Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Soon: Trump Heads To Court For Day 15 Of Criminal Trial; Survey: 1 in 8 U.S. Adults Say They've Taken A GLP-1 Drug; Rep. Adam Smith (D-Washington) On Biden's Rafah Warning. Aired 7:30-8a ET

Aired May 10, 2024 - 07:30   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[07:30:00]

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: On the plus side, the storms could also trigger an amazing view of the Northern Lights across the U.S. spanning from southern Alabama to northern California. The best chance to see it, 11:00 p.m. tonight through Sunday.

And Sara, I don't know if you know this, but the Fantastic Four got their superpowers largely through a geomagnetic storm. It was called Cosmic Rays. I am expecting to be much stronger by Monday.

SARA SIDNER, CNN ANCHOR: Yep, and I'm expecting to be much cuter, but it's not going to happen. Sorry, John.

All right, let's go to some live pictures of Trump Tower where, as you know, what happens every day of court, Donald Trump soon to be leaving there heading to day 15 of his criminal hush money trial here in New York.

Thursday, another pretty dramatic day in court. Trump's lawyers grilling Stormy Daniels in a confrontational and contentious cross- examination. Jurors now standing by to hear more from Trump's former White House aide this morning.

I am joined this morning by former Trump White House lawyer, Jim Schultz. And CNN legal analyst and former House Judiciary special counsel in Trump's first impeachment trial, Norm Eisen. Thank you, gentlemen, for being here bright and early. I know you went to a concert last night. Let's dap it out because we love us some Billy Joel.

But now we're talking about what happened in court, which was kind of wild, right, when you're talking about a former president and the allegations being made.

The defense line of questioning hit two points I felt like over and over and over again. One, they were accusing Stormy Daniels of solely being motivated by money. And two, they were basically calling her a liar and kind of slut-shaming her. They were bringing up a lot of sex talk.

Here is some of what she said. I want to read this out for you. This is the exchange between Stormy Daniels and one of Trump's attorneys. The Trump attorney says: "So you have a lot of experience in making

phony stories about sex appear to be real, right?" Daniels laughs -- "Wow. That's not how I would put it. The sex in the films , it's very much real. Just like what happened to me in that room."

Trump's attorney: "All right. But you're making fictional stories about sex. You write those stories? Daniels: "No. The sex is real. The character names might be different, but the sex is very real."

The attorney says: "And you have bragged about how good you are about writing porn movies and writing really good stories and writing really good dialogue, right?" Daniels: "Yes."

Trump attorney: "And now, you have a story you have been telling about having sex with President Trump, right?" Daniels: "And if that story was untrue, I would have written it to be a lot be a lot better."

All right. So, she's, as the British would say, "taking the piss" when it comes to responding.

Norm, you were inside court while all of this was happening. How did this come across to the jury? She laughed a bit. She seemed to be sort of almost poking fun at the questions themselves.

NORM EISEN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST, FORMER HOUSE JUDICIARY SPECIAL COUNSEL IN TRUMP'S FIRST IMPEACHMENT TRIAL: The jury was sympathetic to her, Sara, unlike on her direct, which paradoxically was less successful with the jurors, I thought, than the cross. The genuine Stormy Daniels came out.

And they laughed -- jurors laughed at her jokes. They paid close attention. Many of them have writing materials. They put down the writing materials and watched her. I thought they were sympathetic to her.

It's always tough to know what's going on inside jurors' minds. We won't know until we get a verdict in this case. But I thought that the testimony came across well.

There is a defense strategy at play here. They're playing for one angry juror to give them a mistrial. But Stormy Daniels held her own and that means she won the day.

SIDNER: Jim, you can only kind of tell what jurors are feeling by their facial expressions usually, or some of their audio.

I do want to ask you, though, this line of questioning about lying -- does this kind of set, though, the jury up to question well, if she didn't have this one-night stand with Donald Trump, then why would they pay her $130,000 to shut her up?

JAMES SCHULTZ, CNN LEGAL COMMENTATOR, FORMER TRUMP WHITE HOUSE LAWYER: Yeah. I felt this line of questioning was really risky for the defense, right? I think that what they did, it was -- it was -- it was a risk for the prosecution on the front end and I think it didn't play well on the front end with the jury, likely -- on the front end in terms of direct examination.

