Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Connie Chung Tonight

Baffling Maryland Murders; Gunfire at United Nations

Aired October 03, 2002 - 20:00   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.


CONNIE CHUNG, CNN ANCHOR: Good evening. I'm Connie Chung.
Tonight: a shooting spree, five people dead; now a statewide manhunt and a community in fear.

ANNOUNCER: Five people gunned down in Maryland.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: These are not figureheads. These are not people associated with anything that we are aware of. These are simply victims. And we need to figure out a way to stop this.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ANNOUNCER: Are the killings random acts of violence or a terrible murder plot in the suburbs of Washington, D.C.?

Richard Reid, the alleged shoe bomber, charged with trying to blow up a transatlantic flight; John Walker Lindh, the Taliban American who fought alongside al Qaeda -- tonight: two men about to meet justice in the fight against terror.

Duped dads: DNA tests can get someone off death row, but can't relieve a man from paying child support. Angry fathers wage a state- by-state battle to change paternity laws.

And a change of chefs at the New York Stock Exchange: Martha steps down.

This is CONNIE CHUNG TONIGHT. Live from the CNN Broadcast Center in New York: Connie Chung.

CHUNG: Good evening.

Tonight: shock and disbelief in suburban Maryland, just outside Washington, D.C. Police are on the hunt for a killer or killers who left five people dead over the course of 16 hours, each of the victims killed by a single gunshot, a series of crimes that left authorities baffled and the community terrified.

National correspondent Bob Franken is on the story.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BOB FRANKEN, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): While police say there is no apparent connections between the victims, their killer or killers have been operating in a calculated way. Six shots have been fired at six locations, all within a few miles of each other here in a Maryland suburb of Washington. Five have been killed.

Schools let out at their normal times after students were kept inside all day.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It's crazy. I have kids that go to school around here. And it's pretty nuts.

FRANKEN: Police spread out in a massive manhunt.

CHIEF CHARLES MOOSE, MONTGOMERY CO. POLICE: We feel like we probably have a skilled shooter. And that does heighten our concern.

DOUG DUNCAN, MONTGOMERY CO. EXECUTIVE: We're also offering a reward of up to $50,000 for information leading to the arrest and indictment of whoever is responsible for this.

FRANKEN: The incidents began Wednesday evening. A single shot crashed through a craft store window. No one was hit. But a half hour later at a nearby supermarket, another shot rang out. This time, a 55-year-old man was killed outside the store. The shootings resumed in the morning at 7:41. A man cutting his grass in the area was shot dead.

Less than a half hour later, a cab driver was filling up his car at a service station. He was shot and killed. Another half hour after that, a woman was shot dead outside a post office near a retirement home. A little over an hour later, another murder, again a single shot. This time it took the life of a woman who was simply at a service station vacuuming her van.

JOHN MISTRY, SHELL STATION CO-OWNER: A couple of ladies came from there and she said there's something wrong with this lady, so we went to go and help her, to pull her out because the door was on top of her. We couldn't pull her out.

FRANKEN: Police quote some witnesses as saying they may have spotted two people in a vehicle described as a box-type truck with a damaged tailgate. Trucks were being stopped throughout the area.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

FRANKEN: The schools, according to officials, will open and operate on a normal schedule tomorrow, Connie. They're trying to very deliberately try and maintain calm in a community which, as you can imagine, is right now consumed by the jitters over this.

CHUNG: Absolutely, Bob.

Since no one has been arrested, I would imagine that the residents there are really fearful.

FRANKEN: Well, it's intriguing to me that there doesn't seem to be that kind of atmosphere. I remember one reporter called it a paralysis. That doesn't seem to be the case at all. The officials have gone to great lengths to say that they're going to offer protection. They have a massive manhunt. And, in fact, there are a lot of curiosity seekers who are coming here, even though there is some concern that this is probably the one place that you wouldn't want to have curiosity seekers.

CHUNG: All right, Bob Franken, thank you.

As we have been saying, this crime shocked and terrified the community. The police chief noted that the five killings represent a 25 percent jump in the county's homicide rate in just one day.

Joining us now from Rockville, Maryland, with the latest details are Montgomery County Police Chief Charles Moose and the county executive, Douglas Duncan.

Thank you, gentlemen, for being with us.

First, Chief Moose, can you tell us, what's the latest on the investigation?

MOOSE: At this point, we're still very visible on patrol. Our investigators have been in a session for the last two hours looking at all of the information that they've gathered today, bringing everything together, making sure that our federal partners, ATF, FBI, Secret Service are up to date, seeing what additional equipment, ideas and strategies they can bring to the situation.

CHUNG: Are there any suspects, sir?

MOOSE: At this point, certainly, as you've noted, we have no one in custody. We have a very active hot line, where people are continuing to give us information.

We want to stress that people were near these situations today. Maybe they saw someone driving strangely. Maybe they saw some other activity, didn't realize that it was a crime scene. So now they're calling in. We're getting a chance to talk to them. It will help us put the pieces of the puzzle together.

CHUNG: Now, Chief Moose, you have said that you believe that the five killings are linked. How do you know that?

MOOSE: Well, again, I've been very hesitant to do any speculation, but, as we look at the situation, we're still waiting on all of the science pieces to come together. But a lot of pieces do tell us that these are connected.

And, again, we have some very strong feelings there. We're waiting on the signs to make that all absolute. But there's no really doubt, at this point, in my mind that they're all connected.

CHUNG: May I assume that it might have something to do with the type of weapon and the bullets that have been recovered, that that is the link?

MOOSE: Well, again, at this point, we want to be very careful with any kind of assumptions. We're still waiting a lot of that forensics-type material to come back, to be processed.

But when we look at the situation on the map, when we look at the nature of the wounds, again, some strong feelings that these are connected.

CHUNG: County Executive Duncan, we assume that you have been talking to family members of the victims. Do any of them know each other?

DUNCAN: We don't see any real connection between the victims. And we have been in contact with all of the families. And we offered them assistance through our victim assistance unit here in the county. And we offered counseling, whatever else. But we have not found any connection between the victims or their families.

CHUNG: Mr. County Executive, I used to live in Montgomery County and I have never seen or heard anything like this before. Have you?

DUNCAN: No, I haven't. I'm a native of the county, grew up here. And I don't recall a day ever in the history of the county like this.

When you get five murders in a period of 16 hours, that's 25 percent of the normal murders we get in a full year. We normally get 15 to 20 murders a year. To get five in one day, totally random shootings, it's a very, very dark day for Montgomery County.

CHUNG: And you're not closing schools down, are you?

DUNCAN: No. After September 11, we instituted a good security plan for all the schools in the county. They performed that plan today. They kept the students inside. They kept the doors locked. We went through our normal release procedures, with school getting out on time, parents knowing what the normal procedure is. We had extra police security at the schools.

We're going to do that tomorrow. We're going to go to school at normal times. People need to be very vigilant and very observant. But we feel that the children will be safe inside the school with us. We want to make sure that people go about their business with a heightened sense of vigilance, a heightened sense of caution.

And we're also asking people, if they know anything, give us a call and let us know. If they can think of anything that might help, call us and let us know.

CHUNG: Also, are you contemplating any kind of curfew?

DUNCAN: No, not at this time. We're not looking at a curfew. That could change depending on what we see tonight or if something happens tomorrow. But right now, we're not contemplating that. All of the shootings took place during daylight hours.

CHUNG: Now, I know that you have offered a $50,000 reward. How are you trying to protect the residents? DUNCAN: Well, we've got greatly enhanced patrols throughout this county. We have got surveillance going all over the place in the county, actually.

And what is nice is that we have gotten tremendous support from not just the county police, Montgomery County police, but Maryland State Police, the FBI, the Secret Service, ATF. We've gotten assistance from Prince George County's police, D.C. police. So the whole region has come together. And we're tapping the resources of the best law enforcement capabilities here in the Washington area, which is some of the best in the world.

CHUNG: Chief Moose, are you getting some help from the FBI in terms of profiling this killing or killers?

MOOSE: Well, at this point, I think it's too early for that to kick in. We need to gather more data to give them. But we are getting help from them in a number of different areas. And, so far, it's going extremely well. But the profiling piece, again, it's too early. We have to get our arms around a lot more data to give them, so that they can do that work.

CHUNG: Do you believe there is more than one killer?

MOOSE: Well, at this point, we are, again, not sure. But we are working with the idea that it is more than one. We're not closing any avenues. We're keeping an open mind. And we don't want to, by any means, handcuff our investigators.

CHUNG: All right, County Executive Duncan, I know you have a wife and five children. What are you telling your children?

DUNCAN: Well, we're talking to our children. We have got a young daughter who is 10 years old. And she just has a lot of questions. She had a lot of questions on September 11. She's got a lot of questions today about why people would do this.

And we're trying our best to calm her anxieties, calm her fears, and make her feel better about her community and about her country and her world.

CHUNG: Now, I know that you are warning everyone to be vigilant. In particular, is it the vehicle that you and the police chief are telling residents to be on the lookout for? Because there is a little bit confusion, I think, on whether or not it is a boxy truck, a white boxy car. What are you telling residents?

DUNCAN: It is a white box truck. It is not a van. It is a bigger truck than that. It's a white box truck that's either Isuzu or Mitsubishi and has some damage on the rear door, the tailgate. And it has got some small black lettering on it as well. So we're asking people, if they see that, call us, let us know. We have stopped an awful lot of white box trucks today in Montgomery County trying to find who did this.

CHUNG: All right, thank you so much, gentlemen. We appreciate your being with us. And we hope you have some success in your investigation.

