Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Dominique Strauss-Kahn Released From House Arrest; Anthony Trial Resumes Soon; Kareem Abdul-Jabbar On NBA Lockout; Face Of Changing America

Aired July 01, 2011 - 12:00   ET

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

(EVENT CONTINUES FROM LAST HOUR)

KENNETH THOMPSON, ATTORNEY FOR ALLEGED VICTIM: When I got back to New York City, I spoke with the victim and I met with her daughter. And both of them individually met with me with tears in their eyes and told me that the prosecutors here had repeatedly screamed and yelled at her. The little 15-year-old daughter told me that she was outside of the DA's office behind -- when her mother was behind closed doors with the prosecution team, and all she could hear were the prosecutors screaming and yelling at her mother as she was trying to do homework.

She became concerned for her mother. And then when there was a break, and they went out to talk to someone, they returned.

That someone was me, because when I found out that they were mistreating her, I told them to stop going forward with a interview. They wanted to continue. I told them, "Wait until I get back to New York City."

What the victim's daughter told me is that when the prosecutors walked back into that office, they screamed at her mother, "Get out! Get out! Get out of here!" And they threw her mother out of that office.

This little girl had tears in her eyes when she told me how they had treated her mother. I was so concerned, that I demanded a meeting with the district attorney himself, Cy Vance.

They didn't grant it, so I had to meet with the second in charge, Dan Alonso, who I worked with when we were both federal prosecutors in Brooklyn. And I complained to Dan Alonso about how they had been treating the victim, and I told him clearly that the way they had treated the victim was no way to treat a rape victim.

Then, the following week, after I had been on this case since May, and had been at this office many time times, had many phone calls with the prosecutors, many meetings, many discussions, I learned for the first time by reading "The New York Times" that one of Cy Vance's top aides, the third in charge, the woman who is in charge of the entire trial division, is married to one of Dominique Strauss-Kahn's lawyers. She's married to the man who's been in this courtroom trying to get Dominique Strauss-Kahn off for his attack on the victim.

That troubled me, because I believe that as the lawyer for the victim, the district attorney had an obligation to tell me that one of his top aides was married to one of Dominique Strauss-Kahn's lawyers in this case. And so I demanded a meeting with Cy Vance, and I was granted a meeting with Cy Vance.

And I asked Cy Vance, how could he ensure that his number three person would not get information from all the other prosecutors here and inadvertently tell her husband when they're home at night? I said, "I want to make sure that you have taken the necessary steps to surely wall off this prosecutor. I want to see the e-mail that went to every prosecutor in the office saying that Karen Friedman Agnifilo had recused herself."

I wanted to see the letter that went to every prosecutor in the office. And guess what? There is no letter. There is no e-mail.

Cy Vance told me, "Tell the victim you've spoken to the DA," as if that was sufficient. And then when I asked Cy Vance to explain "The New York Times" report that after Dominique Strauss-Kahn was taken off that Air France flight by the Port Authority police on May 14th, and turned over to the custody of the NYPD, and after he had been taken all the way up to Harlem, to the Special Victims Squad, and had been in that station house for at least five hours, and had asked for an egg sandwich, asked for coffee, said he wanted to call Europe because he had a meeting with the German chancellor, Angela Merkel, the next day, and never asked to speak to a lawyer. Said his handcuffs was too tight.

Why didn't the New York City Police Department, with those very fine and experienced detectives of the Special Victims Squad, attempt to ask Dominique Strauss-Kahn whether he had attempted to rape or sexually assaulted the victim? It does not make sense.

It is Policing 101, that when you have a suspect in custody for a very serious crime of rape, murder, or robbery, one of the first things you do is you try to get them to make statements. They didn't do that in this case. Instead, for five hours, he sat there, and no one had the guts to go up to him and ask him whether he had committed these acts.

On his own, at 9:00 that night, Dominique Strauss-Kahn said, "I want to speak to my lawyer. Can I have my cell phone?"

And he called his lawyer, spoke to his lawyer, hung up. And at that point, detectives said, "Do you want to talk about the incident?" And he said, "I was all ready to talk about the incident, but my lawyers told me not to."

So I asked DA Cy Vance, "Why wasn't Dominique Strauss-Kahn questioned before he asked to speak to his lawyer?" DA Cy Vance had no answer at all. That does not make sense.

So, now, what you have to understand is relatively straightforward. We believe that the district attorney is laying the foundation to dismiss this case. Anyone can see that.