But on the cross-examination, I think she probably did a nice job, like Norm said, of appealing to jurors, right? She was making them laugh. She -- they were engaged. They put their pens and pencils down -- like, pens down. They were -- they were entertained, if you will, by this -- which, at the end of the day, takes kind of the tiresome kind of sitting there for hours and hours away. They're paying attention.

I don't know that it probably went in their favor in terms of the testimony, but the line here is that OK, she's discredited. She doesn't tell the truth. That's what they're trying to say. They're trying to say she's money hungry. They're trying to appeal to that one juror, like Norm said --

SIDNER: Norm said.

SCHULTZ: -- and maybe they get it.

SIDNER: OK.

[07:35:00]

I want to ask you about something that the judge has said because I found this quite interesting after her testimony where she described in some detail about the sexual encounter. And she was asked over and over and over again for hours by the cross-examiners about that particular night.

The judge did not grant an appeal because he had said look, we don't need to hear these intimate details of the alleged sexual encounter. But the judge said then this to the attorneys afterwards.

He says, look, "...for some unexplained reason, which I still don't understand, there was no objection to certain testimony, which was later used in the motion for a mistrial on Tuesday, and again used today. For example, the mention of the condom. I agree that should not have come out. I wished those questions hadn't been asked, and I wished those answers hadn't been given. But for the life of me, I don't understand, Ms. Necheles, why you didn't object."

What does this tell you about the judge's thinking? And is this something that if you don't object you can't bring it up in appeal, or does it hurt your case?

SCHULTZ: The judge is trying to create a record for appeal so that this does -- so that this isn't something that comes back on him.

And I do think -- look, they should have been objecting to some of those -- some of those issues. They missed some of them. But they have to make a strategic decision at that time. Do you object, object, object and look to the jury like you're worried about it, or do you object, make your points -- the entire line? The judge made some comments about it. Just preserve the record and move on for appeal.

I think they were probably doing the latter, but they probably should have objected more specifically on those instances and, particularly, the condom issue.

SIDNER: OK.

Norm, there was also a White House aide to Donald Trump -- former White House aide for Donald Trump who took the stand. And what did you think about that? Because it did seem she humanized him a bit and even apologized to him for buying a $600 picture frame -- saying, like, sorry we spent so much money on that -- in court.

EISEN: I thought Madeleine Westerhout was an effective witness for both sides. The prosecution needed her, Sara, as you know, because there's two dimensions to this case. They're alleging that there was a criminal conspiracy to violate campaign finance and other laws benefiting the campaign in 2016 with this hush money payment.

And then there was a documentary coverup. A document case -- you need a series of witnesses to authenticate and introduce all the documents. And she helped with the chain of custody.

But she also helped the defense. It was very skillful how they took advantage of that.

So some good for both sides in her testimony.

SIDNER: All right. Norm Eisen, thank you so much. I know you're going to be in court watching all this. And, Jim Schultz, appreciate you getting up early and coming in for us this morning. I appreciate it.

SCHULTZ: Thanks.

SIDNER: Kate.

KATE BOLDUAN, CNN ANCHOR: So if you are having a hard time buying a house, you are definitely not alone. A new survey has Americans saying it is the worst time ever to buy a home.

CNN's Matt Egan joins me now with all of the good news. Can you talk us through these numbers?

MATT EGAN, CNN REPORTER: Well, Kate, listen, it is tough out there for homebuyers.

BOLDUAN: For sure.

EGAN: Historically tough. We've got inventory is low. Home prices are high. And mortgage rates are even higher.

BOLDUAN: Yeah.

EGAN: That's why just 21 percent of Americans say that it is a good time to buy a home right now, according to Gallup. That is tied with last year for the lowest reading that Gallup has ever seen. Seventy- six percent --

BOLDUAN: It's tied with last year?

EGAN: Tied --

BOLDUAN: That's interesting.

EGAN: -- with last year.

Seventy-six percent say it is a bad time to buy a home. That is just off the record high of 78 percent last year. Now listen, it is hard to get 76 percent of Americans to agree on anything, but they agree on this.

One of the big factors here I mentioned is home prices. Now, the latest reading shows that home prices were up by five percent in March to $393,000. That is the highest price that we've ever seen in March.

Now, this cuts both ways, right? If you already own your home this means you're richer --

BOLDUAN: Right.

EGAN: -- on paper. It gives you another source to borrow against. But obviously --

BOLDUAN: But then when you sell your house you can't get another one.

EGAN: Right. And a lot of people are on the outside looking in. They want to buy --

BOLDUAN: Yeah.

EGAN: -- but they feel like they can't. They've got to borrow.

Now, let's look at mortgage rates.

BOLDUAN: Well, yeah. Can you talk us through mortgage rates?

EGAN: Of course.

BOLDUAN: Because this is huge when you think of where mortgage rates were, what, five years ago or something.

EGAN: Absolutely. Look at this. So, I mean, the good news is that rates did tick down to seven percent.

BOLDUAN: You're searching for some good news, buddy.

EGAN: I am searching but you need a magnifying glass to see that tick down because we're still talking about rates that have doubled --

BOLDUAN: Yeah.

EGAN: -- from three years ago. And --

BOLDUAN: Look it.

EGAN: -- hopefully, Kate, the Fed can start lowering interest rates because the higher rates are the less affordable -- BOLDUAN: Yeah.

EGAN: -- housing is.

I just want to run you through exactly why this matters. Let's say you're in the market to buy a $500,000 home and you're planning to put down 20 percent. Your monthly payments are $1,000 higher per month than they would have been three years ago all because interest rates are higher.

BOLDUAN: Um. The bearer of good news always --

EGAN: I'm sorry.

BOLDUAN: -- Matt Egan.

John, I know you have a beautiful home and you are not in the market, but this is rough.

[07:40:03]

BERMAN: I will only be paying the mortgage for another 65 years. Thank you very much for that.

So this morning, a new poll shows one out of every eight adults in the U.S. has taken a weight loss drug, like Ozempic or Mounjaro.

CNN medical correspondent Meg Tirrell joins us now. Look, I've had a primary care physician tell me it's like three-quarters of his practice now. It's everywhere.

MEG TIRRELL, CNN MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: Wow, John -- and, I mean, these numbers really speak to that. And to put it even further into context, these drugs are in shortage. The companies that make them, Novo Nordisk and Eli Lilly, they cannot make enough to satisfy demand.

So we're talking about these GLP-1 receptor agonist drugs, including Ozempic and Mounjaro, which are approved for type 2 diabetes; and Wegovy and Zepbound, which are approved for weight loss.

Now, this new poll from KFF shows that 12 percent of Americans in this poll -- one out of eight people -- says they've ever taken one of these drugs. Six percent say they are currently taking one and that equates to about 15 million Americans. And there would be more if there wasn't a shortage, so keep that in mind.

Now, among people with type 2 diabetes, those are the most common folks to have said that they've ever taken one of these medicines -- more than 40 percent. About 26 percent of people with heart disease say they've ever taken one of these drugs. And 22 percent of people with obesity or who are overweight.

And so, of course, we know that there is a clamoring for these medicines. The companies can't make enough. And these numbers are only expected to keep rising.

BERMAN: It's not cheap. I mean, what do the polls say about the cost right now of these drugs?

TIRRELL: That is the other huge issue with these medicines. They are priced at more than $1,000 per month before insurance kicks in -- and often, insurance doesn't kick in. So that could be really problematic for people.

We see in this poll that more than half of folks say that these drugs have been difficult to afford. Twenty-two percent say they are very difficult. And one segment of the population that has particular trouble is elderly Americans -- people who are on Medicare -- because CMS, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, isn't allowed to cover drugs used solely for weight loss.

Now, as these medications get additional indications -- like, for example, one of them, Wegovy, was shown to prevent heart attacks and strokes in people who have already had one of those events -- they will get better coverage. But right now, just for weight loss, people don't have that coverage. And more than 60 percent of people in this poll said that should change even when told that could raise premiums for everybody.

BERMAN: Hmm.

All right, Meg Tirrell. Thanks so much for being with us this morning. Have a great weekend -- Sara.

SIDNER: All right. This morning, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, the Duchess of Sussex, are in Nigeria -- their very first trip to the country. They are there to promote Harry's Invictus Games that is for wounded veterans and military members.

The trip comes days after Harry celebrated the 10th anniversary of the Games in London and a couple of years later after Meghan said she actually has genetic ties to the country. The two of them going into Nigeria for this really important games -- very important to Harry.

CNN senior editor Stephanie Busari is in Nigeria for us to explain what is happening here and how this visit all came about. We will get her in just a few seconds. We're having some technical problems there, but we'll be right back -- Kate.

BOLDUAN: We're going to get back to that in just one second. In the meantime, some good stuff.

An A+ student and an A+ teacher. When a kindergarten teacher in Arkansas, Mrs. Pam Pilgrim Smith, learned that she had a very special student coming into her class, she decided to step up and learn a new skill -- learn a special skill. Learn Braille to help with his visual impairment.

Six-year-old Towns Fuentez -- man, he's cute -- has a condition that affects his eye development. He is legally blind, but it is -- but he is definitely not letting that slow him down. They say you should see him at recess.

And his teacher's new talent is helping him along the way to quickly develop a love of reading.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TOWNS FUENTEZ, KINDERGARTEN STUDENT: I open the door and let people in -- and that's just my favorite job.

ANDREA FUENTEZ, TOWNS' MOTHER: I would describe Towns' year as magical. He's gained lots of confidence in affirming friends and just who he is.

PAM PILGRIM-SMITH, KINDERGARTEN TEACHER: We've learned, I feel like, a lot more from him, in some cases because of his perseverance.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BOLDUAN: Towns' teacher, right there, Pam Pilgrim-Smith tells our affiliate KATV also that he has recently scored the highest possibly level on the state reading exam, saying he is excelling like you would not believe.

I love those kindergarten jobs and how excited they get. It's like line leader, date follower, date reader, weather forecaster.

SIDNER: I'm coming to hug you because this is the --

BOLDUAN: I know.

SIDNER: -- sweetest story. It makes you just want to love on people.

BOLDUAN: Yeah.

SIDNER: What a sweetheart. It's my favorite job.

BOLDUAN: Sweetness on sweetness on sweetness is just --

[07:45:00]

SIDNER: Oh, that.

BOLDUAN: I'm just -- we're just going to sit on it.

SIDNER: Let's just sit on this for an hour.

BOLDUAN: I actually really did need a hug right then. Thanks, Sara.

SIDNER: See? You're welcome.

BOLDUAN: Alrighty.

Here we go -- and we will turn back to -- we will continue to follow Towns' development. We're also going to turn back to the major news we're following, which includes this.

Humanitarian aid for Palestinians in Gaza is stuck out at sea. The obstacles the United States is now facing to get supplies on the ground. And we'll show you some live pictures outside of Trump Tower. Donald Trump heading back to court any minute now as day 15 of his criminal trial is about to get underway.

(COMMERCIAL)

[07:50:00]

BOLDUAN: The head of the U.N. Food Agency says Northern Gaza is already experiencing full-blown famine. And fear of what's to come in Southern Gaza is only growing as Israel now threatens to launch its military offensive in the southern city of Rafah.

But still, the United States is facing new obstacles in their efforts to get aid on the ground as aid is currently stuck out at sea. In part, weather appears to be to blame, but also the potential Israeli offensive in Rafah could complicate what the United States is trying to do there.

CNN's Katie Bo Lillis has been reporting on all of this and she's joining us now. Katie Bo, what's going on here?

KATIE BO LILLIS, CNN REPORTER: Yeah, Kate. So, the U.S. has been building this floating pier that they are going to use to transport aid from ships arriving from Cypress to get aid to desperate Palestinians inside of Gaza. But there's a lot of really basic practical challenges to making this pier actually work even as the Pentagon says that they expect to be able to have this thing operational within days.

And weather conditions play a potentially huge factor here and, in fact, already have. Part of the reason that this aid is still sitting in ships off of the coast of Gaza is because weather conditions forced the U.S. to move this floating pier to a -- to a port in Israel because of high seas. And it's still sitting there even as the Pentagon says that they expect to have this thing operational within days.

In fact, reporting from our colleagues suggests that weather conditions have to be almost unusually perfect for this pier to be -- to be operational. In order to safely use this thing, sea levels have to be -- waves have to be at three foot or below and wind speeds have to be at 15 miles per hour or less. But according to a marine data center in Israel, conditions in the area where this pier is expected to operate, sea levels are pretty typically at around the three-foot level.

So I think there's some big questions about how frequently the U.S. is even going to -- and its allies are even going to be able to flow aid down this pier once you get it operational. This isn't just going to be an open artery into Gaza.

BOLDUAN: And also adding into the complication you talk about to flow aid down the pier. What happens then? Who -- what's the chain of custody? Who takes the aid from the pier to the shore? LILLIS: Yeah, that's the million-dollar question. The U.S. is refusing to do it because they -- the Biden administration doesn't want its personnel anywhere near Israel. According to U.S. officials, the U.K. had, in fact, offered to do this but has now backed out because of security concerns.

The Pentagon's press secretary is saying that it could be civilian contractors that do this, but not clear who that actually would be. The Pentagon is saying non-U.S. contractors. One source familiar with the matter suggested that one plan under consideration is that it might be Israeli contractors.

But that's the big question. At this point, we don't know, Kate.

BOLDUAN: Hmm. Katie Bo, it's always good to see you. Thanks for bringing us the reporting -- John.

BERMAN: All right. With me now is Democratic Congressman Adam Smith, the ranking member on the House Armed Services Committee. Congressman, always great to have you here.

REP. ADAM SMITH (D-WA): Good to see you, John.

BERMAN: How clear -- and I know you heard Erin Burnett's interview with President Biden the other night. How clear do you think the president's policy toward Israel in terms of supplying weapons is right now?

SMITH: Well, there's on aspect of it that isn't clear -- but overall, it's incredibly clear that the U.S. is supporting Israel. We just passed a massive supplemental. We continue to give weapons to them to defend themselves. Just a couple of weeks ago, we defended them against the attack from Iran. Hundreds of missiles that were shot down and the U.S. played a huge role in that. That's clear.

On the specific aspect of what weapons is he talking about restricting from Israel based on what actions, I don't -- I don't think that was as clear as it was. Now, John Kirby cleared it up quite a bit yesterday. Talking about dumb bombs, specifically, and if the attack in Rafah amounts to a -- you know, basically, a full urban invasion and you're talking about dropping bombs indiscriminately. But I don't think that is as clear as it should be, and I think the president ought to clear it up.

BERMAN: You think it's a communications issue?

SMITH: It's a really complicated problem. I mean, look, Israel is trying to defeat Hamas. That requires military action. At the same time, you have a massive humanitarian crisis.

What the president has been trying to do from the beginning of this conflict is help Israel defend itself, defeat Hamas, and at the same time, minimize that humanitarian catastrophe. That's not easy. It's not easy for Israel and it's not easy for us as we're trying to help them in that effort.

BERMAN: Do you agree with the policy of threatening to withhold certain weapons if Israel goes further into Rafah?

SMITH: I don't think he should have done it publicly. I think the private conversations were very appropriate. I think the other possibility is in-use restrictions. We've done that, for instance, in Ukraine. You know, here's your weapons. You can't fire into Russia.

BERMAN: Why don't you think he should have done it publicly?

SMITH: Because look, the biggest block to a ceasefire right now is Hamas, and that's being largely underreported. There has been a ceasefire agreement on the table for months, which the president brokered, to allow for the return of hostages and a temporary ceasefire. Hamas has blocked that and said no, Israel has to completely withdraw, permanent ceasefire, and oh, by the way, we're only going to return some of the hostages over an extended period of time. That offer has been on the table.

[07:55:07]

We have to keep the pressure on Hamas to agree to that ceasefire.

BERMAN: So what, then, does making the public threat to withhold weapons do?

SMITH: Well, I think it's being way overblown, OK? And obviously, there's politics involved here. The Republicans attack Joe Biden every time he opens his mouth. The notion that this is some kind of huge signal that we're backing off of our support for Israel -- the facts don't back that up.

BERMAN: But you said you wish he hadn't done it publicly and I'm trying to understand why.

SMITH: Well, it doesn't help, OK? What I just said was the idea that somehow this is some huge break with Israel -- well, why is because I think it took pressure off of Hamas when it shouldn't have.

BERMAN: You think it disincentivizes Hamas from making a deal -- some kind of a pause.