So what kind of person or persons would be behind such acts? We have asked profiler Pat Brown, who has been a frequent visitor with us, for some insight into the killer.

She joins us now from Washington.

Now, Pat, you call this killer someone who is on a shooting spree, as opposed to a mass killer. Can you explain the distinction?

PAT BROWN, PROFILER, SEXUAL HOMICIDE EXCHANGE: Well, in this particular case, it is almost a little confusing.

It is definitely not a serial killer, because that kind of person does things very quietly and sneakily, and then he'll have his down times and maybe not do anything for a month or two or even a year. But in a case of a mass murderer, usually mass murderers shoot a whole bunch of people in one place and go out. They know the police are coming. They know they are going to be shot to death. And they go out with a blaze of glory.

Spree killers usually have some time in between their killings. And they're moving from one killing to another. What makes this most interesting is that the killings are so close together. So it almost is a mix between a mass murderer and a spree killer.

CHUNG: And in broad daylight as well.

BROWN: And in broad daylight. So I think probably the No. 1 reason there is to get good aim. This way, the person probably doesn't have any night vision going there. He can get a good shot. Apparently, he's very proud of his shooting skills. And he has a right to be, because he's doing a pretty darn fine job with one shot, so he is a skilled shooter.

CHUNG: Well, that's what police say. They say that he is experienced, skilled. He's calculating.

Knowing that, I think some people would assume -- and I would as well -- that this person might have a military background or a police background. Is that a false assumption?

BROWN: Well, it is certainly one area to look at, one avenue to go down, because the person does have a skill, but that doesn't necessarily mean that anybody who -- this could be a dear hunter as well.

If the truck is large enough, the person could be -- I also agree with the police that it might well be two people: one driving, one perhaps kneeling down with perhaps a rifle. We don't know yet that it is a rifle, so it could be some other weapon. But they definitely have practiced enough. So we are looking for somebody who either hunts a lot, who has military experience, who has spent a lot of time at gun ranges.

This is a person who has stacks of "Guns & Ammo" magazines in his home. This is someone who really likes weaponry.

CHUNG: Any clues as to a psychological profile?

BROWN: Well, obviously, you have got somebody pretty angry at the world. And if you have two people, you have them encouraging each other on and saying: "Yes, we ought to get people. We ought to do this. Here's the time. Look, we can get away with it or we can make a hit," or whatever.

Somebody is obviously very angry. And if you're going to look at who this is, what is very interesting about the pattern here is that, if you actually look at where all the crimes occurred, it is almost like a star. It is like crisscrossing across Wheaton and Aspen Hill in Maryland.

So that leads one to believe that it's possible that the perpetrator or perpetrators in this crime are sort of localized in that area and are working out from their area, going one way and then going the other direction, just seeing what they can get away with, perhaps going into hiding right after they do it, and then going on for the next one and seeing how many they can add up.

CHUNG: Now, early reports said that there was a wide diversity in those who were killed: a white person, a black person, Latino, men, women. Does that tell you anything?

BROWN: Well, it tells us that, probably, we're not looking at somebody who has got a particular issue with any one group. We just have a person who wants to have victims.

And what is interesting about them is, most of them are stationary. So I think this guy doesn't want any one particular victim, except one that is not moving, where he can nail them with one shot. So I think the only advice I have to people right now is, move around a lot. Don't be a good target for this person at the moment.

CHUNG: So what do you think police will be looking at to try and solve it? Is it the ballistics information that would help?

BROWN: Well, the ballistics is going to be very important. They are going to want to find out what kind of gun we're looking at here. They're going to want to see who in the community has these kinds of guns or who has had these guns stolen recently.

For example, we have had a gun shop in the area, right over in P.G. County across the border there, that had a robbery. I believe it was last week. And 12 guns were stolen from that gun shop. We want to find out: Is it a stolen gun? We want to find out who in the neighborhood has been talking a lot about guns. These kind of people don't stay real quiet.

So we're going to have somebody who has been probably shooting off his mouth in the recent past about his grudges against people, and he could wish he could take care of them all. Something like that, we're going to be looking to the community for that information. CHUNG: So, basically, what you're saying is that this person is committing these crimes with warning. He is signaling someone. It's just that those individuals have to come forward and recognize it.

BROWN: Absolutely.

This kind of person doesn't -- it's not like everybody says, "Oh, we had no idea." There has got to be some issues going on in this guy's life. And he's got to have a tremendous interest in weaponry. He might have a stockpile of weapons in his room. If it's a younger person -- and I don't believe this is a teenager. I believe we're looking into the 20s, maybe early 30s.

This is somebody who may have a lot of interest in any kinds of things like -- I said "Guns & Ammo" magazine, or, what's the one, for going overseas and shooting people down, that kind of military stuff, any kind of thing which shows a desire for power, that he would like to be that, maybe that military guy that can do that sniper-type of work.

CHUNG: All right, Pat Brown, thank you very much. Appreciate your being with us.

Coming up: an unbelievable scene at the United Nations caught on tape by CNN. We'll talk to one person who saw it all unfold when we return.

ANNOUNCER: Still ahead: the accused shoe bomber and the Taliban American prepare for their day in court -- justice and the fight against terror.

CONNIE CHUNG TONIGHT returns in a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CHUNG: An extraordinary scene today at the United Nations in New York: A gunman jumped a fence and began shooting right in the heart of world diplomacy.

CNN senior U.N. correspondent Richard Roth watched it all unfold. And he is here to tell us and show us what happened.

Richard, I couldn't believe it. You were there watching. And you could hear the gunshots go off. So tell us exactly what you heard and what you saw.

RICHARD ROTH, CNN SENIOR U.N. CORRESPONDENT: Well, it was a busy day at the U.N., because the chief U.N. weapons inspector on Iraq was briefing the Security Council. So all eyes were down there inside the U.N.

I was in my office, which overlooks the U.N. grounds, the driveway, and First Avenue in Manhattan, where all the flags are up. And suddenly I hear, "pop, pop, pop." And I turn to my left and I see a man firing a pistol straight up in the air. Now, it turns out he had also fired it at the U.N. building. But I came in with my eyes for the last few shots.

He put the gun down. As I'm scrambling to try to tell the network...

CHUNG: He just threw it on the ground.

ROTH: He threw it on the ground and then starts to walk away a bit. And, as he does that, he flings up in the air 20 to 25 pages from a leaflet. And then you see he has a bag there. There go the leaflets. He jumped the fence. He left a suitcase there, a briefcase. And then he just stood, as if waiting, "Come and get me," which they did.

CHUNG: Yes, or as if he's waiting for a bus.

ROTH: That's right.

And you see him here now with U.S. Secret Service agents, who, fortunately, were on the grounds escorting leaders from Cyprus. And they came over -- they happened to be outside -- and put him on the ground, held him there at gunpoint. And other U.N. security rushed over also.

CHUNG: And he obviously is not resisting.

ROTH: No, not resisting at all. One of my cameramen had told me that he was giving out leaflets two days ago outside the U.N.

CHUNG: It appeared as if he didn't want to hurt anyone, because, as you said, he was shooting in the air. But you say he did hit a building.

ROTH: He very nearly could have really hurt someone. At least four slugs are now being pulled out of floors 18 through 20. In the U.N. building, one woman would have been at her desk. The bullet went into the ceiling above her. She was out for work. Some other people in the American Express travel office traumatized. They had been down at the World Trade Center on September 11 of last year. But no one was physically injured.

CHUNG: Ultimately, no one.

ROTH: No one.

CHUNG: And what happened to him?

ROTH: Well, this man was then walked away by security. And, eventually, he was taken into custody and then turned over to the FBI. He's going to arraigned tomorrow. Steve Kim, as you see there, walked away, postal worker from Illinois, believed to be potentially of North Korean descent.

CHUNG: And the purpose of his, whatever you call it, a demonstration, his bit of violence?

ROTH: His leaflet signed "Steve Kim, citizen of the United Nations." But his protest was about the treatment and the condition of the people in North Korea, who have been living under tough economic times. He criticized a dictatorial regime there. And he said that the people there are groaning under this starvation.

CHUNG: Have you seen anything like this happen before?

ROTH: No, I never have seen that at the United Nations. I don't think they have seen that. There have been other crazy cases, but nobody pulling a pistol and blasting it in the air.

CHUNG: Now, how he was able to get into the area? Did he jump a fence? Or did he have some kind of identification that actually allowed him through?

ROTH: There's a long fence along First Avenue outside the United Nations. And he picked a spot which is not too visible from guard posts. He hopped the fence and then calmly walked over near the reflecting pool of the U.N. and started firing.

U.N. security has been asking for more money. They say they're waiting for it in the budget. But they admit that the fence perimeter is not totally secure.

CHUNG: Isn't that extraordinary? Particularly after 9/11, you would think that security there would be so tight.

ROTH: Well, it has been beefed up. There are a lot of metal detectors now, bomb-sniffing dogs around. But the United Nations wants to not be a fortress to the world. They want to show that the world can get along, live together, 191 countries.

But every year, it seems, it gets tighter and tighter. If you look at the tape closely, by the way, one of the uniformed security guards couldn't tell where the shots was coming from, ran out, but ran toward First Avenue, thinking they were out there. It echoes around in that complex of the U.N. off the buildings.

CHUNG: So, did anyone inside the building, those who were certainly concerned about the entire debate over Iraq, were they unaware of what was going on out there?

ROTH: Totally unaware. It's amazing. They're talking about disarmament, and right outside, a few feet away, someone is shooting a revolver seven times in the air.

CHUNG: Had there been any demonstrations in that area prior to today?