They agreed to let Dominique Strauss-Kahn freely roam the streets of New York City or any other city in the United States, knowing full well that the victim, to this very day, maintains that he sexually assaulted her in that room, knowing very well to this very day that the forensic evidence shows that, knowing very well to this very day that they have a picture of her bruised vagina, knowing very well to this very day that she suffered a tear to her ligament when he threw her down to the ground, and knowing very well to this day that they have a pair of stockings that were ripped by Dominique Strauss-Kahn.

So, the district attorney of New York County has an obligation to stand by this rape victim. He has an obligation to stand up for all women who have been raped or sexually assaulted.

Now, it is a fact that the victim here made some mistakes, but that doesn't mean she's not a rape victim. And so all of this stuff that they leaked to "The New York Times" was designed to discredit this woman.

And I spoke to her a little while ago, and through her tears, her hurt, she asked me, "Why did they do this to me?" And I said, "I don't know why."

And now she is determined. She's not going to remain in hiding anymore. She's going to come before you all and she's going to tell you what Dominique Strauss-Kahn did to her, and she's going to tell you what the prosecutors in this office did to her, because we don't have confidence that they're ever going to put Dominique Strauss-Kahn on trial. So the victim will stand before you and tell you, because she said, "I will go to my grave knowing the truth, knowing what this man did to me."

So --

QUESTION: Is she here?

THOMPSON: She's not here. That is the truth. And here's the situation.

The DA called me yesterday at 5:30 at my office and said, "Ken, can you come meet with us right now? 5:30. I said, "No. Can we talk?" "Yes."

They called me at 6:00 and they told me that they had put together a letter of some of the statements that our client made, the victim made. And they said, "Ken, we turned that over to the defense attorneys. We had to."

I said, "That's fine. But I think that some of the things that you turned over isn't really Brady (ph)." Yes, it's Brady (ph)."

What that didn't tell you clearly up in that courtroom is that everything that's listed in that letter, every single thing that's listed in that letter -- and you all will get a copy of it -- came from the victim voluntarily. No one in this office could deny that I'm the one who called them and told them that the victim wanted to voluntarily tell them things.

They told me yesterday, "Ken, when we go to court, we're going to tell the judge that Ken Thompson's the one who told me about this," but you really didn't hear that upstairs.

Yes?

QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)

THOMPSON: Let me just say this. Listen --

QUESTION: What about the recorded message that supposedly they got (OFF-MIKE)?

THOMPSON: Well, here's the deal. Here's the deal. I'm sure you're a prosecutor before, right? The point is this -- her credibility is important.

Any rape victim's credibility is important, but you cannot become blind to the physical corroborating evidence. Is it true? Is it true that Dominique Strauss-Kahn bruised her vagina to the point where when they did the rape kit -- I'm not finished sir. I'm not finished.

QUESTION: You didn't answer my question.

THOMPSON: I'm answering your question. You may not like the answer, but I'm answering your question.

Is it true that they have the physical evidence to show that it wasn't consensual? They have to tell you. They know they have the picture of the injuries. They know it happened to her shoulder. They know they have the stockings.

So, you're right, credibility is important. He was in the room. She was in the room. But you cannot discount the powerful physical evidence that was left behind during that assault.

(CROSSTALK)

QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)

THOMPSON: Linda, I'm going to answer that question.

Here's the deal. The prosecutors told me yesterday -- first of all, I have never heard that tape. I asked them to let me listen to the tape. I have not heard that tape.

The first time I heard about that tape, Linda, was late last night. OK? That's number one.

Number two, the prosecutors told me that they have a recording of her on tape with this guy in prison, and she talks about the assault. And I said, "Did she change her story to this guy in prison?" They told me no. She told this guy the same story she's been telling us from day one.

Now, the victim did not know that the calls were recorded. I'm a former federal prosecutor. I know that. She did not know that.

So when she was on the phone with this guy who she did not know was a drug dealer, she told him about what happened in the room, and it was consistent with what she's told the grand jury and what she told the prosecutors from day one. That's something they should have told you.

QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)

SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN ANCHOR: You've been listening to an extraordinary development in the case of Dominique Strauss-Kahn.

We have been listening to the plaintiff's attorney, Kenneth Thompson, laying out the extraordinary detail, what the alleged victim is saying happened between herself, the hotel maid, and Strauss-Kahn in this hotel room. He is certainly not backing down from the charges, but he is also making very serious allegations -- it's a very dramatic departure from the DA's office, the prosecution itself -- that he says he believes they're going to drop this case, that they are essentially setting up his client to drop this case, and they have an obligation to move forward. That there's forensics as well as physical evidence he says that proves his client, the alleged victim, this hotel maid, was indeed sexually assaulted by Strauss-Kahn.