SMITH: I think it's a small part of the larger problem.

Look, I mean, some of the broader reporting on this is part of the problem, too. I mean, The New York Times initially reported Hamas agrees to a ceasefire, you know, and it's largely what Israel was asking for. That's not what it was. It wasn't even close. A lot of the global reporting has underscored the problems that Hamas is presenting, and I think that's a problem.

But again, I think this has been blown out of proportion. The U.S. still supports Israel. We also want to get to a better humanitarian situation in Gaza. That's the very difficult terrain the president is trying to navigate.

BERMAN: You spend most of your time in the Northwest and in Washington, D.C. It's always nice to see you here in New York City. SMITH: Yeah

BERMAN: I don't know if you're aware there's a big trial going on here in New York City.

SMITH: Have they been reporting about that?

BERMAN: Every once in a while, we touch on it here.

SMITH: Yeah, great.

BERMAN: What do you think the impact of this trial will be on the election?

SMITH: Well, I think -- look, it's hard to say at this point. You know, in the world that I grew up in, the impact of all of this would have been that Donald Trump would have been out of politics and that would have been the end of it. So what world are we living in? It's kind of hard to say.

Personally, I think this emphasizes the weaknesses that Donald Trump brings to the office on a whole wide variety of different issues. I do think it matters whether or not there's a conviction.

Now, I would also say that day after day after day talking about the president and whether or not he did pay off a porn star based on a sexual relationship, that should undermine his candidacy. It should. But ultimately, it seems like the public wants to see whether or not he's convicted.

BERMAN: Congressman Adam Smith, always great to have you here in New York. Appreciate it.

SMITH: Thanks, John.

BERMAN: All right -- Sara.

SIDNER: All right. He was a celebrated Olympian who became a convicted killer in this death of his girlfriend. Oscar Pistorius, known as "The Bladerunner," has a story that has captivated the world for years. The former Olympic sprinter spent nine years behind bars for the 2013 murder of his then-girlfriend Reeve Steenkamp. But he was recently set free on parole.

David McKenzie has a closer look at his past and how Steenkamp's family has coped all these years.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

DAVID MCKENZIE, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Convicted murderer Oscar Pistorius quietly released from this prison out of the view of cameras to his uncle's mansion under strict parole conditions. He can't speak to the media, leave the city, or drink alcohol.

But back in 2012, this was Oscar Pistorius -- a worldclass athlete and role model overcoming incredible odds.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He's done magnificently well, and I think everybody's proud of him.

MCKENZIE (voice-over): Months later, Oscar Pistorius' global fame became a sordid global notoriety.

REEVE STEENKAMP, MURDRED BY OSCAR PISTORIUS: Hi, I'm Reeva. This is the shooting for the cover of (INAUDIBLE).

MCKENZIE (voice-over): Valentine's Day 2013, he killed his girlfriend, Reeve Steenkamp, an up-and-coming model, shooting her four times through a locked bathroom door. The police finding him bloodied and in shock.

Pistorius said it was an accident and he thought Reeva was an intruder. The state charged him with premediated murder. His trial, a riveting courtroom drama followed by millions.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I will build my case to say that when you got up you had an argument. That's why she ran away screaming.

OSCAR PISTORIUS, MURDERED REEVE STEENKAMP: She wasn't breathing.

MCKENZIE (voice-over): The defense claimed Pistorius was a vulnerable, now broken man who deserve leniency.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We know that uncontested evidence was that when he was on his stumps his balance was seriously compromised and without anything he would not be able to defend himself.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You killed a person. That's what you did, isn't it?

PISTORIUS: I made a mistake.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You killed Reeva Steenkamp. That's what you did.

MCKENZIE: After a nearly 50-day trial stretched over seven months, Pistorius was found guilty of culpable homicide -- a verdict later changed to murder.

Reeva's mother June Steenkamp said she never believed his version of the story and that the pain is raw and real.

"There can never be justice if your loved one is never coming back," she wrote in a statement on his release. "And no amount of time served will bring Reeva back. We, who remain behind, are the ones serving a life sentence."

MCKENZIE: Oscar Pistorius' trial was a global event, but it was also a family tragedy. And June Steenkamp says that she'll never come to terms with her daughter's death and how she died.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SIDNER: All right.