ROTH: No, no major demonstrations about Korea. You see people across the street. They are allowed to protest in a small park there, but nothing major. And we don't know if he came there knowing that there was a lot of media attention because of the chief weapons inspector at all. We don't.

CHUNG: All right, Richard Roth, thank you. Thank you so much for being with us. And I'm glad your camera was there to capture this. Appreciate it.

When we come back: the fate of an American who chose to side with the Taliban.

ANNOUNCER: Coming up: why you won't be seeing this anymore...

(BELL RINGING)

ANNOUNCER: ... or this.

CONNIE CHUNG TONIGHT returns in a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CHUNG: Tomorrow, the man who allegedly tried to blow up a plane with a bomb hidden in his shoes will have his day in court. But it appears as if Richard Reid will not go to trial. His attorneys filed papers indicating Reid wants to plead guilty to charges against him.

Bill Delaney has the story from Boston.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BILL DELANEY, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Always something of a shambling, mysterious presence, hardly the image of a hardened, disciplined terrorist, alleged shoe bomber, 29-year-old British citizen Richard Reid has now again upended expectations, requesting a hearing to change his plea to guilty -- government attorneys saying it was his right and his call.

MICHAEL SULLIVAN, U.S. ATTORNEY: I want to make it clear there is no deal or bargain of any kind with Richard Reid that has led him to this decision.

DELANEY: Reid's attorney issued a statement, saying their client "has no disagreement with the facts asserted in the charges as to his actions on December 22, 2001, and wants to avoid the publicity associated with a trial and the negative impact it is likely to have on his family."

Reid, in his motion, did echo a request previously filed this summer to strike allegations he received training from al Qaeda from the counts against him. Though not a condition of his guilty plea, government attorneys quickly rejected the request. Despite the government's consistent hard line, some observers think Reid's attorneys do hope, in the end, to get a softer sentence, something less than the maximum life sentence.

MARK PEARLSTEIN, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: Because Mr. Reid is pleading guilty to all eight counts of the indictment, the government doesn't have a choice as to whether or not to accept or reject his offer. That choice is given to the court. And then, at the sentencing hearing, the government and Mr. Reid will each make their arguments about what the appropriate sentence ought to be.

DELANEY: Accused of trying to ignite explosives in the sneakers he wore on an American Airlines flight with 197 passengers and crew, Reid has told investigators he acted alone, enraged at the United States for its support for Israel.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

DELANEY: Late today, government attorneys filed in federal court here in Boston a response to that request by Richard Reid and his attorneys that language in the original indictment against him tying him to al Qaeda be stricken, federal attorneys saying they reject that request, saying they have more than enough evidence to show that Richard Reid was tied to al Qaeda, some language from those pleadings put in this evening, the government saying -- quote -- "that Reid was an Islamic extremist engaging in acts of international terrorism while on a martyrdom mission."

Richard Reid and his attorneys have asserted for months now that tying him to al Qaeda would prejudice any case against him. They did not, as that piece said, make that conditional on whether or not he will change his plea to guilty. He will do that tomorrow, Connie.

CHUNG: All right, Bill, so when Reid appears before the judge tomorrow, what will happen?

DELANEY: Well, the judge will look at three things, Connie. He will look at whether the person changing the plea is competent, whether they're doing it voluntarily, and whether there is a factual basis to do it.

Now, if the judge decides that those three things are the case, he will almost certainly allow the change of plea to guilty. What happens then is no trial. The case will go directly to the sentencing stage, which would happen in 10 weeks to three months, we're told.

CHUNG: All right, Bill Delaney, thank you.

Now for some perspective on the case, we're joined by CNN analyst Jeffrey Toobin.

Jeffrey, you heard Bill Delaney talking about the request on the part of Reid's attorneys that he not be connected to al Qaeda. Now, how could that affect his sentencing if that request is in?

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Well, the interesting question first is: Will the judge accept the plea?

You know, there's an interesting parallel here to -- remember a few weeks ago, Zacarias Moussaoui, the so-called 20th hijacker, he tried to plead guilty to being a member of al Qaeda, but he said, "I had nothing to do with September 11." The judge said: "No deal. You can't plead guilty because you're not really acknowledging what the government says is true."

Here the judge is going to have to make the same inquiry. Is Reid really acknowledging that he did what the government said he did? Here he probably will get his plea accepted, because the al Qaeda part of the accusation is not really the main part, but it is by no means a done deal that this guilty plea will be accepted tomorrow.

CHUNG: So, if it is accepted, what kind of sentencing is he looking at?

TOOBIN: He is looking at a very long time.

It is true that he probably stands a somewhat better chance of avoiding life in prison without the possibility of parole by pleading guilty as opposed to going to trial. But when you consider the magnitude of this crime, when you consider that 197 people easily could have died if this bomb went off, he is going to have a tough time asking for mercy under any circumstances.

CHUNG: All right, let's go on to a different trial, the John Walker Lindh trial. He is facing sentencing tomorrow. What is he likely to face?

TOOBIN: Well, there is an agreement in place. And there really should be no surprises tomorrow.

When he pled guilty, both the defense and the prosecution agreed that a sentence of 20 years would be appropriate. Barring extremely unforeseen developments, that's what he should get when he's sentenced tomorrow.

CHUNG: Jeffrey, what would he have faced had he gone to trial?

TOOBIN: If he went to trial and was convicted, life in prison without possibility of parole.

This was a huge discount for John Walker Lindh. He did very well on this plea bargain, because, remember, in federal court, he's going to get credit for time served. He will probably get credit for good behavior. He could reduce his sentence by about 10 or 20 percent. So he is looking at actually serving maybe serving 17 or 18 years. That means he will get out of prison when he's in his late 30s. That's awfully different from dying behind bars.

CHUNG: And will there be any victim-impact statements, because, obviously, there were victims?

TOOBIN: Well, that's an open question. And that was argued in briefs today. Johnny Spann, who was the CIA agent killed at Tora Bora, his father wants to speak out. And Tora Bora, of course, is where John Walker Lindh was arrested.

The defense has said: "We don't want him to testify, because John Walker Lindh had nothing to do with the death of Johnny Spann. He feels sorry for Spann, but he had nothing to do with it. So he was not the victim. His father shouldn't get to speak as a victim- impact."

Interesting question, because that will be a moment of high drama, if the elder Mr. Spann speaks. Don't know if it will happen.

CHUNG: Jeffrey, do you have any idea of where he will be held and whether or not he will be separated from other inmates?

TOOBIN: That's really up to the Bureau of Prisons. Also, the defense asked for Lindh to be held in California near his home, to be given educational opportunities in prison.

Federal judges are very careful about saying, "Look, I can't promise you where he'll go." I think it is very likely, at least for the initial part of his sentence, that he will be separated from other prisoners. Prisoners, they don't like child molesters and they don't like people who commit treason against the United States. Oddly enough, they're sort of patriotic.

CHUNG: Well, and finally, both of these men, Reid and John Walker Lindh, did not go to trial. So, therefore, I would imagine that the government is either terribly frustrated that information was not flowing from them, because they are supposed to cooperate, or they can cooperate. So what do we gain and what do we lose from having them not go to trial and plead?

TOOBIN: Well, certainly we gain saving the expense of a trial. These terrorist trials are very expensive to prosecute. And in the John Walker Lindh case, he has agreed to cooperate. And, in fact, as a condition of his plea, he is cooperating. And the government says he is providing truthful information. So I don't think much is lost there.

In terms of Reid, the shoe bomber, you know, he has the right to plead guilty and not cooperate. There is nothing the government can do to stop him from pleading guilty if he wants to. And he doesn't have to cooperate. As for what we're giving up, the true answer is, I don't really know. He remains somewhat mysterious. We don't know who, if anyone, sent him. We don't know if he really was a member of al Qaeda.

And if he in fact pleads guilty tomorrow and the trial ends, it is likely we will never know.

CHUNG: All right, Jeffrey Toobin, thank you.

And still to come: Imagine paying child support for more than a decade only to discover your daughter is not your biological child. So, should you still pay?

When we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CHUNG: In just a moment, we'll meet the man who discovered that his 15-year-old daughter isn't his after all.

We'll be back in 60 seconds.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CHUNG: Get this: A marriage breaks up and the ex-husband provides financial support for his daughter for more than a decade. Then a DNA test proves that the child, now 15, is not his. But a court says it doesn't matter. He has still got to keep footing the bills.

Patrick McCarthy says that's just what happened to him. So now he has founded a group called New Jersey Citizens Against Paternity Fraud. And he's with us tonight.

Thank you for being with us.

PATRICK MCCARTHY, FOUNDER, NEW JERSEY CITIZENS AGAINST PATERNITY FRAUD: You're welcome.

CHUNG: I want to show you the ad that your organization put in "The New York Times." And I want you to explain it to me.

"Did she lie to you?" it says. And then the second line, which I can't read that well, but I will pull up here. My eyes just aren't that good. "Finally, you may be able to do something about it." There we go.

Tell me, what are you trying to convey here?

MCCARTHY: Convey that, if a woman does lie to you, if she falsely accuses you of being the father, and knowingly knows who the biological father is, you should have the ability to go back to court and have your child support order relieved and have a DNA test done.

CHUNG: All right, so let's go back.

MCCARTHY: OK.

CHUNG: Because you obviously have a personal stake in this. You were married.

MCCARTHY: Correct.

CHUNG: And you and your wife had a baby girl.

MCCARTHY: Right.

CHUNG: And, at that time, did you have any reason to believe that that child was not yours?

MCCARTHY: Never. No, I never had a reason to doubt that she had stepped outside the marriage. This child was my child.

CHUNG: All right, eventually, your marriage becomes a little rocky. You're separated. You're divorced. And you're paying child support. And then, at one point, you sort of got an inkling that something was awry in terms of the biological connection that you had with your child. What happened?

MCCARTHY: Yes.

In the context of an argument with my ex-wife, she had made a statement that the child was not my child. Obviously, that's when the seed of doubt was planted in my head. And I started looking at the child a little bit differently and saying, "You know, there are some characteristics that are not indicative of myself or my ex-wife."

CHUNG: But you brought her up as your daughter.

MCCARTHY: I certainly did.

CHUNG: And you loved her 100 percent?

MCCARTHY: Sure. And I still consider her my daughter.

CHUNG: All right, when did you decide that you were going to actually find out the truth? And how did you find out the truth?

MCCARTHY: After that seed of doubt was planted, that's when I proceeded to order what is called a home paternity kit, just like a home pregnancy kit. And I got a sample of her saliva, a sample of my saliva, sent it off to a lab. The results came back four weeks later that she was indeed not my biological child.

CHUNG: Was your ex-wife aware of what you were doing?

MCCARTHY: No.

CHUNG: And when you found out, did you inform your ex-wife and did you inform your daughter?

MCCARTHY: I informed my ex-wife about a year after the fact, because I really -- I just wanted to start doing a little bit of research on what kind of recourse I had as far as my financial obligations.

CHUNG: And what you discovered?

MCCARTHY: That the courts will hold you to all of your financial obligations. And that I feel is something that should be an individual choice, not a court-ordered mandate.

CHUNG: Did you intend to stop payments?

MCCARTHY: No, no, I never did. And I would have continued to pay the financial support and continued to give her emotional support as well.

CHUNG: Because?

MCCARTHY: She's still my daughter.

CHUNG: You really strongly felt that way?

MCCARTHY: Certainly.

CHUNG: So, in the end, you're saying that you went ahead and came through 100 percent, continued to pay child support until she turned 18.

MCCARTHY: Eighteen. She was emancipated. That's correct.

CHUNG: But, as far as you were concerned, what did you want to accomplish? And what do you want to accomplish from now on?

MCCARTHY: Right.

I feel that the law -- and I think that is what, to me, was more appalling, is that the law protects a woman like this who lies, who knows that you're not the biological father. Men currently in New Jersey are now allowed -- in most states, are not allowed to petition the courts for a DNA test. However, if you do get a DNA test, you're fortunate enough, they will still hold you to your support obligations.

I have a Supreme Court case where the couple split up. The man was a nonbiological father of the child. The mother was living with the alleged biological father of the child. And the child was living with the two of them. And the Supreme Court still made the nonbiological father pay support. And the biological father had not one bit of financial obligation.

CHUNG: One more time -- because that is tricky -- one more time, so that we make sure everyone understands.

MCCARTHY: Couple were married. They separated.

CHUNG: Yes. Right.

MCCARTHY: The father, the alleged father found out that this child was not his biological child.

CHUNG: Right.

MCCARTHY: When they separated, the mother moved in with the true biological father.

CHUNG: Right.

MCCARTHY: He went to court with this. And the Supreme Court ruled that, even though he is the nonbiological father, he falls under what is called the presumption of paternity. It is based on a 500- year-old English common law that, if you are married to the woman, your name is on the birth certificate, you are bound to support obligations, even though the child and his ex-wife were living with the true biological father.

CHUNG: How did your daughter find out you that you were not her biological daughter -- I mean the biological father?

MCCARTHY: Right. That was disclosed to her by my ex-wife in counseling.

CHUNG: May I ask you how she reacted?

MCCARTHY: She took it hard at first. But I believed she knew -- we talked about it. Her and I discussed it at great length. And I let her know that I still love her as my daughter. Just because there is not a genetic connection, she is still my daughter. And she is actually handling it quite well.

And I think she had some doubts. And I think the biggest thing...

CHUNG: Doubts about?

MCCARTHY: About the fact that I was her father, because I think she may have overheard it in the house. And, usually, when situations like this occur, they do hear things. And I think we need to empower our children with the truth, not only for medical reasons, but for psychological reasons as well.

CHUNG: Now, you are on this crusade, in many ways, going state by state, almost.

MCCARTHY: Right.

CHUNG: Tell me, does your daughter hold that against you? Does she feel hurt that you're doing this?

MCCARTHY: No, I don't think. She has never acted in that way.

And that's one of the reasons that I wanted to make sure that she did know this, too, because I was going to go forward with this, because it's not right. It's not a fair situation currently. And I don't want to make it a man/woman situation, because my current wife, who I love very much, is involved in this. And she is...

CHUNG: And is supportive?

MCCARTHY: Very supportive. She has actually done a lot of research with me and feels that this is something that needs to be corrected. Women can petition the courts at any time for a DNA test to establish paternity and essentially make a man pay child support. But when a man finds out, it's in the reverse. They have no rights in court.

CHUNG: All right, Patrick McCarthy, thank you for being with us. We appreciate it.

MCCARTHY: Certainly. Thank you.

CHUNG: Next: Martha Stewart gives up her seat on the board, as the heat from a stock scandal grows more intense.

We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CHUNG: Martha Stewart may have worn out her welcome at the New York Stock Exchange. Stewart today resigned from the board of the New York Stock Exchange. The exchange says that she stepped down voluntarily and was not asked to leave. In a statement, she said -- quote -- "I did not want the media attention currently surrounding me to distract from the important work of the New York Stock Exchange. And, thus, I felt it appropriate to resign."

But the news came one day after a Merrill Lynch employee pled guilty to accepting payoffs to hide details of Stewart's stock dealing.

"Fortune" magazine's Andy Serwer joins us now to help us sort out what all of this means.

Andy, thank you for being with us.

ANDY SERWER, "FORTUNE": Sure.

CHUNG: Now, she resigned. And the question is -- in her resignation letter, she says it was because of her busy and demanding corporate life, and yet she doesn't even mention the investigation. But isn't it obvious it's the investigation?

SERWER: Oh, yes. That's what people say when they resign: They're going off to pursue things, need to spend more time with their family.

I don't think that she was actually asked to leave by the board of the NYSE or the head of the New York Stock Exchange. I talked to a source very close to the New York Stock Exchange. And he insisted that she in fact did leave on her own. But he acknowledged to me, the source acknowledged that her situation was becoming more and more difficult and that probably her lawyers advised her that it was time to do the right thing.

CHUNG: So you honestly don't think that there was pressure coming in from the outside?

SERWER: Well, I think there were discussions back and forth, Connie. That's clear. But I think they allowed her to make the decision herself -- you know, it is always sort of a close call -- rather than actually pushing her out the door.

CHUNG: Well, do you think this makes her appear, if you will, more guilty?

SERWER: Well, I certainly don't think it helps. Obviously, we're sort of moving closer and closer to a situation where the Department of Justice is either going to file charges or decide to drop the whole thing.

And I think -- let's be honest here. I think they're going to be filing charges. And I think that's going to probably happen soon, maybe even within a matter of couple days, certainly within a couple of weeks, I think.

CHUNG: And particularly with yesterday's developments. The assistant to her stockbroker said he was going to plead guilty, and did.

SERWER: That's right. And that's a piece in the puzzle. That's moving the case forward. That's investigative work by the Department of Justice, basically allowing Douglas Faneuil, this young broker's assistant, to plead guilty to a misdemeanor. That is in exchange for testimony that will be used against Martha Stewart and presumably the broker, Peter Bacanovic, as well.

CHUNG: What about the SEC? Is that a separate investigation or is it parallel with the Justice Department?

SERWER: It is probably a parallel investigation. The SEC is always very tight-lipped about these things.

But you can assume that they're working in concert with the Department of Justice. The SEC filed civil charges. The Department of Justice, of course, can file criminal charges.

CHUNG: Finally, how is her corporation doing? And I'm really wondering now, is this the end of Martha Stewart? Are we seeing it right before us?

SERWER: Well, I think that last question is really, really interesting.

Obviously, Martha Stewart is a tremendously popular and respected woman amongst the American public. Her magazine is very, very successful. She still does TV. And I'm not so sure the American public has given up on Martha Stewart. Martha Stewart has a lot of enemies here inside Manhattan and in the Beltway. But I think, in America, there are people who still like her and respect her. And I think the magazine, I think she does a wonderful job with the magazine. So it's a commercially successful operation. It's hard to see it just going away.

On the other hand, if she is charged with criminal activity and then even found guilty, it's very difficult. Can she remain the CEO of that company or even the editor of the magazine or the head of the magazine? Those are questions that her company is going to have to sort out, the board of her company is going to sort out.

CHUNG: And how far has her stock dipped?

SERWER: It has declined precipitously from a couple of years ago when she went public. And, of course, her fortune is tied up in that stock price, Connie. She is still a very, very wealthy woman, but she is not anywhere as wealthy as she used to be.

CHUNG: All right, Andy Serwer, thank you for being with us. We always like it when you come here.

SERWER: Thanks.

CHUNG: And keep it right here.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) CHUNG: I'll have more in just a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CHUNG: And before we go, I just wanted to tell you that exclusive video we showed you earlier of the shooting incident at the U.N. was shot by CNN cameraman Ricky Shine (ph). Great job, Ricky.

And tomorrow: A teenager leaves a house party drunk and causes a fatal car accident. Should a parent go to jail?

And coming up next on "LARRY KING LIVE": the cast of "The Mary Tyler Moore Show."

Thanks for joining us. And for all of us at CNN, good night and we'll see you tomorrow.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com







Aired October 3, 2002 - 20:00   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
CONNIE CHUNG, CNN ANCHOR: Good evening. I'm Connie Chung.
Tonight: a shooting spree, five people dead; now a statewide manhunt and a community in fear.

ANNOUNCER: Five people gunned down in Maryland.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: These are not figureheads. These are not people associated with anything that we are aware of. These are simply victims. And we need to figure out a way to stop this.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ANNOUNCER: Are the killings random acts of violence or a terrible murder plot in the suburbs of Washington, D.C.?

Richard Reid, the alleged shoe bomber, charged with trying to blow up a transatlantic flight; John Walker Lindh, the Taliban American who fought alongside al Qaeda -- tonight: two men about to meet justice in the fight against terror.

Duped dads: DNA tests can get someone off death row, but can't relieve a man from paying child support. Angry fathers wage a state- by-state battle to change paternity laws.

And a change of chefs at the New York Stock Exchange: Martha steps down.

This is CONNIE CHUNG TONIGHT. Live from the CNN Broadcast Center in New York: Connie Chung.

CHUNG: Good evening.

Tonight: shock and disbelief in suburban Maryland, just outside Washington, D.C. Police are on the hunt for a killer or killers who left five people dead over the course of 16 hours, each of the victims killed by a single gunshot, a series of crimes that left authorities baffled and the community terrified.

National correspondent Bob Franken is on the story.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BOB FRANKEN, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): While police say there is no apparent connections between the victims, their killer or killers have been operating in a calculated way. Six shots have been fired at six locations, all within a few miles of each other here in a Maryland suburb of Washington. Five have been killed.

Schools let out at their normal times after students were kept inside all day.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It's crazy. I have kids that go to school around here. And it's pretty nuts.

FRANKEN: Police spread out in a massive manhunt.

CHIEF CHARLES MOOSE, MONTGOMERY CO. POLICE: We feel like we probably have a skilled shooter. And that does heighten our concern.

DOUG DUNCAN, MONTGOMERY CO. EXECUTIVE: We're also offering a reward of up to $50,000 for information leading to the arrest and indictment of whoever is responsible for this.

FRANKEN: The incidents began Wednesday evening. A single shot crashed through a craft store window. No one was hit. But a half hour later at a nearby supermarket, another shot rang out. This time, a 55-year-old man was killed outside the store. The shootings resumed in the morning at 7:41. A man cutting his grass in the area was shot dead.

Less than a half hour later, a cab driver was filling up his car at a service station. He was shot and killed. Another half hour after that, a woman was shot dead outside a post office near a retirement home. A little over an hour later, another murder, again a single shot. This time it took the life of a woman who was simply at a service station vacuuming her van.

JOHN MISTRY, SHELL STATION CO-OWNER: A couple of ladies came from there and she said there's something wrong with this lady, so we went to go and help her, to pull her out because the door was on top of her. We couldn't pull her out.

FRANKEN: Police quote some witnesses as saying they may have spotted two people in a vehicle described as a box-type truck with a damaged tailgate. Trucks were being stopped throughout the area.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

FRANKEN: The schools, according to officials, will open and operate on a normal schedule tomorrow, Connie. They're trying to very deliberately try and maintain calm in a community which, as you can imagine, is right now consumed by the jitters over this.

CHUNG: Absolutely, Bob.

Since no one has been arrested, I would imagine that the residents there are really fearful.

FRANKEN: Well, it's intriguing to me that there doesn't seem to be that kind of atmosphere. I remember one reporter called it a paralysis. That doesn't seem to be the case at all. The officials have gone to great lengths to say that they're going to offer protection. They have a massive manhunt. And, in fact, there are a lot of curiosity seekers who are coming here, even though there is some concern that this is probably the one place that you wouldn't want to have curiosity seekers.

CHUNG: All right, Bob Franken, thank you.

As we have been saying, this crime shocked and terrified the community. The police chief noted that the five killings represent a 25 percent jump in the county's homicide rate in just one day.

Joining us now from Rockville, Maryland, with the latest details are Montgomery County Police Chief Charles Moose and the county executive, Douglas Duncan.

Thank you, gentlemen, for being with us.

First, Chief Moose, can you tell us, what's the latest on the investigation?

MOOSE: At this point, we're still very visible on patrol. Our investigators have been in a session for the last two hours looking at all of the information that they've gathered today, bringing everything together, making sure that our federal partners, ATF, FBI, Secret Service are up to date, seeing what additional equipment, ideas and strategies they can bring to the situation.

CHUNG: Are there any suspects, sir?

MOOSE: At this point, certainly, as you've noted, we have no one in custody. We have a very active hot line, where people are continuing to give us information.

We want to stress that people were near these situations today. Maybe they saw someone driving strangely. Maybe they saw some other activity, didn't realize that it was a crime scene. So now they're calling in. We're getting a chance to talk to them. It will help us put the pieces of the puzzle together.

CHUNG: Now, Chief Moose, you have said that you believe that the five killings are linked. How do you know that?

MOOSE: Well, again, I've been very hesitant to do any speculation, but, as we look at the situation, we're still waiting on all of the science pieces to come together. But a lot of pieces do tell us that these are connected.

And, again, we have some very strong feelings there. We're waiting on the signs to make that all absolute. But there's no really doubt, at this point, in my mind that they're all connected.

CHUNG: May I assume that it might have something to do with the type of weapon and the bullets that have been recovered, that that is the link?

MOOSE: Well, again, at this point, we want to be very careful with any kind of assumptions. We're still waiting a lot of that forensics-type material to come back, to be processed.

But when we look at the situation on the map, when we look at the nature of the wounds, again, some strong feelings that these are connected.

CHUNG: County Executive Duncan, we assume that you have been talking to family members of the victims. Do any of them know each other?

DUNCAN: We don't see any real connection between the victims. And we have been in contact with all of the families. And we offered them assistance through our victim assistance unit here in the county. And we offered counseling, whatever else. But we have not found any connection between the victims or their families.

CHUNG: Mr. County Executive, I used to live in Montgomery County and I have never seen or heard anything like this before. Have you?

DUNCAN: No, I haven't. I'm a native of the county, grew up here. And I don't recall a day ever in the history of the county like this.

When you get five murders in a period of 16 hours, that's 25 percent of the normal murders we get in a full year. We normally get 15 to 20 murders a year. To get five in one day, totally random shootings, it's a very, very dark day for Montgomery County.

CHUNG: And you're not closing schools down, are you?

DUNCAN: No. After September 11, we instituted a good security plan for all the schools in the county. They performed that plan today. They kept the students inside. They kept the doors locked. We went through our normal release procedures, with school getting out on time, parents knowing what the normal procedure is. We had extra police security at the schools.

We're going to do that tomorrow. We're going to go to school at normal times. People need to be very vigilant and very observant. But we feel that the children will be safe inside the school with us. We want to make sure that people go about their business with a heightened sense of vigilance, a heightened sense of caution.

And we're also asking people, if they know anything, give us a call and let us know. If they can think of anything that might help, call us and let us know.

CHUNG: Also, are you contemplating any kind of curfew?

DUNCAN: No, not at this time. We're not looking at a curfew. That could change depending on what we see tonight or if something happens tomorrow. But right now, we're not contemplating that. All of the shootings took place during daylight hours.

CHUNG: Now, I know that you have offered a $50,000 reward. How are you trying to protect the residents? DUNCAN: Well, we've got greatly enhanced patrols throughout this county. We have got surveillance going all over the place in the county, actually.

And what is nice is that we have gotten tremendous support from not just the county police, Montgomery County police, but Maryland State Police, the FBI, the Secret Service, ATF. We've gotten assistance from Prince George County's police, D.C. police. So the whole region has come together. And we're tapping the resources of the best law enforcement capabilities here in the Washington area, which is some of the best in the world.

CHUNG: Chief Moose, are you getting some help from the FBI in terms of profiling this killing or killers?

MOOSE: Well, at this point, I think it's too early for that to kick in. We need to gather more data to give them. But we are getting help from them in a number of different areas. And, so far, it's going extremely well. But the profiling piece, again, it's too early. We have to get our arms around a lot more data to give them, so that they can do that work.

CHUNG: Do you believe there is more than one killer?

MOOSE: Well, at this point, we are, again, not sure. But we are working with the idea that it is more than one. We're not closing any avenues. We're keeping an open mind. And we don't want to, by any means, handcuff our investigators.

CHUNG: All right, County Executive Duncan, I know you have a wife and five children. What are you telling your children?

DUNCAN: Well, we're talking to our children. We have got a young daughter who is 10 years old. And she just has a lot of questions. She had a lot of questions on September 11. She's got a lot of questions today about why people would do this.

And we're trying our best to calm her anxieties, calm her fears, and make her feel better about her community and about her country and her world.

CHUNG: Now, I know that you are warning everyone to be vigilant. In particular, is it the vehicle that you and the police chief are telling residents to be on the lookout for? Because there is a little bit confusion, I think, on whether or not it is a boxy truck, a white boxy car. What are you telling residents?

DUNCAN: It is a white box truck. It is not a van. It is a bigger truck than that. It's a white box truck that's either Isuzu or Mitsubishi and has some damage on the rear door, the tailgate. And it has got some small black lettering on it as well. So we're asking people, if they see that, call us, let us know. We have stopped an awful lot of white box trucks today in Montgomery County trying to find who did this.

CHUNG: All right, thank you so much, gentlemen. We appreciate your being with us. And we hope you have some success in your investigation.

So what kind of person or persons would be behind such acts? We have asked profiler Pat Brown, who has been a frequent visitor with us, for some insight into the killer.

She joins us now from Washington.

Now, Pat, you call this killer someone who is on a shooting spree, as opposed to a mass killer. Can you explain the distinction?

PAT BROWN, PROFILER, SEXUAL HOMICIDE EXCHANGE: Well, in this particular case, it is almost a little confusing.

It is definitely not a serial killer, because that kind of person does things very quietly and sneakily, and then he'll have his down times and maybe not do anything for a month or two or even a year. But in a case of a mass murderer, usually mass murderers shoot a whole bunch of people in one place and go out. They know the police are coming. They know they are going to be shot to death. And they go out with a blaze of glory.

Spree killers usually have some time in between their killings. And they're moving from one killing to another. What makes this most interesting is that the killings are so close together. So it almost is a mix between a mass murderer and a spree killer.

CHUNG: And in broad daylight as well.

BROWN: And in broad daylight. So I think probably the No. 1 reason there is to get good aim. This way, the person probably doesn't have any night vision going there. He can get a good shot. Apparently, he's very proud of his shooting skills. And he has a right to be, because he's doing a pretty darn fine job with one shot, so he is a skilled shooter.

CHUNG: Well, that's what police say. They say that he is experienced, skilled. He's calculating.

Knowing that, I think some people would assume -- and I would as well -- that this person might have a military background or a police background. Is that a false assumption?

BROWN: Well, it is certainly one area to look at, one avenue to go down, because the person does have a skill, but that doesn't necessarily mean that anybody who -- this could be a dear hunter as well.

If the truck is large enough, the person could be -- I also agree with the police that it might well be two people: one driving, one perhaps kneeling down with perhaps a rifle. We don't know yet that it is a rifle, so it could be some other weapon. But they definitely have practiced enough. So we are looking for somebody who either hunts a lot, who has military experience, who has spent a lot of time at gun ranges.

This is a person who has stacks of "Guns & Ammo" magazines in his home. This is someone who really likes weaponry.

CHUNG: Any clues as to a psychological profile?

BROWN: Well, obviously, you have got somebody pretty angry at the world. And if you have two people, you have them encouraging each other on and saying: "Yes, we ought to get people. We ought to do this. Here's the time. Look, we can get away with it or we can make a hit," or whatever.

Somebody is obviously very angry. And if you're going to look at who this is, what is very interesting about the pattern here is that, if you actually look at where all the crimes occurred, it is almost like a star. It is like crisscrossing across Wheaton and Aspen Hill in Maryland.

So that leads one to believe that it's possible that the perpetrator or perpetrators in this crime are sort of localized in that area and are working out from their area, going one way and then going the other direction, just seeing what they can get away with, perhaps going into hiding right after they do it, and then going on for the next one and seeing how many they can add up.

CHUNG: Now, early reports said that there was a wide diversity in those who were killed: a white person, a black person, Latino, men, women. Does that tell you anything?

BROWN: Well, it tells us that, probably, we're not looking at somebody who has got a particular issue with any one group. We just have a person who wants to have victims.

And what is interesting about them is, most of them are stationary. So I think this guy doesn't want any one particular victim, except one that is not moving, where he can nail them with one shot. So I think the only advice I have to people right now is, move around a lot. Don't be a good target for this person at the moment.

CHUNG: So what do you think police will be looking at to try and solve it? Is it the ballistics information that would help?

BROWN: Well, the ballistics is going to be very important. They are going to want to find out what kind of gun we're looking at here. They're going to want to see who in the community has these kinds of guns or who has had these guns stolen recently.

For example, we have had a gun shop in the area, right over in P.G. County across the border there, that had a robbery. I believe it was last week. And 12 guns were stolen from that gun shop. We want to find out: Is it a stolen gun? We want to find out who in the neighborhood has been talking a lot about guns. These kind of people don't stay real quiet.

So we're going to have somebody who has been probably shooting off his mouth in the recent past about his grudges against people, and he could wish he could take care of them all. Something like that, we're going to be looking to the community for that information. CHUNG: So, basically, what you're saying is that this person is committing these crimes with warning. He is signaling someone. It's just that those individuals have to come forward and recognize it.

BROWN: Absolutely.

This kind of person doesn't -- it's not like everybody says, "Oh, we had no idea." There has got to be some issues going on in this guy's life. And he's got to have a tremendous interest in weaponry. He might have a stockpile of weapons in his room. If it's a younger person -- and I don't believe this is a teenager. I believe we're looking into the 20s, maybe early 30s.

This is somebody who may have a lot of interest in any kinds of things like -- I said "Guns & Ammo" magazine, or, what's the one, for going overseas and shooting people down, that kind of military stuff, any kind of thing which shows a desire for power, that he would like to be that, maybe that military guy that can do that sniper-type of work.

CHUNG: All right, Pat Brown, thank you very much. Appreciate your being with us.

Coming up: an unbelievable scene at the United Nations caught on tape by CNN. We'll talk to one person who saw it all unfold when we return.

ANNOUNCER: Still ahead: the accused shoe bomber and the Taliban American prepare for their day in court -- justice and the fight against terror.

CONNIE CHUNG TONIGHT returns in a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CHUNG: An extraordinary scene today at the United Nations in New York: A gunman jumped a fence and began shooting right in the heart of world diplomacy.

CNN senior U.N. correspondent Richard Roth watched it all unfold. And he is here to tell us and show us what happened.

Richard, I couldn't believe it. You were there watching. And you could hear the gunshots go off. So tell us exactly what you heard and what you saw.

RICHARD ROTH, CNN SENIOR U.N. CORRESPONDENT: Well, it was a busy day at the U.N., because the chief U.N. weapons inspector on Iraq was briefing the Security Council. So all eyes were down there inside the U.N.

I was in my office, which overlooks the U.N. grounds, the driveway, and First Avenue in Manhattan, where all the flags are up. And suddenly I hear, "pop, pop, pop." And I turn to my left and I see a man firing a pistol straight up in the air. Now, it turns out he had also fired it at the U.N. building. But I came in with my eyes for the last few shots.

He put the gun down. As I'm scrambling to try to tell the network...

CHUNG: He just threw it on the ground.

ROTH: He threw it on the ground and then starts to walk away a bit. And, as he does that, he flings up in the air 20 to 25 pages from a leaflet. And then you see he has a bag there. There go the leaflets. He jumped the fence. He left a suitcase there, a briefcase. And then he just stood, as if waiting, "Come and get me," which they did.

CHUNG: Yes, or as if he's waiting for a bus.

ROTH: That's right.

And you see him here now with U.S. Secret Service agents, who, fortunately, were on the grounds escorting leaders from Cyprus. And they came over -- they happened to be outside -- and put him on the ground, held him there at gunpoint. And other U.N. security rushed over also.

CHUNG: And he obviously is not resisting.

ROTH: No, not resisting at all. One of my cameramen had told me that he was giving out leaflets two days ago outside the U.N.

CHUNG: It appeared as if he didn't want to hurt anyone, because, as you said, he was shooting in the air. But you say he did hit a building.

ROTH: He very nearly could have really hurt someone. At least four slugs are now being pulled out of floors 18 through 20. In the U.N. building, one woman would have been at her desk. The bullet went into the ceiling above her. She was out for work. Some other people in the American Express travel office traumatized. They had been down at the World Trade Center on September 11 of last year. But no one was physically injured.

CHUNG: Ultimately, no one.

ROTH: No one.

CHUNG: And what happened to him?

ROTH: Well, this man was then walked away by security. And, eventually, he was taken into custody and then turned over to the FBI. He's going to arraigned tomorrow. Steve Kim, as you see there, walked away, postal worker from Illinois, believed to be potentially of North Korean descent.

CHUNG: And the purpose of his, whatever you call it, a demonstration, his bit of violence?

ROTH: His leaflet signed "Steve Kim, citizen of the United Nations." But his protest was about the treatment and the condition of the people in North Korea, who have been living under tough economic times. He criticized a dictatorial regime there. And he said that the people there are groaning under this starvation.

CHUNG: Have you seen anything like this happen before?

ROTH: No, I never have seen that at the United Nations. I don't think they have seen that. There have been other crazy cases, but nobody pulling a pistol and blasting it in the air.

CHUNG: Now, how he was able to get into the area? Did he jump a fence? Or did he have some kind of identification that actually allowed him through?

ROTH: There's a long fence along First Avenue outside the United Nations. And he picked a spot which is not too visible from guard posts. He hopped the fence and then calmly walked over near the reflecting pool of the U.N. and started firing.

U.N. security has been asking for more money. They say they're waiting for it in the budget. But they admit that the fence perimeter is not totally secure.

CHUNG: Isn't that extraordinary? Particularly after 9/11, you would think that security there would be so tight.

ROTH: Well, it has been beefed up. There are a lot of metal detectors now, bomb-sniffing dogs around. But the United Nations wants to not be a fortress to the world. They want to show that the world can get along, live together, 191 countries.

But every year, it seems, it gets tighter and tighter. If you look at the tape closely, by the way, one of the uniformed security guards couldn't tell where the shots was coming from, ran out, but ran toward First Avenue, thinking they were out there. It echoes around in that complex of the U.N. off the buildings.

CHUNG: So, did anyone inside the building, those who were certainly concerned about the entire debate over Iraq, were they unaware of what was going on out there?

ROTH: Totally unaware. It's amazing. They're talking about disarmament, and right outside, a few feet away, someone is shooting a revolver seven times in the air.

CHUNG: Had there been any demonstrations in that area prior to today?

ROTH: No, no major demonstrations about Korea. You see people across the street. They are allowed to protest in a small park there, but nothing major. And we don't know if he came there knowing that there was a lot of media attention because of the chief weapons inspector at all. We don't.

CHUNG: All right, Richard Roth, thank you. Thank you so much for being with us. And I'm glad your camera was there to capture this. Appreciate it.

When we come back: the fate of an American who chose to side with the Taliban.

ANNOUNCER: Coming up: why you won't be seeing this anymore...

(BELL RINGING)

ANNOUNCER: ... or this.

CONNIE CHUNG TONIGHT returns in a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CHUNG: Tomorrow, the man who allegedly tried to blow up a plane with a bomb hidden in his shoes will have his day in court. But it appears as if Richard Reid will not go to trial. His attorneys filed papers indicating Reid wants to plead guilty to charges against him.

Bill Delaney has the story from Boston.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BILL DELANEY, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Always something of a shambling, mysterious presence, hardly the image of a hardened, disciplined terrorist, alleged shoe bomber, 29-year-old British citizen Richard Reid has now again upended expectations, requesting a hearing to change his plea to guilty -- government attorneys saying it was his right and his call.

MICHAEL SULLIVAN, U.S. ATTORNEY: I want to make it clear there is no deal or bargain of any kind with Richard Reid that has led him to this decision.

DELANEY: Reid's attorney issued a statement, saying their client "has no disagreement with the facts asserted in the charges as to his actions on December 22, 2001, and wants to avoid the publicity associated with a trial and the negative impact it is likely to have on his family."

Reid, in his motion, did echo a request previously filed this summer to strike allegations he received training from al Qaeda from the counts against him. Though not a condition of his guilty plea, government attorneys quickly rejected the request. Despite the government's consistent hard line, some observers think Reid's attorneys do hope, in the end, to get a softer sentence, something less than the maximum life sentence.

MARK PEARLSTEIN, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: Because Mr. Reid is pleading guilty to all eight counts of the indictment, the government doesn't have a choice as to whether or not to accept or reject his offer. That choice is given to the court. And then, at the sentencing hearing, the government and Mr. Reid will each make their arguments about what the appropriate sentence ought to be.

DELANEY: Accused of trying to ignite explosives in the sneakers he wore on an American Airlines flight with 197 passengers and crew, Reid has told investigators he acted alone, enraged at the United States for its support for Israel.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

DELANEY: Late today, government attorneys filed in federal court here in Boston a response to that request by Richard Reid and his attorneys that language in the original indictment against him tying him to al Qaeda be stricken, federal attorneys saying they reject that request, saying they have more than enough evidence to show that Richard Reid was tied to al Qaeda, some language from those pleadings put in this evening, the government saying -- quote -- "that Reid was an Islamic extremist engaging in acts of international terrorism while on a martyrdom mission."

Richard Reid and his attorneys have asserted for months now that tying him to al Qaeda would prejudice any case against him. They did not, as that piece said, make that conditional on whether or not he will change his plea to guilty. He will do that tomorrow, Connie.

CHUNG: All right, Bill, so when Reid appears before the judge tomorrow, what will happen?

DELANEY: Well, the judge will look at three things, Connie. He will look at whether the person changing the plea is competent, whether they're doing it voluntarily, and whether there is a factual basis to do it.

Now, if the judge decides that those three things are the case, he will almost certainly allow the change of plea to guilty. What happens then is no trial. The case will go directly to the sentencing stage, which would happen in 10 weeks to three months, we're told.

CHUNG: All right, Bill Delaney, thank you.

Now for some perspective on the case, we're joined by CNN analyst Jeffrey Toobin.

Jeffrey, you heard Bill Delaney talking about the request on the part of Reid's attorneys that he not be connected to al Qaeda. Now, how could that affect his sentencing if that request is in?

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Well, the interesting question first is: Will the judge accept the plea?

You know, there's an interesting parallel here to -- remember a few weeks ago, Zacarias Moussaoui, the so-called 20th hijacker, he tried to plead guilty to being a member of al Qaeda, but he said, "I had nothing to do with September 11." The judge said: "No deal. You can't plead guilty because you're not really acknowledging what the government says is true."

Here the judge is going to have to make the same inquiry. Is Reid really acknowledging that he did what the government said he did? Here he probably will get his plea accepted, because the al Qaeda part of the accusation is not really the main part, but it is by no means a done deal that this guilty plea will be accepted tomorrow.

CHUNG: So, if it is accepted, what kind of sentencing is he looking at?

TOOBIN: He is looking at a very long time.

It is true that he probably stands a somewhat better chance of avoiding life in prison without the possibility of parole by pleading guilty as opposed to going to trial. But when you consider the magnitude of this crime, when you consider that 197 people easily could have died if this bomb went off, he is going to have a tough time asking for mercy under any circumstances.

CHUNG: All right, let's go on to a different trial, the John Walker Lindh trial. He is facing sentencing tomorrow. What is he likely to face?

TOOBIN: Well, there is an agreement in place. And there really should be no surprises tomorrow.

When he pled guilty, both the defense and the prosecution agreed that a sentence of 20 years would be appropriate. Barring extremely unforeseen developments, that's what he should get when he's sentenced tomorrow.

CHUNG: Jeffrey, what would he have faced had he gone to trial?

TOOBIN: If he went to trial and was convicted, life in prison without possibility of parole.

This was a huge discount for John Walker Lindh. He did very well on this plea bargain, because, remember, in federal court, he's going to get credit for time served. He will probably get credit for good behavior. He could reduce his sentence by about 10 or 20 percent. So he is looking at actually serving maybe serving 17 or 18 years. That means he will get out of prison when he's in his late 30s. That's awfully different from dying behind bars.

CHUNG: And will there be any victim-impact statements, because, obviously, there were victims?

TOOBIN: Well, that's an open question. And that was argued in briefs today. Johnny Spann, who was the CIA agent killed at Tora Bora, his father wants to speak out. And Tora Bora, of course, is where John Walker Lindh was arrested.

The defense has said: "We don't want him to testify, because John Walker Lindh had nothing to do with the death of Johnny Spann. He feels sorry for Spann, but he had nothing to do with it. So he was not the victim. His father shouldn't get to speak as a victim- impact."

Interesting question, because that will be a moment of high drama, if the elder Mr. Spann speaks. Don't know if it will happen.

CHUNG: Jeffrey, do you have any idea of where he will be held and whether or not he will be separated from other inmates?

TOOBIN: That's really up to the Bureau of Prisons. Also, the defense asked for Lindh to be held in California near his home, to be given educational opportunities in prison.

Federal judges are very careful about saying, "Look, I can't promise you where he'll go." I think it is very likely, at least for the initial part of his sentence, that he will be separated from other prisoners. Prisoners, they don't like child molesters and they don't like people who commit treason against the United States. Oddly enough, they're sort of patriotic.

CHUNG: Well, and finally, both of these men, Reid and John Walker Lindh, did not go to trial. So, therefore, I would imagine that the government is either terribly frustrated that information was not flowing from them, because they are supposed to cooperate, or they can cooperate. So what do we gain and what do we lose from having them not go to trial and plead?

TOOBIN: Well, certainly we gain saving the expense of a trial. These terrorist trials are very expensive to prosecute. And in the John Walker Lindh case, he has agreed to cooperate. And, in fact, as a condition of his plea, he is cooperating. And the government says he is providing truthful information. So I don't think much is lost there.

In terms of Reid, the shoe bomber, you know, he has the right to plead guilty and not cooperate. There is nothing the government can do to stop him from pleading guilty if he wants to. And he doesn't have to cooperate. As for what we're giving up, the true answer is, I don't really know. He remains somewhat mysterious. We don't know who, if anyone, sent him. We don't know if he really was a member of al Qaeda.

And if he in fact pleads guilty tomorrow and the trial ends, it is likely we will never know.

CHUNG: All right, Jeffrey Toobin, thank you.

And still to come: Imagine paying child support for more than a decade only to discover your daughter is not your biological child. So, should you still pay?

When we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CHUNG: In just a moment, we'll meet the man who discovered that his 15-year-old daughter isn't his after all.

We'll be back in 60 seconds.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CHUNG: Get this: A marriage breaks up and the ex-husband provides financial support for his daughter for more than a decade. Then a DNA test proves that the child, now 15, is not his. But a court says it doesn't matter. He has still got to keep footing the bills.

Patrick McCarthy says that's just what happened to him. So now he has founded a group called New Jersey Citizens Against Paternity Fraud. And he's with us tonight.

Thank you for being with us.

PATRICK MCCARTHY, FOUNDER, NEW JERSEY CITIZENS AGAINST PATERNITY FRAUD: You're welcome.

CHUNG: I want to show you the ad that your organization put in "The New York Times." And I want you to explain it to me.

"Did she lie to you?" it says. And then the second line, which I can't read that well, but I will pull up here. My eyes just aren't that good. "Finally, you may be able to do something about it." There we go.

Tell me, what are you trying to convey here?

MCCARTHY: Convey that, if a woman does lie to you, if she falsely accuses you of being the father, and knowingly knows who the biological father is, you should have the ability to go back to court and have your child support order relieved and have a DNA test done.

CHUNG: All right, so let's go back.

MCCARTHY: OK.

CHUNG: Because you obviously have a personal stake in this. You were married.

MCCARTHY: Correct.

CHUNG: And you and your wife had a baby girl.

MCCARTHY: Right.

CHUNG: And, at that time, did you have any reason to believe that that child was not yours?

MCCARTHY: Never. No, I never had a reason to doubt that she had stepped outside the marriage. This child was my child.

CHUNG: All right, eventually, your marriage becomes a little rocky. You're separated. You're divorced. And you're paying child support. And then, at one point, you sort of got an inkling that something was awry in terms of the biological connection that you had with your child. What happened?

MCCARTHY: Yes.

In the context of an argument with my ex-wife, she had made a statement that the child was not my child. Obviously, that's when the seed of doubt was planted in my head. And I started looking at the child a little bit differently and saying, "You know, there are some characteristics that are not indicative of myself or my ex-wife."

CHUNG: But you brought her up as your daughter.

MCCARTHY: I certainly did.

CHUNG: And you loved her 100 percent?

MCCARTHY: Sure. And I still consider her my daughter.

CHUNG: All right, when did you decide that you were going to actually find out the truth? And how did you find out the truth?

MCCARTHY: After that seed of doubt was planted, that's when I proceeded to order what is called a home paternity kit, just like a home pregnancy kit. And I got a sample of her saliva, a sample of my saliva, sent it off to a lab. The results came back four weeks later that she was indeed not my biological child.

CHUNG: Was your ex-wife aware of what you were doing?

MCCARTHY: No.

CHUNG: And when you found out, did you inform your ex-wife and did you inform your daughter?

MCCARTHY: I informed my ex-wife about a year after the fact, because I really -- I just wanted to start doing a little bit of research on what kind of recourse I had as far as my financial obligations.

CHUNG: And what you discovered?

MCCARTHY: That the courts will hold you to all of your financial obligations. And that I feel is something that should be an individual choice, not a court-ordered mandate.

CHUNG: Did you intend to stop payments?

MCCARTHY: No, no, I never did. And I would have continued to pay the financial support and continued to give her emotional support as well.

CHUNG: Because?

MCCARTHY: She's still my daughter.

CHUNG: You really strongly felt that way?

MCCARTHY: Certainly.

CHUNG: So, in the end, you're saying that you went ahead and came through 100 percent, continued to pay child support until she turned 18.

MCCARTHY: Eighteen. She was emancipated. That's correct.

CHUNG: But, as far as you were concerned, what did you want to accomplish? And what do you want to accomplish from now on?

MCCARTHY: Right.

I feel that the law -- and I think that is what, to me, was more appalling, is that the law protects a woman like this who lies, who knows that you're not the biological father. Men currently in New Jersey are now allowed -- in most states, are not allowed to petition the courts for a DNA test. However, if you do get a DNA test, you're fortunate enough, they will still hold you to your support obligations.

I have a Supreme Court case where the couple split up. The man was a nonbiological father of the child. The mother was living with the alleged biological father of the child. And the child was living with the two of them. And the Supreme Court still made the nonbiological father pay support. And the biological father had not one bit of financial obligation.

CHUNG: One more time -- because that is tricky -- one more time, so that we make sure everyone understands.

MCCARTHY: Couple were married. They separated.

CHUNG: Yes. Right.

MCCARTHY: The father, the alleged father found out that this child was not his biological child.

CHUNG: Right.

MCCARTHY: When they separated, the mother moved in with the true biological father.

CHUNG: Right.

MCCARTHY: He went to court with this. And the Supreme Court ruled that, even though he is the nonbiological father, he falls under what is called the presumption of paternity. It is based on a 500- year-old English common law that, if you are married to the woman, your name is on the birth certificate, you are bound to support obligations, even though the child and his ex-wife were living with the true biological father.

CHUNG: How did your daughter find out you that you were not her biological daughter -- I mean the biological father?

MCCARTHY: Right. That was disclosed to her by my ex-wife in counseling.

CHUNG: May I ask you how she reacted?

MCCARTHY: She took it hard at first. But I believed she knew -- we talked about it. Her and I discussed it at great length. And I let her know that I still love her as my daughter. Just because there is not a genetic connection, she is still my daughter. And she is actually handling it quite well.

And I think she had some doubts. And I think the biggest thing...

CHUNG: Doubts about?

MCCARTHY: About the fact that I was her father, because I think she may have overheard it in the house. And, usually, when situations like this occur, they do hear things. And I think we need to empower our children with the truth, not only for medical reasons, but for psychological reasons as well.

CHUNG: Now, you are on this crusade, in many ways, going state by state, almost.

MCCARTHY: Right.

CHUNG: Tell me, does your daughter hold that against you? Does she feel hurt that you're doing this?

MCCARTHY: No, I don't think. She has never acted in that way.

And that's one of the reasons that I wanted to make sure that she did know this, too, because I was going to go forward with this, because it's not right. It's not a fair situation currently. And I don't want to make it a man/woman situation, because my current wife, who I love very much, is involved in this. And she is...

CHUNG: And is supportive?

MCCARTHY: Very supportive. She has actually done a lot of research with me and feels that this is something that needs to be corrected. Women can petition the courts at any time for a DNA test to establish paternity and essentially make a man pay child support. But when a man finds out, it's in the reverse. They have no rights in court.

CHUNG: All right, Patrick McCarthy, thank you for being with us. We appreciate it.

MCCARTHY: Certainly. Thank you.

CHUNG: Next: Martha Stewart gives up her seat on the board, as the heat from a stock scandal grows more intense.

We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CHUNG: Martha Stewart may have worn out her welcome at the New York Stock Exchange. Stewart today resigned from the board of the New York Stock Exchange. The exchange says that she stepped down voluntarily and was not asked to leave. In a statement, she said -- quote -- "I did not want the media attention currently surrounding me to distract from the important work of the New York Stock Exchange. And, thus, I felt it appropriate to resign."

But the news came one day after a Merrill Lynch employee pled guilty to accepting payoffs to hide details of Stewart's stock dealing.

"Fortune" magazine's Andy Serwer joins us now to help us sort out what all of this means.

Andy, thank you for being with us.

ANDY SERWER, "FORTUNE": Sure.

CHUNG: Now, she resigned. And the question is -- in her resignation letter, she says it was because of her busy and demanding corporate life, and yet she doesn't even mention the investigation. But isn't it obvious it's the investigation?

SERWER: Oh, yes. That's what people say when they resign: They're going off to pursue things, need to spend more time with their family.

I don't think that she was actually asked to leave by the board of the NYSE or the head of the New York Stock Exchange. I talked to a source very close to the New York Stock Exchange. And he insisted that she in fact did leave on her own. But he acknowledged to me, the source acknowledged that her situation was becoming more and more difficult and that probably her lawyers advised her that it was time to do the right thing.

CHUNG: So you honestly don't think that there was pressure coming in from the outside?

SERWER: Well, I think there were discussions back and forth, Connie. That's clear. But I think they allowed her to make the decision herself -- you know, it is always sort of a close call -- rather than actually pushing her out the door.

CHUNG: Well, do you think this makes her appear, if you will, more guilty?

SERWER: Well, I certainly don't think it helps. Obviously, we're sort of moving closer and closer to a situation where the Department of Justice is either going to file charges or decide to drop the whole thing.

And I think -- let's be honest here. I think they're going to be filing charges. And I think that's going to probably happen soon, maybe even within a matter of couple days, certainly within a couple of weeks, I think.

CHUNG: And particularly with yesterday's developments. The assistant to her stockbroker said he was going to plead guilty, and did.

SERWER: That's right. And that's a piece in the puzzle. That's moving the case forward. That's investigative work by the Department of Justice, basically allowing Douglas Faneuil, this young broker's assistant, to plead guilty to a misdemeanor. That is in exchange for testimony that will be used against Martha Stewart and presumably the broker, Peter Bacanovic, as well.

CHUNG: What about the SEC? Is that a separate investigation or is it parallel with the Justice Department?

SERWER: It is probably a parallel investigation. The SEC is always very tight-lipped about these things.

But you can assume that they're working in concert with the Department of Justice. The SEC filed civil charges. The Department of Justice, of course, can file criminal charges.

CHUNG: Finally, how is her corporation doing? And I'm really wondering now, is this the end of Martha Stewart? Are we seeing it right before us?

SERWER: Well, I think that last question is really, really interesting.

Obviously, Martha Stewart is a tremendously popular and respected woman amongst the American public. Her magazine is very, very successful. She still does TV. And I'm not so sure the American public has given up on Martha Stewart. Martha Stewart has a lot of enemies here inside Manhattan and in the Beltway. But I think, in America, there are people who still like her and respect her. And I think the magazine, I think she does a wonderful job with the magazine. So it's a commercially successful operation. It's hard to see it just going away.

On the other hand, if she is charged with criminal activity and then even found guilty, it's very difficult. Can she remain the CEO of that company or even the editor of the magazine or the head of the magazine? Those are questions that her company is going to have to sort out, the board of her company is going to sort out.

CHUNG: And how far has her stock dipped?

SERWER: It has declined precipitously from a couple of years ago when she went public. And, of course, her fortune is tied up in that stock price, Connie. She is still a very, very wealthy woman, but she is not anywhere as wealthy as she used to be.

CHUNG: All right, Andy Serwer, thank you for being with us. We always like it when you come here.

SERWER: Thanks.

CHUNG: And keep it right here.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) CHUNG: I'll have more in just a moment.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

CHUNG: And before we go, I just wanted to tell you that exclusive video we showed you earlier of the shooting incident at the U.N. was shot by CNN cameraman Ricky Shine (ph). Great job, Ricky.

And tomorrow: A teenager leaves a house party drunk and causes a fatal car accident. Should a parent go to jail?

And coming up next on "LARRY KING LIVE": the cast of "The Mary Tyler Moore Show."

Thanks for joining us. And for all of us at CNN, good night and we'll see you tomorrow.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com