All of this happens as Strauss-Kahn is actually released on his own recognizance. That, after the prosecution bringing forward to a judge, saying we've got some issues about her credibility, and the judge essentially saying he will be allowed to walk freely, to leave his house arrest.

And this is far from over. This case will continue, but there are dramatic twists and turns.

We're going to take a really break. When we come back, a very real possibility that we are going to hear from the district attorney, Cyrus Vance Jr., following these remarks.

We also have analysis. We've got our own Susan Candiotti. She was outside that courthouse. She was in the proceedings before.

And we've got Jeffrey Toobin, our legal analyst. He is on the phone to kind of break down where all of this goes from here.

This has captured the international spotlight on this international leader who was disgraced, and now there are many, many questions about whether or no this trial will even move forward.

We're going to take a really quick break. We'll have all those details coming up very shortly.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MALVEAUX: We are following the breaking news, stunning developments, in the case of Dominique Strauss-Kahn, the former IMF head and potential candidate in France. He is now being released on his own recognizance.

This happening out of a Manhattan courtroom. You see pictures there of Strauss-Kahn and his wife -- as well, his legal team -- leaving the courthouse. That happened just within the last hour or so. This, after a judge heard from the prosecution that there were holes that were in the case because of questions about the alleged victim's credibility.

I want to play for you a bit of the court proceeding that took place earlier, and how the judge came to this conclusion, the presentation of the prosecution when they realized that there were enough questions about the main alleged victim in this case, that they would allow Strauss-Kahn to essentially go free and not be under house arrest.

Let's take a listen to the judge.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

All right. I understand that the circumstances surrounding this case from the viewpoint of the parties have changed substantially, and I agree Mr. Strauss-Kahn -- as I said when the original securing order was granted, its purpose was to assure your appearance not to be some type of a punishment. And I have no doubt that you have complied with that order in every way.

In light of recent developments, the risk that you would not be here appears to have receded quite a bit. Of course, the case is not over, as you just heard, and you will be expected to appear here on the adjourned date, unless the court orders otherwise in the interim or we change the date, and I'm confident that you will.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MALVEAUX: Want to bring in our own Susan Candiotti, who's outside the courthouse.

You were in these proceedings that the prosecution brought forward. What was the case that they were making before the judge here? What did they say about how their case is potentially falling apart?

SUSAN CANDIOTTI, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, they talked about serious issues that had arisen during the course of their investigation, that they interviewed the alleged victim in this case several times, over several weeks. Their investigators did a lot of legwork. And they said to the court, "We have developed serious credibility issues," but they didn't go into detail.

We now have the detail, Suzanne. It is contained in this filing from prosecutors, and here's the headline.

It contains some stunning new information that we have not previously reported about what prosecutors are saying in part led them to today's hearing. Here's the headline.

They state that, immediately following the incident, that they interviewed the alleged victim, the hotel maid, several times about exactly what she said happened after the alleged sexual encounter. And during the course of that time, they said that after the alleged attack, prosecutors said that she fled to an area of the 28th floor where that hotel suite was and she told them repeatedly that she remained in the hallway until she said she saw Dominique Strauss-Kahn leave by an elevator. And that is when she told authorities she reported the incident to her supervisor. Again, they said that she repeated that several times.

However, prosecutors said that they subsequently learned that she did not immediately report this to her supervisor and remain in the hallway after the alleged attack. That, afterwards, she went on to -- in their words, "She proceeded to clean a nearby room and then return to the suite where this alleged attack occurred, and began to clean that suite before she reported the incident to the supervisor."

So, Suzanne, this is brand new information that we have not heard before, that wasn't said in open court, but is contained in this written document.

This document also goes on to state what we have previously reported, quoting sources, but now it's on the record. The prosecutors said that she had admitted that -- the hotel maid admitted that she had lied on her asylum application when she came to the United States from her native Guinea.

You heard her attorney say that she admitted to these lies because she was afraid about what might happen. But here, prosecutors point out that she was provided with a tape recording on what she should say in that application, that she memorized it, said this in interviews several times, and now acknowledges that she had lied about that. Talking also about -- they said about a gang rape. We previously reported that she said she was previously sexually assaulted in the past, and that she said that this was also a part of the asylum process, and she had lied about that taking place.

One more thing that this states about credibility issues. It says that she acknowledged to authorities that for the past two years, she lied on her income tax forms, lying that she had a second child, when, in fact, she only had one, claiming a friend's child as a second dependent. And that she also, they said, misrepresented her income in order to maintain the housing where she is currently living.

So, after that, they pretty much just summarized as they state that she also -- it said that she was untruthful to the prosecutors in this case about a variety, as I said, of different topics, including her background, as they put it, her present circumstances, and her personal relationships. Some of that has been reported in a single news report, but they're not documenting any of that in this court filing, Suzanne.

But certainly, what a stunning turn of events in just the last 24 hours. Here we have Dominique Strauss-Kahn walking into the courtroom with a very serious look on his face and able to leave after a pat on his back from his attorney, after he is now allowed to move on and be released on his own recognizance. But as the judge pointed out repeatedly, this doesn't mean the investigation is over. They are continuing to pursue exactly what happened.

MALVEAUX: And Susan, just a quick question for you here. In those documents, is there anything about these alleged reports -- we saw something mentioned in "The New York Times" about it, and people have been asking questions about a conversation she had with an inmate about potentially making money or benefiting in some way from filing charges. Is there anything from her team that talks about that allegation?

CANDIOTTI: No, Suzanne. As I said, the key elements had to do with what happened the day of the incident, where she was, and what exactly she did. The income tax information, the part about the asylum application in which she admits lies -- and then, as I said, it generally sums up, and there are a variety of other issues in which she was untruthful. That's it.

MALVEAUX: And Susan, what was the reaction inside of the courtroom when they made that presentation?

CANDIOTTI: Well, there was absolute silence. As the expression goes, you could hear a pin drop.

Everyone was hanging on every word stated by the prosecutor as she laid out the information she had. And when the judge spoke as well -- again, Dominique Strauss-Kahn was not asked any questions and he did not offer any information to the court. And it was over and done with within a brief 10 minutes.

And then he strode out of the courtroom, in effect at this time, being released on his own recognizance, that those bail conditions go away. He won't be allowed to travel outside the United States, but he will be able to travel about while this case goes on. But the judge did issue a stern warning that he better appear in court on July 18th.

MALVEAUX: OK. Susan, thank you very much. Excellent reporting.

I want to bring in our own Jeffrey Toobin on the phone.

And Jeff, before we get into so many of the details that have been presented here, I just want your impression, your reaction to what has happened over the last 30 minutes. It seems absolutely extraordinary that you have a situation where the prosecution, the DA, comes forward with a case, says that the witness has some credibility issues, and the attorney for the plaintiff, the alleged victim, comes forward and, basically, you see a whole team deteriorate before your very eyes.

I mean, can this case even go forward when you've got this team in such turmoil?

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN SR. LEGAL ANALYST: Suzanne, I've heard a lot of lawyer press conferences in my day. I have never heard anything remotely like the Ken Thompson, the lawyer for the maid's press conference, earlier, just a minutes ago. I mean, the way he excoriated the prosecution, detailing his version of the facts, and accused, in no uncertain terms, the district attorney of New York, Cy Vance, of selling out his client, of tossing this case out the window to benefit a powerful defendant at the expense of a victimized immigrant maid, it was just an extraordinary scene.

And we have just been informed that Cy Vance, Jr., the district attorney, will be having his own press conference, apparently, in the next few minutes. And he's going to have a lot of questions to answer, because that was some set of accusations that we just heard against him.

MALVEAUX: How can they possibly move forward when they're not even on the same page? I mean, is it possible for the attorney, Kenneth Thompson, and for the maid, who is unidentified, but may go before cameras and essentially bring forward their own case, and do it without the DA?

TOOBIN: Well, they certainly can't bring a criminal case without the DA. They certainly can bring a civil case and sue Dominique Strauss- Kahn for civil damages. And I expect they will certainly do that. But in terms of whether Strauss-Kahn can be criminally prosecuted, I would say that case is now hanging by a thread.

What the prosecution did today was very close to throwing in the towel. It has not thrown in the towel, but by essentially describing its own witness as a liar, and giving Dominique Strauss-Kahn bail conditions that are essentially no bail conditions at all, they are signaling that they think this case is heading for a very favorable resolution for the defense.

MALVEAUX: What is next?

(LAUGHTER)

TOOBIN: Good question. I mean, given the way things have gone, I would certainly hesitate to predict anything.

Well, I think the thing we will hear next is, how does Cyrus Vance, who is the prosecutor who brought this case with great fanfare, embracing the credibility of the victim, describe what happened and whether he is really selling out his -- this victim, whether he is in fact responding rationally and logically to new developments, or whether he is simply throwing in the towel because he's afraid of losing to a powerful defendant and his skilled and expensive lawyers. This is a very difficult moment for Cyrus Vance, and he better have some answers.

MALVEAUX: Did you hear anything, Jeffrey, that was presented by the attorney of the alleged victim, anything at all? I mean, it was unbelievable, the level of detail about this alleged assault. Was there anything that gave you pause in terms of whether or not this case could move forward?

TOOBIN: Well, you know, I think we have to keep in mind that we are hearing a defense attorney's characterization of his client's story. By definition, the defense attorney is going to play, is going to put forth the facts in a favorable light, so you know, we weren't hear from the witness. We were hearing from the witness' lawyer and I think we need to keep that in mind.

But he made a very compelling case that this woman was a victim of a horrible, vicious crime and the D.A. is throwing her to the wolves. That was the case he made. I thought it was a persuasive case, but I also believe in hearing both sides of the story.

So, I think it's important for us to hear how Cyrus Vance characterizes what his office did and apparently, we're going to hear from him any minute.

SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN ANCHOR: We are. And, Jeff, real quick before we go to a break, whose job is it to kind of deal with all of this mess? To figure out whether or not they're dropping the ball, whether they should move on the case, whether or not there's been any kind of misconduct? Who has to deal with all of this now?

TOOBIN: Well, the district attorney has his own authority to bring a case or not bring a case. That's why district attorneys run for office. That's why voters either vote him in or vote him out, because they're supposed to administer justice in a fair way.

There really is no review of his decision to bring a case or not bring a case. This is a decision within his sole discretion and the voters can decide whether they want to keep him in office based the decision he makes. And this is obviously a defining moment in the very new career of Cyrus Vance as the district attorney. The district attorney of New York county was Robert Morgenthau (ph) for 30 years and Cyrus Vance, the son of the former secretary of state, just won that election a couple of years ago. And so, we'll see how to reacts to his first major public controversy and crisis.

MALVEAUX: All right. Jeffery Toobin, stay with us.

We're going to take a quick break and we'll be looking for those comments from the district attorney, Cyrus Vance, Jr., what his side of all of this is. This dramatic twist, this dramatic turn in the trial of Dominique Strauss-Kahn.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MALVEAUX: Following some breaking news out of the case of Dominic Strauss-Kahn, the former IMF head. We are looking at live pictures there outside of the courtroom, some dramatic twist and turns today.

Earlier, a judge agreeing with the prosecution that there were some holes, some credibility issues regarding the alleged victim in this case, the maid who alleges that Strauss-Kahn raped her in a Manhattan hotel room, that there were enough questions about the credibility in her story, that he was released on his recognizance. So, he's a free man in Manhattan.

We also heard as well from the attorney of the alleged victim, saying that her story, in fact, is accurate, giving lots of forensic and physical, what he said, was evidence that would prove that case. Also, he made the accusation that the D.A. was essentially throwing his client under the bus and that they were setting up a scenario in which this case would be dropped against Strauss-Kahn.

We will be hearing from the D.A., the Manhattan D.A., Cyrus Vance, Jr., fairly shortly, outside of that courtroom. When he comes to those microphones, we will bring that to you live, we're keeping a very close on that development story.

We're also following another story, that is the latest in the Casey Anthony murder trial. We are all geared up to hear from the rebuttal witnesses today, but proceedings actually came to a screeching halt. The defense had questions about one of the witnesses that prosecutors plan to call.

And so, the judge ordered an indefinite recess. But he was clearly not happy about what was taking place.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JUDGE BELVIN PERRY, ORANGE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT: Remember, you all can take as much time as you want. But you got jurors back there and may have been sequestered and there are real problems and there are imaginary problems. And I hope this is a real problem and not an imaginary problem.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MALVEAUX: Defense attorney and former prosecutor, Holly Hughes, is with us again. Holly, what do you make of what happened today here? Does it appear that the defense has real or imaginary problems with that rebuttal witness?

HOLLY HUGHES, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Well, in my opinion, they are imaginary but they're going to put on the record that they think it's real because this is one more thing that Jose Baez does not want to be held in contempt for. What they're fighting about, Suzanne, just to bring the viewers up to speed, this particular witness --

MALVEAUX: All right. Holly, I'm sorry, we're going to have to interrupt. We got the Manhattan D.A., Cyrus Vance, at the mike. Let's take a listen.

CYRUS VANCE, MANHATTAN D.A.: Can you hear me now?

Mike, come on over here.

Can you hear me?

MALVEAUX: There, trying to get everything settled in here for him to make a statement. Just make sure that they hear him. