and you'll hear them in a moment, that might have been spoken by other so-called martyrs who most people would consider terrorists.
Here's CNN's Brian Cabell.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
CABELL (voice-over): One day before his scheduled execution, Paul Hill calmly and with a smile claims he has no regrets for the double murder he committed in 1994.
PAUL HILL, CONVICTED MURDERER: I can honestly say that if I had not acted when I did in the way I did that I could not look at myself in the mirror.
CABELL: Nine years ago Hill, a Presbyterian minister and father of three, opened fire on Dr. John Britton, who performed abortions and his two escorts as they drove into a Pensacola clinic. Hill then took time to reload.
HILL: Dr. Britton was still alive, was moving around and I fired five more rounds until all movement stopped.
CABELL: Britton was killed. So was escort James Barrett. His wife June was wounded but survived. Hill has never denied shooting them, nor has he appealed the case with the exception of one mandatory appeal before the Florida Supreme Court. He long ago dismissed his attorneys.
And now, as his execution by lethal injection nears some clinics providing abortions are on alert for possible violence.
VICTORIA SAPORTA, NATIONAL ABORTION FEDERATION: We know that events can trigger acts of violence and we know that those in the extreme wing of the anti-choice movement are predicting a backlash and we need to take these people seriously.
CABELL: In addition, some state officials have received threatening letters, including the judge who sentenced Hill to death and Paul Hill himself, if you believe him, he has no fear.
HILL: I believe that the moment that I'm executed that my soul will be made perfect in holiness and that I'll enter the immediate presence of the Lord and I'll be forever with him and so I'm certainly looking forward to that.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
CABELL: During the press conference, Hill was asked whether he supported other people following in his footsteps, other people in other words murdering abortion providers. He said only if they have the calling as he claims he did.
He met with his wife and three teenage kids yesterday. He'll meet with his wife, his eldest son, his mother and father and two sisters tomorrow and he'll have a final meal and then at 6:00 p.m., Aaron, he is scheduled to be executed.
BROWN: Two quick questions, one has the governor said anything one way or another about this and what have mainstream anti-abortion groups had to say?
CABELL: Jeb Bush has said he does not want to get involved in this at all. He will not intervene. Mainstream groups have said -- they have disavowed him. They don't want anything to do with him. They say he's a murderer. He's a violent man. They want nothing whatsoever to do with him.
BROWN: Brian, thank you, Brian Cabell, in Stark, Florida tonight on the Paul Hill case.
From the moment he was convicted, the case of young Lionel Tate in south Florida has been an extraordinary test of the Florida legal system. He was 12 when he killed a six-year-old playmate, two children with lost lives, one literally, the other sentenced to life without parole.
Short of death which the state was barred from seeking it was the harshest sentence prosecutors could ask for once the case went to trial. The question of course is was it just?
Again, here's CNN's John Zarrella.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ZARRELLA (voice-over): The attorney for the state defended Lionel Tate's murder conviction telling the Appeals Court that what Tate did to six-year-old Tiffany Unik (ph) was no accident. Tate's mother sat hands folded listening to the stinging words.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Little Tiffany Unik was beaten to death and the beating lasted at a minimum of five minutes during which she was kicked, punched, and stomped to death.
ZARRELLA: Tate was convicted at age 14 and sentenced to life without parole. The defense contended Lionel was play acting wrestling moves he saw on TV when Tiffany hit her head. Tate's current attorney, Richard Rosenbaum, argued that Lionel should have been given a competency evaluation.
RICHARD ROSENBAUM, ATTORNEY FOR LIONEL TATE: First of all Michael's young age, he was 12 years old at the time. Lionel's mental age, depending on which doctor you believe he was either 1.9 to four years below that, his immaturity, his lack of development, all this was borne out by the record through pretrial proceedings.
ZARRELLA: The three judge panel questioned whether a felony murder charge should be applied to a 12-year-old. ROSENBAUM: That's the difficulty that I'm having. At what point do we as a society say that's beyond the pale, what age?
ZARRELLA: Lionel's attorneys are hoping the panel finds sufficient reason to either reverse the conviction or order a new trial.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ZARRELLA: Now there's no time table for the Appeals Court to rule and this is not the only avenue of appeal that Lionel Tate's attorneys are pursuing. They've also gone to Tallahassee and a lot of legal experts say that may be their best avenue where they're asking Florida's Governor Jeb Bush and the Florida cabinet to at least consider clemency for Lionel Tate -- Aaron.
BROWN: John, thank you, John Zarrella in South Florida tonight.
Ahead on NEWSNIGHT, a spy for an American ally, we'll talk with lawyers for Jonathan Pollard who were in court today arguing that he got a raw deal but he was given a life sentence.
And, four months after a strange poison attack on members of a Maine church, we'll visit a town still searching for answers.
From New York, this is NEWSNIGHT.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BROWN: There doesn't appear to be much middle ground when it comes to the case of Jonathan Pollard. He's either the worst kind of spy who did untold damage to the United States interest for money or he's a hero who only gave U.S. intelligence to Israel because it was the right thing to do.
Either way he spent 18 years in prison for spying. He stands to spend the rest of his life there unless he can convince someone to let him out. Five years ago, the Israeli government asked President Clinton to pardon Mr. Pollard but that went nowhere.
Today with new lawyers he was in Federal Court to argue that he never should have been sentenced to life in prison in the first place. Mr. Pollard claims his earlier lawyer should have done more to ensure a shorter sentence after his guilty plea.
We're joined from Washington now by Mr. Pollard's new lawyers, Elliot Lauer and Jacques Semmelman, nice to have you both with us. Mr. Semmelman, I don't want to assume too much knowledge here for people but Mr. Pollard pleaded guilty. There was an agreed upon sentence.
The judge went well outside the agreement and that was apparently based on a letter, a lengthy letter by Caspar Weinberger, the defense secretary, and that's what you're trying to get your hands on, right?
JACQUES SEMMELMAN, ATTORNEY FOR JONATHAN POLLARD: Well, one of the documents we're trying to get our hands on is the Weinberger declaration which was submitted two months before the sentencing and is partially classified and has not been provided to us even though we have the appropriate level of security clearance, which is top secret clearance.
Mr. Lauer and I have the clearance. We have the need to know and yet the government is refusing to allow us to see that document and four other related documents.
BROWN: And the reason you want to get your hands on that document is what?
SEMMELMAN: We want to be able to see that document because we need it in order to effectively represent our client. It is not possible to effectively represent our client unless we have access to the court record.
We have attempted to obtain clemency for Mr. Pollard and we have been met with the objection that we have not seen all of the relevant documents.
As a result of that we applied for and obtained the appropriate level of security clearance from the United States Department of Justice. We clearly have the need to know and yet the government says you cannot see it.
BROWN: Mr. Lauer, I think the question here in a sense is why should people care? You have a guy who at the very least sold out his country. I mean there's no question he was a spy. There's no question he sold secrets to Israel. It is sort of that old saying if you can't do the time don't do the crime, isn't it?
ELLIOT LAUER, ATTORNEY FOR JONATHAN POLLARD: Well, first, people should care because Jonathan Pollard was deprived of a fundamental constitutional right and that's important to all of us. Second, Jonathan Pollard...
BROWN: I'm sorry, what right was he deprived of?
LAUER: He was deprived of his Sixth Amendment right to effective legal representation.
BROWN: OK, I'm sorry, go ahead.
LAUER: Go ahead, Aaron.
BROWN: No.
LAUER: The government -- just to put this in a nutshell, the government reached a written plea agreement with Jonathan Pollard in which the government promised that it would not seek a life sentence.
It breached that agreement. It asked the court to sentence Jonathan to life and yet Jonathan's lawyer at the time did not object to that breach and did not even file a one-page notice of appeal that would have preserved Pollard's rights and that's important to all of us because every American citizen is entitled to effective legal representation.
BROWN: Has anyone up to this point, it's been 18 years, has anyone, any of his other lawyers ever challenged the quality of his representation and where did that challenge go if it was made?
LAUER: No and that's precisely the point that we're making. No one every challenged the representation of the formal lawyer. Indeed, in 1992 when there was a challenge to some of what the government had done, the subsequent lawyer who represented Pollard at the time chose not to criticize the original lawyer but incredibly he praised him and that's the point that we're raising in court today.
We argued to the judge that no one representing Pollard has ever effectively criticized the woefully deficient performance of the sentencing lawyer.
BROWN: And Mr. Semmelman, it's not technically I suppose a legal question. You may want to walk away from it but can you tell me where the current government of Israel is on this? Is the Sharon government actively seeking Mr. Pollard's release?
SEMMELMAN: Well, we're not going to comment on the current government of Israel. We are here to discuss the legal case, the legal issues that we argued in court today and we're happy to answer any questions relating to that. We are not involved with regard to the government of Israel.
BROWN: Gentlemen, thank you. We'll await the court and I assume more on this in the weeks ahead. Thank you both.
LAUER: Thank you.
BROWN: The Pollard case continues almost a generation later.
Quickly, a number of other stories from around the country, three more from courtrooms as it turns out starting in Washington with the man who shot and tried to kill Ronald Reagan when he was president.
A judge today agreed to allow hearings on whether John Hinckley, Jr. should be allowed unsupervised visitation by his family. Mr. Hinckley has been incarcerated for the last 22 years at St. Elizabeth's Hospital in Washington after a jury found him not guilty by reason of insanity.
An appeal was filed today with the U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of detainees at the American military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. It calls on the court to review the constitutionality of holding the prisoners without charges and without access to lawyers. An appeals court has already ruled the inmates are not entitled to constitutional protection.
And, in South Dakota, Congressman Bill Janklow made his first court appearance today. He stands charged with second degree manslaughter and reckless driving, felonies, in the death of a motorcyclist. The judge today let him remain free until his next court appearance. And, Jessica Lynch, not surprisingly, has struck a book deal, $1 million to tell the story of her capture and release, that's according to leaks. Ms. Lynch isn't talking. The book will be titled "I am a Soldier too." The Jessica Lynch story expected out in November.
Coming up on NEWSNIGHT we'll look at the day in politics including a talk with one of the principal advisers to California gubernatorial candidate Arnold Schwarzenegger.
And, it's official, he is a candidate. John Kerry of Massachusetts goes to South Carolina to formally say he is running for president.
On CNN, this is NEWSNIGHT.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BROWN: Well, you can say this about Senator John Francis Kerry, he sure is discreet. Who knew he was running for president? When he started campaigning much earlier this year the undeclared Senator from Massachusetts was all but considered a shoe-in, certainly in neighboring New Hampshire. Now, having loudly and officially declared his candidacy today Senator Kerry is a distinct underdog. How did that happen?
Here's CNN's Candy Crowley.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
CROWLEY (voice-over): At a place called Patriot's Point with the USS Yorktown at his back and old Navy buddies by his side, John Kerry announced his eight-month-old campaign with a four state swing he calls the American Courage Tour.
SEN. JOHN KERRY (D-MA), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: George Bush's vision does not live up to the America I enlisted in the Navy to defend.
CROWLEY: Did we mention he's a combat vet? Subtle it wasn't but there's no time for subtle. John Kerry needs some juice fast before the money begins to dry up and planned endorsements fade away. He is down in the polls in a thaw made more painful by early campaign success, a seasoned A-team staff, a bunch of money, the aura of presumed frontrunner.
HOWARD DEAN (D), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: This time the person with the most votes is going to be the president of the United States.
CROWLEY: Oops. Kerry underestimated the politician in Howard Dean and the ferocity of anti-Bush sentiment in hardcore Democrats. Time for Plan B, synthesizing Kerry's yes vote on the war with the anti-war voters at the core of his party.
KERRY: I voted to threaten the use of force to make Saddam Hussein comply with the resolutions of the United Nations. I believe that was right. But it was wrong to rush to war without building a true international coalition and with no plan to win the peace.
CROWLEY: Plan B is national security as the threshold issue, John Kerry as the guy with the war credentials to deal with it.
KERRY: Every investigation, every commission, every piece of evidence tells us that this president has failed to make us as safe as we should be.
CROWLEY: Plan B is John Kerry as a candidate with sharper elbows.
KERRY: Being flown to an aircraft carrier and saying mission accomplished doesn't end a war. And the swagger of a president saying bring them on will never bring peace or safety to our troops.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
CROWLEY: For now, Kerry intends to save the rough stuff for George Bush.
As for Howard Dean, his strategists believe that Kerry can make some inroads by highlighting Dean's plan to repeal all the tax cuts that George Bush has impositioned on to the public. That includes the tax cuts that were given to the middle class. The staffers believe that Dean is very vulnerable on that issue -- Aaron.
BROWN: There's a long way to go here, but I'm tempted to ask what went wrong. It's not that Senator Kerry made some huge blunder. It just seems more like he doesn't have a natural home in the party right now.
CROWLEY: Well, there was a hole. And Dean went to move into it. And the hole was that fierce anti-Bush, anti-war gap.
And it was a lot of the people who pay attention in the primaries. So Dean went in and sort of sucked up that airspace. And the rest of them sort of had to move around in that. Obviously, Kerry's war vote did hurt him. But it is more than that. It's that you've got to find a constituency with some passion. And Dean claimed those early on.
So now, what Kerry's hoping to do is say: Look, I'm sort of Dean-heavy. I'm the guy that can take on George Bush. I've got the credentials to do it. I've got the gravitas.
So that's what he's keying on, is Dean's relative inexperience, particularly in foreign policy.
BROWN: Candy, thank you very much. Glad to know the senator is now officially in after all those debates and all those speeches. Thank you.
With just 35 days to go until California's recall election, Arnold Schwarzenegger is taking some hits tonight for skipping a televised debate tomorrow and for some incredibly bawdy comments he made back in 1977. On the debate matter, Mr. Schwarzenegger says he'll only do one debate, a debate sponsored by the California Association of Broadcasters, an unusual debate, we think, in that the candidates get the questions a week or so in advance. My daughter should be so lucky on her SATs.
With us in Washington tonight to talk about it all, the co-chair of the campaign, Congressman David Dreier.
Nice to see you, Congressman.
REP. DAVID DREIER (R), CALIFORNIA: How are you, Aaron?
BROWN: Well, if one were a cynic -- not that one is -- but if one were a cynic, one would say that debate is made for an actor. You've got a week to write his lines. And he's got one night to deliver them. He's seen the questions in advance. Why is he ducking?
DREIER: The interesting thing about the debate process, Aaron, is that virtually every debate is scripted. Everyone knows what the questions are going to be ahead of time, because campaigns spend time planning for those debates. They go through rehearsals. It happens in presidential campaigns and gubernatorial campaigns.
This is really no different. The California Broadcasters Association was the organization that we concluded -- and I was asked to negotiate these debates -- having received more than a dozen requests, including from CNN and -- I won't go through all the people who have called me over the past weeks. And a chance to go through these structured debates every single day of the campaign was an option.
But what we concluded was that the wisest thing to do would be to provide a neutral operation, which the California Broadcasters Association is, that would provide CNN and every other network with the opportunity to have access to this. It will be a 90 minute- debate. It will include a wide range of candidates. And it will give the California voters a chance to see all the candidates.
But I should say, Aaron, that, just this afternoon, Arnold Schwarzenegger had four or five debates -- interviews with local television stations. And to act as if this debate is the only opportunity for questions to be posed to a candidate, as you very well know, hosting this program, is not the case. We get questions all the time, I as a candidate myself. And Arnold Schwarzenegger's been getting them himself, too.
BROWN: We wouldn't mind asking some of those.
Let me just very quickly -- it's almost literally yes or no -- have you ever done a debate where they handed you the questions a week in advance?
DREIER: Well, yes.
I've been in all kinds of different debates, Aaron. And, yes, we have gotten those. This really...
(CROSSTALK)
DREIER: Go ahead with your other yes-or-no questions.
BROWN: Well, no, that was it. If you say you have, I believe you.
DREIER: Yes.
BROWN: Mr. Schwarzenegger said yesterday, "I will never take money from special interests, from Indian gaming, from unions, or anything like that." He also acknowledged that he had taken money from business groups and said this: "I get donations from business and individuals, absolutely. They're powerful interests who control things."
Can you explain the difference to me between special interests and powerful interests?
DREIER: Well, Aaron, the interesting thing is, is, he said at the beginning he didn't need the money. We all know he's a very wealthy man.
What's happened is, there are people from all over the country who have come forward and demonstrated a real willingness to support him; 44 of the 50 states have people who have contributed to this campaign. And so there are a wide range of people who want to contribute.
The concern that Arnold has and one of the things that led him to run here is the fact that there are some interests which literally have a stranglehold on Governor Gray Davis. This campaign has come about, Aaron, because people are angry. And I asked myself -- when I was asked to participate and help him on this thing, I asked myself the question. I'm back here now in Washington. I just got off a plane a couple hours ago.
We've got a lot on our plate back here. And you've just talked about it on your program. And you regular regularly do. But what's happened is, I've found people are angry. And I'm upset over the fact that Gray Davis and Cruz Bustamante have really ruined our state. Today's "L.A. Times" had a cartoon which had Dr. Evil as Gray Davis and Mini-Me was Cruz Bustamante.
(CROSSTALK)
BROWN: Let me just -- would you agree that accepting money from a business group is no different than accepting money from a labor group, they both have interests before the state, they both have a desire to be heard, and that there is fundamentally no difference?
DREIER: The difference is this.
There are interests which have had virtual veto authority. Just for an example, it's been heavily criticized. Gray Davis addressed the Indian gaming group NIGA in Northern California in Sacramento. And he said: You all can appoint two members to the Gaming Control Commission. It's been criticized by both sides, people who are involved and not involved in this process, as basically catering to people and allowing them to pick who it is going to regulate -- to regulate them.
These are just examples of the kind of control. And Gray Davis has focused virtually all of his attention on raising money. He's known for a few things, running dirty campaigns, which they're already in the midst of, with the chairman of the Democratic Party saying that Arnold Schwarzenegger is a known sexual predator, when they say they're not going to use this sort of stuff in the campaign. They run dirty campaigns and they raise tons of money. And so -- and they obviously have delivered on it.
I think that many people have stepped forward, Aaron, and voluntarily indicated a willingness to support Arnold Schwarzenegger. And he has been willing to take that. But there are limits out there.
BROWN: Well, I hope there are limits out there.
DREIER: Yes, $21,200 is the limit.
BROWN: Congressman, there are lots of other things we should talk about. I hope you'll come back. We didn't get to most of them tonight.
DREIER: You bet.
BROWN: But we made a good start on it. And we appreciate your time. Thank you, sir. I know you've had a long day.
DREIER: Thanks, Aaron. OK.
BROWN: Thank you, congressman David Dreier.
Later on NEWSNIGHT: the mystery of New Sweden -- all we can do is ask these questions sometimes -- it remains unsolved. Who was trying to kill the members of a Lutheran Church? We go back there a little later.
Up next: a mystery from September 11. Why have so few families applied for compensation? We'll find out after a break.
Around the world, this is NEWSNIGHT.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BROWN: With the approach of the second anniversary of September 11 -- and it is right around the corner, too -- a plea today to the families of the victims of those who died in the attack.
New York's Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Kenneth Feinberg, who oversees the fund set up to help the victims, said today that only about half the people who are eligible to file for compensation have done so. And the clock is running. The deadline to file for compensation is the 22nd of December. We asked Mr. Feinberg to join us to talk about the process and why so few people have applied. And he joins us from Washington tonight.
It's nice to see you, sir.
KENNETH FEINBERG, VICTIMS COMPENSATION FUND: Thank you.
BROWN: What is it, about 60 percent or so of those who are arguably eligible have contacted you?
FEINBERG: No, less.
(CROSSTALK)
FEINBERG: Oh, I think they've contacted me, but only about 42 percent of the eligible claimants who lost somebody on 9/11 have actually filed with this fund.
BROWN: And the reasons for -- it's not that they're -- at least it's not that you all believe the reason is they think there's more money to be gotten if they go sue on their own. It's something else, right?
FEINBERG: Well, the lawsuits are a minor annoyance. There are 69 lawsuits. It's nothing compared to the tragedy of September 11.
And since January 1, Aaron, there have been only five new lawsuits. It's not lawsuits. It's grief. It's fear. It's human nature. I hope that, by December 22, these families have come around to the fund.
BROWN: Let's talk a little about each of those. The fear of what?
FEINBERG: The fear, on the case, for example, of undocumented workers, families, fear that they'll be deported, even though they're eligible. Now, the attorney general has made it very clear, the INS has made it very clear, there will be no repercussions from filing.
Nevertheless, we're having trouble reaching undocumented worker families, foreign claimants, who are afraid, if they apply, they won't be able to enter the country. That's the fear factor.
BROWN: And the grief factor is what?
FEINBERG: "Mr. Feinberg," with tears streaming down claimants' faces, "I'm just not ready to file. It's too soon. I lost my wife. I lost my father. I lost my husband. I need more time. Leave the application. It doesn't matter that I can get tax-free millions of dollars. I am just not ready to put pencil to paper."
BROWN: And I gather -- you can't fill the forms out for them. You can't sign them for them. If they don't want to do it, there's nothing you can do. Is there any prospect that the December 22 deadline will be extended? FEINBERG: I think that's highly unlikely. You'll have to ask Congress. But every indication I have is that December 22 is fixed. Anybody who files after December 22 will be barred and there will be no extension.
BROWN: And so what do you do between now and then, other than talk to me and talk to all sorts of people? Are there outreach programs? Is there an attempt to sort of aggressively go after people and get them to sign?
FEINBERG: Absolutely, a massive outreach program.
During the entire month of September, I will be traveling, meeting at town hall meetings, meetings with family groups. I'll be meeting with individual families who have expressed a desire to see me. We have victim assistance groups. We're using advertising in various languages. We are going -- the State Department has been very helpful. The administration's been extremely helpful in this regard.
And we are hoping, during the next 30 to 60 days, to reach out to people. We will sit down with any family and help them fill out the forms, once they make that decision to participate.
BROWN: Mr. Feinberg, I think those of us, particularly in New York, who have watched you work for the last year-plus now have an exquisite appreciation for how difficult, at times, this has been and how hard you've tried to make this work. We appreciate your time tonight. Thank you.
FEINBERG: Thank you. Thank you very, very much.
BROWN: Thank you, sir.
Ahead on NEWSNIGHT, a little bit later, we'll check morning papers from around the country and around the world.
Up next, the town of New Sweden, Maine, and the still unsolved mystery of who poisoned the members of the local Lutheran church.
This is NEWSNIGHT.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BROWN: It began as an ordinary Sunday morning just over four months ago in a very small town in northern Maine. There was church, of course. And then there was coffee and dessert after the service.
But what happened next in New Sweden, Maine, generated headlines around the world and left both townspeople and authorities there reeling. We went back to New Sweden recently to check in with the people and the place. And we found that things are far from settled.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BROWN (voice-over): The countryside, with its lakes, are idyllic at this time of year. But Lester Beaupre isn't paying a lot of attention. For him, it is enough to simply be alive.
LESTER BEAUPRE, VICTIM OF POISONING: The only thing right now is my feet. They feel -- like when you get a limb that goes numb and then it's coming back, how it tingles and hurts? Well, that's what my feet feel like.
BROWN: An expert cabinetmaker by trade, Beaupre was one of 16 victims of a mass poisoning that took place here at the tiny Gustaf Adolph Lutheran Church in the town of New Sweden, Maine, a Sunday morning late in April.
There was cake with icing. There was coffee, all served after the regular service.
BEAUPRE: I took a cup of coffee and kind of like chased the icing down. And I thought the icing had a weird taste. But after the icing was all washed down, I realized it was the coffee.
The coffee tasted that metal type, aluminum-like. So by this time, I had drank about -- a little bit over half a cup of coffee. And I just took it and I just put it to the side.
BROWN: The coffee, investigators later said, was laced with arsenic. One elderly church member, a man with a heart condition, died; 15 others became violently ill.
A lifelong member of the congregation, 53-year-old Daniel Bondeson killed himself five days later and left a suicide note that police say linked him to the poisoning. But that news was not the end of anything.
LT. DENNIS APPLETON, MAINE STATE POLICE: We still believe that there is an individual or individuals that were -- that played a part in this. We're still trying to develop exactly what that part may have been.
BROWN: When the news reached New Sweden and its 617 residents that investigators were looking for someone else in connection with the poisoning, it was like an earthquake had suddenly struck.
BRENDA JEPSON, NEW SWEDEN HISTORIAN: It's really kind of like clouds hanging over this town, because there's the suspicion aspect. There are all the questions that are unanswered. Somebody out there perhaps is guilty. We don't know. And so all of that makes us feel uncomfortable.
BROWN: And down at Stan's Grocery, where people meet and get their mail, the rumors are abundant.
STAN THOMAS, STORE OWNER: There was a rumor at first that there was a 12-year-old girl involved, and also a 17-year-old girl, and then nothing more said, except that.
BROWN: Police aren't saying much at the moment. Most here still can't believe that the 53-year-old Bondeson could have ever even thought of a mass poisoning, let alone pulled one off. JEPSON: He was a person who was out and about quite a lot, I thought very friendly and approachable. He was quiet. But he was not the reclusive type that, if you spoke to him, wouldn't speak back. And, in fact, he would venture to speak to you if you hadn't kind of noticed him there.
BROWN: Dennis Appleton has been in charge of the investigation since it began. He will not rest, he says, until he has answers.
APPLETON: It would be great to wrap everything up, as would many of the unsolved mysteries around this world today. But we'll plug away. And we won't go away until we're satisfied.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
BROWN: New Sweden, Maine, four months later.
Morning papers after the break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(ROOSTER CROWING)
BROWN: Oh, we've all missed that, haven't we? Time to check morning papers from -- we haven't? -- from around the country and around the world.
A lot of good local stories today and a few national stories as well. "San Antonio Express News" starts us off, San Antonio, Texas. Big story, "Democrat Walkout Stumbles." One of the AWOL senators came back. But the story I like best down in the corner here, "A real sting operation against terror. Bees among insects being trained in San Antonio to sniff out weapons." Man, I hope that works. That's a -- well, we'll find out, won't we?
"The Oregonian" out in Portland, Oregon. Something I liked here. Oh, yes. Come on, it's not easy to do the whole show and this. "White House Prepares to Ask U.N. for help." This is going to be a big story in the next few days, the White House negotiating with the Security Council to try and get money and troops into Iraq.
There's been a flood of stories lately on things not going that well in Iraq, including this one in "The Washington Times." "The Washington Times" editorially certainly, editorial page, conservative paper, very supportive of the administration generally. "U.S. Rushed Post-Saddam Planning. War Strategy Approved in August 2002." We'll be wanting to read that story by Rowan Scarborough of "The Washington Times." Take a look at that. Down here in the middle, "Republicans to Force Issue of Gay Marriage, Want Democrats to State Positions." There's a wedge issue, if ever we saw one.
"The Hartford Courant," Hartford, Connecticut. "Combat Injuries Climb in Iraq." This was in some papers today. It was a "Washington Post" story, 10 or so wounded a day, the number of wounded well over 1,000 now, also a very good story.
How we doing?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Thirty-six.
BROWN: OK. Thirty-six?
"The Boston Herald." John Kerry, the senator from Massachusetts, on the cover. "Steaming Ahead." That's the headline there.
Well, we'll get this one in, too. "The Detroit News" today -- or tomorrow, actually. That's the whole point of this bit, isn't it? "Bloomfield Vote" -- that's Bloomfield, Michigan -- "Vote Fraud Alleged. State Investigators Claim Tenants Were Offered Free Rent For Annexation Votes." Never happens to me.
That's morning papers. That's the program. We really are all back tomorrow, 10:00 Eastern time. We hope you are, too.
Until then, good night for 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
Faces Execution for Murder of Abortion Doctor; Lawyers Argue Tate Should Have Had Psych Eval Before Trial>
Aired September 2, 2003 - 22:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
AARON BROWN, HOST: Good evening again, everyone. It's nice to see you tonight.
It seems like everyone went back to work today. The courts certainly did. Everywhere we turn tonight there is a judge on the bench, a defendant in the dock, and issues, mostly big issues hanging in the balance.
A convicted spy goes to court hoping to escape one of those life sentences that actually seems to mean life.
A child goes to court in Florida hoping to convince a judge that a life sentence handed down to a young child is the very definition of cruel and unusual punishment.
An anti-abortion terrorist goes to his death tomorrow but not before pleading the rightness of his cause to reporters today.
And, out west, 100 or so people who faced execution may have found their ticket off death row because a judge, not a jury, sent them there, so much for easing our way out of summer.
We begin the whip out west and perhaps the luckiest 100 people in the country today, CNN's Frank Buckley on the story, so Frank a headline from you.
FRANK BUCKLEY, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Aaron, death row inmates in Arizona, Idaho, and Montana have had their sentences commuted because of a ruling today. They will not walk free as a result but the decision does mean that tonight they are no longer among the condemned -- Aaron.
BROWN: Frank, thank you, we'll get to you at the top tonight.
Next stop Stark, Florida, CNN's Brian Cabell on what the killer of an abortion doctor had to say about facing the executioner, Brian a headline.
BRIAN CABELL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Aaron, Paul Hill is scheduled to be executed tomorrow. He has no regrets, no remorse. It appears that he will go to his death with a smile on his face and peace in his heart.
BROWN: Brian, thank you. On to Miami and the case of a 14-year-old boy sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole, John Zarrella covered that so, John, a headline from you.
JOHN ZARRELLA, CNN MIAMI BUREAU CHIEF: Aaron, Lionel Tate's attorneys went to appeals court asking the three judge panel to throw out his conviction or, at the very least send it back for retrial, the attorneys arguing that Lionel Tate never got an evaluation, a psychological evaluation before his trial or anytime during it and the judges themselves wondered is it too young at 12 years old to stand trial for a murder felony -- Aaron?
BROWN: John, thank you, we'll get back to you as well.
It's not all crime and punishment. CNN's Candy Crowley has politics tonight on candidate Kerry, a headline Candy.
CANDY CROWLEY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Aaron, John Kerry launched his official presidential campaign out of South Carolina today. Why do that on a campaign that's been running for almost a year now? Well, because it gives you a little buzz and a lot of attention and at this point former frontrunner John Kerry could use a bit of both -- Aaron.
BROWN: Candy, thank you, back to you and the rest shortly. Also coming up on NEWSNIGHT on this Tuesday night, the case of Jonathan Pollard, the convicted spy, a traitor to many, a hero to some, a political complication when it comes to relations between the United States and Israel.
We'll talk debates and why Arnold Schwarzenegger only wants to take part in one of them, top campaign adviser joins us.
Joining us as well tonight, a man with a very tough job to do, Kenneth (unintelligible) who overseas the compensation fund for the victims of 9/11 with the deadline approaching for victims to register a striking number have yet to sign up.
And, tired of staying up all night just to see tomorrow morning's front pages? Thanks to the miracle of miracle fibers and, of course, a rooster we'll bring you morning papers as well, all that and more in the hour ahead.
We begin tonight with the court's ruling to overturn death sentences against more than 100 prisoners in three states. In relative terms that is a very small number because so many people, 3,700 or so, are currently on death row in the country and most of them will stay there but a few more may not as appellate courts try to sort out what the Supreme Court meant earlier this year.
We begin tonight with CNN's Frank Buckley.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BUCKLEY (voice-over): The ruling by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals will immediately impact death row prisoners in three states in which judges impose the death penalty rather than juries. Under the ruling, 89 prisoners on Arizona's death row, 17 in Idaho, and five in Montana will see their death sentences overturned.
KEN MURRAY, ASSISTANT FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER: At the heart of the case was the fact that if you're going to execute, take somebody's life that you need to have the jury reflecting the social conscience of the community making that decision.
BUCKLEY: The decision followed a June, 2002 Supreme Court ruling that said juries, not judges, should decide death but it left open the question of whether the new rule should apply retroactively to condemned prisoners already on death row. The 8-3 ruling by the Ninth Circuit said the new rules did apply and that the death sentences should be commuted to sentences of life in prison.
ERWIN CHEMERINSKY, USC LAW SCHOOL PROFESSOR: Before a person can be put to death a jury and not just the judge should find the death sentence appropriate. Somebody shouldn't be executed by the accident of timing that they're tried before June of 2002.
BUCKLEY: Arizona's attorney general says he'll appeal.
TERRY GODDARD, ARIZONA ATTORNEY GENERAL: The accident of timing is a fact of life we see many, many times. In this case, the Supreme Court changed a procedural rule for capital cases albeit a very important procedural rule but one that we have argued as not substantive.
BUCKLEY: But opponents of the death penalty say the procedure that a jury should decide death is fundamental.
RICHARD DEITER, DEATH PENALTY INFORMATION CENTER: This was a decision about a person's right to jury, the Sixth Amendment, and the court said that this should apply in death penalty cases and it should apply to people on death row as well as to future cases. That has the potential of affecting a lot of death sentences and is a very important decision.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
BUCKLEY: Now, the immediate effect of the decision is that the 111 death row prisoners in the three states of Arizona, Idaho, and Montana will not be executed for now but their convictions still stand and they will not walk out of prison.
What could happen next, though, is that the individual jurisdictions that convicted these inmates can decide to retry the penalty phase of each person before a jury. Before that happens, though, it's likely, Aaron that this will all go to the Supreme Court.
BROWN: And just in listening to the Arizona attorney general, he didn't necessarily tip his hand as to whether they'll ask to re- sentence all of these people. Is there something there we ought to know?
BUCKLEY: Well, we talked about that and he said that he is going to await the ruling of the Supreme Court and ultimately it's not his call. It's up to the D.A. in whatever county sentenced one of the 89 people who were on death row in Arizona.
BROWN: Frank, thank you very much, Frank Buckley out in Los Angeles tonight.
We're joined here in New York by CNN Legal Analyst Jeffrey Toobin, nice to see you again. Before we get into the legal complexities here, the underlying case was so bizarre here.
JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Unbelievable. Just, I'll give you the key facts in this case. Mr. Summerlin, the defendant, a debt collector came to his house. The debt collector disappeared. No one knew what happened to the debt collector.
Someone calls the cops and says my daughter has ESP. She can tell you where the body is. In fact, that's how they found the body. Plea negotiations are going on in this case during the trial. It turns out during the plea negotiations the defense attorney is sleeping with the prosecutor.
OK, the case finally goes to trial. There's a penalty phase. The judge has to determine part of the sentence. That's what this case is all about. The judge is stoned on pot during much of the trial, later convicted, disbarred, I mean all of this it's no wonder that this crime took place in 1981 and it's taken 20 plus years to get it through. I mean you can't make this stuff up.
BROWN: Just one question then I want to go to the bigger issue.
TOOBIN: Sure.
BROWN: How is it that a judge who is high on marijuana at the time of the trial and the penalty phase, I mean long ago why wasn't that thrown out?
TOOBIN: Well, that is -- they had a hearing about it and they determined that the judge did not do anything that was indicative of being stoned but the government really didn't argue that this guy, that this judge who later was disbarred was a serious pothead during this trial. That's a separate hour.
BROWN: Right, on to the broader issue.
TOOBIN: Right.
BROWN: In the court, the Supreme Court's original decision did it give guidance to the appeals courts on how to deal with these older cases?
TOOBIN: No, it really didn't. There are these procedures in place for decisions about constitutional rights. Are they retroactive or not? And, the rule is if it's procedural it's not retroactive.
If it's a substantive ruling it is retroactive. What's the difference between substantive and procedural? Lawyers fight about that all day long and that's why this is such a confusing mess.
BROWN: Would Miranda be procedural, for example?
TOOBIN: That would be procedural, yes.
BROWN: So, when the court issued Miranda, the ruling on Miranda, you have to be -- you're entitled to be told of your rights.
TOOBIN: Right.
BROWN: Retroactively, were people not informed of their rights?
TOOBIN: I believe they -- I believe on Miranda they were not. Other decisions like, for example, I mean there are certain death penalty decisions that like when they struck down all the death penalty in 1972...
BROWN: Right.
TOOBIN: ...that was considered so important it was retroactive that, you know, everybody got off death row not just people who were subsequently sentenced.
BROWN: And it's a little point but in those cases they were not re-sentenced. The court said then that the law as applied was fatally unconstitutional.
TOOBIN: So, everybody on death row got life sentences. They were not executed.
BROWN: So, where do we go? Who takes this to the U.S. Supreme Court?
TOOBIN: The Arizona attorney general has said that he is going to appeal and it's worth noting that this was a decision by the famous Ninth Circuit, the most liberal court in America. The eight judges, five Clinton appointees, three Carter appointees, all Democratic judges, I mean so this was a liberal group.
Two other circuits have considered this issue, more conservative circuits and they have said it should not be retroactive. They came to the opposite conclusion so there's a split in the circuits. The Supreme Court has to take the case to resolve it.
BROWN: Has anyone been executed who was -- since the Supreme Court ruled who was sentenced by a judge?
TOOBIN: No, no, no one has gotten that far in the process but it won't be long because the circuits that approved this process have a lot of people on death row. That's why the Supreme Court will definitely take this up this fall.
BROWN: Thank you, nice to see you.
TOOBIN: Nice to see you.
BROWN: It's a strange case. On to Florida now and the saga of Paul Hill, barring any last minute developments he'll be executed tomorrow for murdering a doctor and his bodyguard outside an abortion clinic nearly ten years ago.
Today, he spoke with reporters. He called himself a martyr and some might agree. He spoke some words, and you'll hear them in a moment, that might have been spoken by other so-called martyrs who most people would consider terrorists.
Here's CNN's Brian Cabell.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
CABELL (voice-over): One day before his scheduled execution, Paul Hill calmly and with a smile claims he has no regrets for the double murder he committed in 1994.
PAUL HILL, CONVICTED MURDERER: I can honestly say that if I had not acted when I did in the way I did that I could not look at myself in the mirror.
CABELL: Nine years ago Hill, a Presbyterian minister and father of three, opened fire on Dr. John Britton, who performed abortions and his two escorts as they drove into a Pensacola clinic. Hill then took time to reload.
HILL: Dr. Britton was still alive, was moving around and I fired five more rounds until all movement stopped.
CABELL: Britton was killed. So was escort James Barrett. His wife June was wounded but survived. Hill has never denied shooting them, nor has he appealed the case with the exception of one mandatory appeal before the Florida Supreme Court. He long ago dismissed his attorneys.
And now, as his execution by lethal injection nears some clinics providing abortions are on alert for possible violence.
VICTORIA SAPORTA, NATIONAL ABORTION FEDERATION: We know that events can trigger acts of violence and we know that those in the extreme wing of the anti-choice movement are predicting a backlash and we need to take these people seriously.
CABELL: In addition, some state officials have received threatening letters, including the judge who sentenced Hill to death and Paul Hill himself, if you believe him, he has no fear.
HILL: I believe that the moment that I'm executed that my soul will be made perfect in holiness and that I'll enter the immediate presence of the Lord and I'll be forever with him and so I'm certainly looking forward to that.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
CABELL: During the press conference, Hill was asked whether he supported other people following in his footsteps, other people in other words murdering abortion providers. He said only if they have the calling as he claims he did.
He met with his wife and three teenage kids yesterday. He'll meet with his wife, his eldest son, his mother and father and two sisters tomorrow and he'll have a final meal and then at 6:00 p.m., Aaron, he is scheduled to be executed.
BROWN: Two quick questions, one has the governor said anything one way or another about this and what have mainstream anti-abortion groups had to say?
CABELL: Jeb Bush has said he does not want to get involved in this at all. He will not intervene. Mainstream groups have said -- they have disavowed him. They don't want anything to do with him. They say he's a murderer. He's a violent man. They want nothing whatsoever to do with him.
BROWN: Brian, thank you, Brian Cabell, in Stark, Florida tonight on the Paul Hill case.
From the moment he was convicted, the case of young Lionel Tate in south Florida has been an extraordinary test of the Florida legal system. He was 12 when he killed a six-year-old playmate, two children with lost lives, one literally, the other sentenced to life without parole.
Short of death which the state was barred from seeking it was the harshest sentence prosecutors could ask for once the case went to trial. The question of course is was it just?
Again, here's CNN's John Zarrella.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ZARRELLA (voice-over): The attorney for the state defended Lionel Tate's murder conviction telling the Appeals Court that what Tate did to six-year-old Tiffany Unik (ph) was no accident. Tate's mother sat hands folded listening to the stinging words.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Little Tiffany Unik was beaten to death and the beating lasted at a minimum of five minutes during which she was kicked, punched, and stomped to death.
ZARRELLA: Tate was convicted at age 14 and sentenced to life without parole. The defense contended Lionel was play acting wrestling moves he saw on TV when Tiffany hit her head. Tate's current attorney, Richard Rosenbaum, argued that Lionel should have been given a competency evaluation.
RICHARD ROSENBAUM, ATTORNEY FOR LIONEL TATE: First of all Michael's young age, he was 12 years old at the time. Lionel's mental age, depending on which doctor you believe he was either 1.9 to four years below that, his immaturity, his lack of development, all this was borne out by the record through pretrial proceedings.
ZARRELLA: The three judge panel questioned whether a felony murder charge should be applied to a 12-year-old. ROSENBAUM: That's the difficulty that I'm having. At what point do we as a society say that's beyond the pale, what age?
ZARRELLA: Lionel's attorneys are hoping the panel finds sufficient reason to either reverse the conviction or order a new trial.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
ZARRELLA: Now there's no time table for the Appeals Court to rule and this is not the only avenue of appeal that Lionel Tate's attorneys are pursuing. They've also gone to Tallahassee and a lot of legal experts say that may be their best avenue where they're asking Florida's Governor Jeb Bush and the Florida cabinet to at least consider clemency for Lionel Tate -- Aaron.
BROWN: John, thank you, John Zarrella in South Florida tonight.
Ahead on NEWSNIGHT, a spy for an American ally, we'll talk with lawyers for Jonathan Pollard who were in court today arguing that he got a raw deal but he was given a life sentence.
And, four months after a strange poison attack on members of a Maine church, we'll visit a town still searching for answers.
From New York, this is NEWSNIGHT.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BROWN: There doesn't appear to be much middle ground when it comes to the case of Jonathan Pollard. He's either the worst kind of spy who did untold damage to the United States interest for money or he's a hero who only gave U.S. intelligence to Israel because it was the right thing to do.
Either way he spent 18 years in prison for spying. He stands to spend the rest of his life there unless he can convince someone to let him out. Five years ago, the Israeli government asked President Clinton to pardon Mr. Pollard but that went nowhere.
Today with new lawyers he was in Federal Court to argue that he never should have been sentenced to life in prison in the first place. Mr. Pollard claims his earlier lawyer should have done more to ensure a shorter sentence after his guilty plea.
We're joined from Washington now by Mr. Pollard's new lawyers, Elliot Lauer and Jacques Semmelman, nice to have you both with us. Mr. Semmelman, I don't want to assume too much knowledge here for people but Mr. Pollard pleaded guilty. There was an agreed upon sentence.
The judge went well outside the agreement and that was apparently based on a letter, a lengthy letter by Caspar Weinberger, the defense secretary, and that's what you're trying to get your hands on, right?
JACQUES SEMMELMAN, ATTORNEY FOR JONATHAN POLLARD: Well, one of the documents we're trying to get our hands on is the Weinberger declaration which was submitted two months before the sentencing and is partially classified and has not been provided to us even though we have the appropriate level of security clearance, which is top secret clearance.
Mr. Lauer and I have the clearance. We have the need to know and yet the government is refusing to allow us to see that document and four other related documents.
BROWN: And the reason you want to get your hands on that document is what?
SEMMELMAN: We want to be able to see that document because we need it in order to effectively represent our client. It is not possible to effectively represent our client unless we have access to the court record.
We have attempted to obtain clemency for Mr. Pollard and we have been met with the objection that we have not seen all of the relevant documents.
As a result of that we applied for and obtained the appropriate level of security clearance from the United States Department of Justice. We clearly have the need to know and yet the government says you cannot see it.
BROWN: Mr. Lauer, I think the question here in a sense is why should people care? You have a guy who at the very least sold out his country. I mean there's no question he was a spy. There's no question he sold secrets to Israel. It is sort of that old saying if you can't do the time don't do the crime, isn't it?
ELLIOT LAUER, ATTORNEY FOR JONATHAN POLLARD: Well, first, people should care because Jonathan Pollard was deprived of a fundamental constitutional right and that's important to all of us. Second, Jonathan Pollard...
BROWN: I'm sorry, what right was he deprived of?
LAUER: He was deprived of his Sixth Amendment right to effective legal representation.
BROWN: OK, I'm sorry, go ahead.
LAUER: Go ahead, Aaron.
BROWN: No.
LAUER: The government -- just to put this in a nutshell, the government reached a written plea agreement with Jonathan Pollard in which the government promised that it would not seek a life sentence.
It breached that agreement. It asked the court to sentence Jonathan to life and yet Jonathan's lawyer at the time did not object to that breach and did not even file a one-page notice of appeal that would have preserved Pollard's rights and that's important to all of us because every American citizen is entitled to effective legal representation.
BROWN: Has anyone up to this point, it's been 18 years, has anyone, any of his other lawyers ever challenged the quality of his representation and where did that challenge go if it was made?
LAUER: No and that's precisely the point that we're making. No one every challenged the representation of the formal lawyer. Indeed, in 1992 when there was a challenge to some of what the government had done, the subsequent lawyer who represented Pollard at the time chose not to criticize the original lawyer but incredibly he praised him and that's the point that we're raising in court today.
We argued to the judge that no one representing Pollard has ever effectively criticized the woefully deficient performance of the sentencing lawyer.
BROWN: And Mr. Semmelman, it's not technically I suppose a legal question. You may want to walk away from it but can you tell me where the current government of Israel is on this? Is the Sharon government actively seeking Mr. Pollard's release?
SEMMELMAN: Well, we're not going to comment on the current government of Israel. We are here to discuss the legal case, the legal issues that we argued in court today and we're happy to answer any questions relating to that. We are not involved with regard to the government of Israel.
BROWN: Gentlemen, thank you. We'll await the court and I assume more on this in the weeks ahead. Thank you both.
LAUER: Thank you.
BROWN: The Pollard case continues almost a generation later.
Quickly, a number of other stories from around the country, three more from courtrooms as it turns out starting in Washington with the man who shot and tried to kill Ronald Reagan when he was president.
A judge today agreed to allow hearings on whether John Hinckley, Jr. should be allowed unsupervised visitation by his family. Mr. Hinckley has been incarcerated for the last 22 years at St. Elizabeth's Hospital in Washington after a jury found him not guilty by reason of insanity.
An appeal was filed today with the U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of detainees at the American military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. It calls on the court to review the constitutionality of holding the prisoners without charges and without access to lawyers. An appeals court has already ruled the inmates are not entitled to constitutional protection.
And, in South Dakota, Congressman Bill Janklow made his first court appearance today. He stands charged with second degree manslaughter and reckless driving, felonies, in the death of a motorcyclist. The judge today let him remain free until his next court appearance. And, Jessica Lynch, not surprisingly, has struck a book deal, $1 million to tell the story of her capture and release, that's according to leaks. Ms. Lynch isn't talking. The book will be titled "I am a Soldier too." The Jessica Lynch story expected out in November.
Coming up on NEWSNIGHT we'll look at the day in politics including a talk with one of the principal advisers to California gubernatorial candidate Arnold Schwarzenegger.
And, it's official, he is a candidate. John Kerry of Massachusetts goes to South Carolina to formally say he is running for president.
On CNN, this is NEWSNIGHT.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BROWN: Well, you can say this about Senator John Francis Kerry, he sure is discreet. Who knew he was running for president? When he started campaigning much earlier this year the undeclared Senator from Massachusetts was all but considered a shoe-in, certainly in neighboring New Hampshire. Now, having loudly and officially declared his candidacy today Senator Kerry is a distinct underdog. How did that happen?
Here's CNN's Candy Crowley.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
CROWLEY (voice-over): At a place called Patriot's Point with the USS Yorktown at his back and old Navy buddies by his side, John Kerry announced his eight-month-old campaign with a four state swing he calls the American Courage Tour.
SEN. JOHN KERRY (D-MA), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: George Bush's vision does not live up to the America I enlisted in the Navy to defend.
CROWLEY: Did we mention he's a combat vet? Subtle it wasn't but there's no time for subtle. John Kerry needs some juice fast before the money begins to dry up and planned endorsements fade away. He is down in the polls in a thaw made more painful by early campaign success, a seasoned A-team staff, a bunch of money, the aura of presumed frontrunner.
HOWARD DEAN (D), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: This time the person with the most votes is going to be the president of the United States.
CROWLEY: Oops. Kerry underestimated the politician in Howard Dean and the ferocity of anti-Bush sentiment in hardcore Democrats. Time for Plan B, synthesizing Kerry's yes vote on the war with the anti-war voters at the core of his party.
KERRY: I voted to threaten the use of force to make Saddam Hussein comply with the resolutions of the United Nations. I believe that was right. But it was wrong to rush to war without building a true international coalition and with no plan to win the peace.
CROWLEY: Plan B is national security as the threshold issue, John Kerry as the guy with the war credentials to deal with it.
KERRY: Every investigation, every commission, every piece of evidence tells us that this president has failed to make us as safe as we should be.
CROWLEY: Plan B is John Kerry as a candidate with sharper elbows.
KERRY: Being flown to an aircraft carrier and saying mission accomplished doesn't end a war. And the swagger of a president saying bring them on will never bring peace or safety to our troops.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
CROWLEY: For now, Kerry intends to save the rough stuff for George Bush.
As for Howard Dean, his strategists believe that Kerry can make some inroads by highlighting Dean's plan to repeal all the tax cuts that George Bush has impositioned on to the public. That includes the tax cuts that were given to the middle class. The staffers believe that Dean is very vulnerable on that issue -- Aaron.
BROWN: There's a long way to go here, but I'm tempted to ask what went wrong. It's not that Senator Kerry made some huge blunder. It just seems more like he doesn't have a natural home in the party right now.
CROWLEY: Well, there was a hole. And Dean went to move into it. And the hole was that fierce anti-Bush, anti-war gap.
And it was a lot of the people who pay attention in the primaries. So Dean went in and sort of sucked up that airspace. And the rest of them sort of had to move around in that. Obviously, Kerry's war vote did hurt him. But it is more than that. It's that you've got to find a constituency with some passion. And Dean claimed those early on.
So now, what Kerry's hoping to do is say: Look, I'm sort of Dean-heavy. I'm the guy that can take on George Bush. I've got the credentials to do it. I've got the gravitas.
So that's what he's keying on, is Dean's relative inexperience, particularly in foreign policy.
BROWN: Candy, thank you very much. Glad to know the senator is now officially in after all those debates and all those speeches. Thank you.
With just 35 days to go until California's recall election, Arnold Schwarzenegger is taking some hits tonight for skipping a televised debate tomorrow and for some incredibly bawdy comments he made back in 1977. On the debate matter, Mr. Schwarzenegger says he'll only do one debate, a debate sponsored by the California Association of Broadcasters, an unusual debate, we think, in that the candidates get the questions a week or so in advance. My daughter should be so lucky on her SATs.
With us in Washington tonight to talk about it all, the co-chair of the campaign, Congressman David Dreier.
Nice to see you, Congressman.
REP. DAVID DREIER (R), CALIFORNIA: How are you, Aaron?
BROWN: Well, if one were a cynic -- not that one is -- but if one were a cynic, one would say that debate is made for an actor. You've got a week to write his lines. And he's got one night to deliver them. He's seen the questions in advance. Why is he ducking?
DREIER: The interesting thing about the debate process, Aaron, is that virtually every debate is scripted. Everyone knows what the questions are going to be ahead of time, because campaigns spend time planning for those debates. They go through rehearsals. It happens in presidential campaigns and gubernatorial campaigns.
This is really no different. The California Broadcasters Association was the organization that we concluded -- and I was asked to negotiate these debates -- having received more than a dozen requests, including from CNN and -- I won't go through all the people who have called me over the past weeks. And a chance to go through these structured debates every single day of the campaign was an option.
But what we concluded was that the wisest thing to do would be to provide a neutral operation, which the California Broadcasters Association is, that would provide CNN and every other network with the opportunity to have access to this. It will be a 90 minute- debate. It will include a wide range of candidates. And it will give the California voters a chance to see all the candidates.
But I should say, Aaron, that, just this afternoon, Arnold Schwarzenegger had four or five debates -- interviews with local television stations. And to act as if this debate is the only opportunity for questions to be posed to a candidate, as you very well know, hosting this program, is not the case. We get questions all the time, I as a candidate myself. And Arnold Schwarzenegger's been getting them himself, too.
BROWN: We wouldn't mind asking some of those.
Let me just very quickly -- it's almost literally yes or no -- have you ever done a debate where they handed you the questions a week in advance?
DREIER: Well, yes.
I've been in all kinds of different debates, Aaron. And, yes, we have gotten those. This really...
(CROSSTALK)
DREIER: Go ahead with your other yes-or-no questions.
BROWN: Well, no, that was it. If you say you have, I believe you.
DREIER: Yes.
BROWN: Mr. Schwarzenegger said yesterday, "I will never take money from special interests, from Indian gaming, from unions, or anything like that." He also acknowledged that he had taken money from business groups and said this: "I get donations from business and individuals, absolutely. They're powerful interests who control things."
Can you explain the difference to me between special interests and powerful interests?
DREIER: Well, Aaron, the interesting thing is, is, he said at the beginning he didn't need the money. We all know he's a very wealthy man.
What's happened is, there are people from all over the country who have come forward and demonstrated a real willingness to support him; 44 of the 50 states have people who have contributed to this campaign. And so there are a wide range of people who want to contribute.
The concern that Arnold has and one of the things that led him to run here is the fact that there are some interests which literally have a stranglehold on Governor Gray Davis. This campaign has come about, Aaron, because people are angry. And I asked myself -- when I was asked to participate and help him on this thing, I asked myself the question. I'm back here now in Washington. I just got off a plane a couple hours ago.
We've got a lot on our plate back here. And you've just talked about it on your program. And you regular regularly do. But what's happened is, I've found people are angry. And I'm upset over the fact that Gray Davis and Cruz Bustamante have really ruined our state. Today's "L.A. Times" had a cartoon which had Dr. Evil as Gray Davis and Mini-Me was Cruz Bustamante.
(CROSSTALK)
BROWN: Let me just -- would you agree that accepting money from a business group is no different than accepting money from a labor group, they both have interests before the state, they both have a desire to be heard, and that there is fundamentally no difference?
DREIER: The difference is this.
There are interests which have had virtual veto authority. Just for an example, it's been heavily criticized. Gray Davis addressed the Indian gaming group NIGA in Northern California in Sacramento. And he said: You all can appoint two members to the Gaming Control Commission. It's been criticized by both sides, people who are involved and not involved in this process, as basically catering to people and allowing them to pick who it is going to regulate -- to regulate them.
These are just examples of the kind of control. And Gray Davis has focused virtually all of his attention on raising money. He's known for a few things, running dirty campaigns, which they're already in the midst of, with the chairman of the Democratic Party saying that Arnold Schwarzenegger is a known sexual predator, when they say they're not going to use this sort of stuff in the campaign. They run dirty campaigns and they raise tons of money. And so -- and they obviously have delivered on it.
I think that many people have stepped forward, Aaron, and voluntarily indicated a willingness to support Arnold Schwarzenegger. And he has been willing to take that. But there are limits out there.
BROWN: Well, I hope there are limits out there.
DREIER: Yes, $21,200 is the limit.
BROWN: Congressman, there are lots of other things we should talk about. I hope you'll come back. We didn't get to most of them tonight.
DREIER: You bet.
BROWN: But we made a good start on it. And we appreciate your time. Thank you, sir. I know you've had a long day.
DREIER: Thanks, Aaron. OK.
BROWN: Thank you, congressman David Dreier.
Later on NEWSNIGHT: the mystery of New Sweden -- all we can do is ask these questions sometimes -- it remains unsolved. Who was trying to kill the members of a Lutheran Church? We go back there a little later.
Up next: a mystery from September 11. Why have so few families applied for compensation? We'll find out after a break.
Around the world, this is NEWSNIGHT.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BROWN: With the approach of the second anniversary of September 11 -- and it is right around the corner, too -- a plea today to the families of the victims of those who died in the attack.
New York's Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Kenneth Feinberg, who oversees the fund set up to help the victims, said today that only about half the people who are eligible to file for compensation have done so. And the clock is running. The deadline to file for compensation is the 22nd of December. We asked Mr. Feinberg to join us to talk about the process and why so few people have applied. And he joins us from Washington tonight.
It's nice to see you, sir.
KENNETH FEINBERG, VICTIMS COMPENSATION FUND: Thank you.
BROWN: What is it, about 60 percent or so of those who are arguably eligible have contacted you?
FEINBERG: No, less.
(CROSSTALK)
FEINBERG: Oh, I think they've contacted me, but only about 42 percent of the eligible claimants who lost somebody on 9/11 have actually filed with this fund.
BROWN: And the reasons for -- it's not that they're -- at least it's not that you all believe the reason is they think there's more money to be gotten if they go sue on their own. It's something else, right?
FEINBERG: Well, the lawsuits are a minor annoyance. There are 69 lawsuits. It's nothing compared to the tragedy of September 11.
And since January 1, Aaron, there have been only five new lawsuits. It's not lawsuits. It's grief. It's fear. It's human nature. I hope that, by December 22, these families have come around to the fund.
BROWN: Let's talk a little about each of those. The fear of what?
FEINBERG: The fear, on the case, for example, of undocumented workers, families, fear that they'll be deported, even though they're eligible. Now, the attorney general has made it very clear, the INS has made it very clear, there will be no repercussions from filing.
Nevertheless, we're having trouble reaching undocumented worker families, foreign claimants, who are afraid, if they apply, they won't be able to enter the country. That's the fear factor.
BROWN: And the grief factor is what?
FEINBERG: "Mr. Feinberg," with tears streaming down claimants' faces, "I'm just not ready to file. It's too soon. I lost my wife. I lost my father. I lost my husband. I need more time. Leave the application. It doesn't matter that I can get tax-free millions of dollars. I am just not ready to put pencil to paper."
BROWN: And I gather -- you can't fill the forms out for them. You can't sign them for them. If they don't want to do it, there's nothing you can do. Is there any prospect that the December 22 deadline will be extended? FEINBERG: I think that's highly unlikely. You'll have to ask Congress. But every indication I have is that December 22 is fixed. Anybody who files after December 22 will be barred and there will be no extension.
BROWN: And so what do you do between now and then, other than talk to me and talk to all sorts of people? Are there outreach programs? Is there an attempt to sort of aggressively go after people and get them to sign?
FEINBERG: Absolutely, a massive outreach program.
During the entire month of September, I will be traveling, meeting at town hall meetings, meetings with family groups. I'll be meeting with individual families who have expressed a desire to see me. We have victim assistance groups. We're using advertising in various languages. We are going -- the State Department has been very helpful. The administration's been extremely helpful in this regard.
And we are hoping, during the next 30 to 60 days, to reach out to people. We will sit down with any family and help them fill out the forms, once they make that decision to participate.
BROWN: Mr. Feinberg, I think those of us, particularly in New York, who have watched you work for the last year-plus now have an exquisite appreciation for how difficult, at times, this has been and how hard you've tried to make this work. We appreciate your time tonight. Thank you.
FEINBERG: Thank you. Thank you very, very much.
BROWN: Thank you, sir.
Ahead on NEWSNIGHT, a little bit later, we'll check morning papers from around the country and around the world.
Up next, the town of New Sweden, Maine, and the still unsolved mystery of who poisoned the members of the local Lutheran church.
This is NEWSNIGHT.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
BROWN: It began as an ordinary Sunday morning just over four months ago in a very small town in northern Maine. There was church, of course. And then there was coffee and dessert after the service.
But what happened next in New Sweden, Maine, generated headlines around the world and left both townspeople and authorities there reeling. We went back to New Sweden recently to check in with the people and the place. And we found that things are far from settled.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
BROWN (voice-over): The countryside, with its lakes, are idyllic at this time of year. But Lester Beaupre isn't paying a lot of attention. For him, it is enough to simply be alive.
LESTER BEAUPRE, VICTIM OF POISONING: The only thing right now is my feet. They feel -- like when you get a limb that goes numb and then it's coming back, how it tingles and hurts? Well, that's what my feet feel like.
BROWN: An expert cabinetmaker by trade, Beaupre was one of 16 victims of a mass poisoning that took place here at the tiny Gustaf Adolph Lutheran Church in the town of New Sweden, Maine, a Sunday morning late in April.
There was cake with icing. There was coffee, all served after the regular service.
BEAUPRE: I took a cup of coffee and kind of like chased the icing down. And I thought the icing had a weird taste. But after the icing was all washed down, I realized it was the coffee.
The coffee tasted that metal type, aluminum-like. So by this time, I had drank about -- a little bit over half a cup of coffee. And I just took it and I just put it to the side.
BROWN: The coffee, investigators later said, was laced with arsenic. One elderly church member, a man with a heart condition, died; 15 others became violently ill.
A lifelong member of the congregation, 53-year-old Daniel Bondeson killed himself five days later and left a suicide note that police say linked him to the poisoning. But that news was not the end of anything.
LT. DENNIS APPLETON, MAINE STATE POLICE: We still believe that there is an individual or individuals that were -- that played a part in this. We're still trying to develop exactly what that part may have been.
BROWN: When the news reached New Sweden and its 617 residents that investigators were looking for someone else in connection with the poisoning, it was like an earthquake had suddenly struck.
BRENDA JEPSON, NEW SWEDEN HISTORIAN: It's really kind of like clouds hanging over this town, because there's the suspicion aspect. There are all the questions that are unanswered. Somebody out there perhaps is guilty. We don't know. And so all of that makes us feel uncomfortable.
BROWN: And down at Stan's Grocery, where people meet and get their mail, the rumors are abundant.
STAN THOMAS, STORE OWNER: There was a rumor at first that there was a 12-year-old girl involved, and also a 17-year-old girl, and then nothing more said, except that.
BROWN: Police aren't saying much at the moment. Most here still can't believe that the 53-year-old Bondeson could have ever even thought of a mass poisoning, let alone pulled one off. JEPSON: He was a person who was out and about quite a lot, I thought very friendly and approachable. He was quiet. But he was not the reclusive type that, if you spoke to him, wouldn't speak back. And, in fact, he would venture to speak to you if you hadn't kind of noticed him there.
BROWN: Dennis Appleton has been in charge of the investigation since it began. He will not rest, he says, until he has answers.
APPLETON: It would be great to wrap everything up, as would many of the unsolved mysteries around this world today. But we'll plug away. And we won't go away until we're satisfied.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
BROWN: New Sweden, Maine, four months later.
Morning papers after the break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(ROOSTER CROWING)
BROWN: Oh, we've all missed that, haven't we? Time to check morning papers from -- we haven't? -- from around the country and around the world.
A lot of good local stories today and a few national stories as well. "San Antonio Express News" starts us off, San Antonio, Texas. Big story, "Democrat Walkout Stumbles." One of the AWOL senators came back. But the story I like best down in the corner here, "A real sting operation against terror. Bees among insects being trained in San Antonio to sniff out weapons." Man, I hope that works. That's a -- well, we'll find out, won't we?
"The Oregonian" out in Portland, Oregon. Something I liked here. Oh, yes. Come on, it's not easy to do the whole show and this. "White House Prepares to Ask U.N. for help." This is going to be a big story in the next few days, the White House negotiating with the Security Council to try and get money and troops into Iraq.
There's been a flood of stories lately on things not going that well in Iraq, including this one in "The Washington Times." "The Washington Times" editorially certainly, editorial page, conservative paper, very supportive of the administration generally. "U.S. Rushed Post-Saddam Planning. War Strategy Approved in August 2002." We'll be wanting to read that story by Rowan Scarborough of "The Washington Times." Take a look at that. Down here in the middle, "Republicans to Force Issue of Gay Marriage, Want Democrats to State Positions." There's a wedge issue, if ever we saw one.
"The Hartford Courant," Hartford, Connecticut. "Combat Injuries Climb in Iraq." This was in some papers today. It was a "Washington Post" story, 10 or so wounded a day, the number of wounded well over 1,000 now, also a very good story.
How we doing?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Thirty-six.
BROWN: OK. Thirty-six?
"The Boston Herald." John Kerry, the senator from Massachusetts, on the cover. "Steaming Ahead." That's the headline there.
Well, we'll get this one in, too. "The Detroit News" today -- or tomorrow, actually. That's the whole point of this bit, isn't it? "Bloomfield Vote" -- that's Bloomfield, Michigan -- "Vote Fraud Alleged. State Investigators Claim Tenants Were Offered Free Rent For Annexation Votes." Never happens to me.
That's morning papers. That's the program. We really are all back tomorrow, 10:00 Eastern time. We hope you are, too.
Until then, good night for 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
Faces Execution for Murder of Abortion Doctor; Lawyers Argue Tate Should Have Had Psych Eval Before Trial>
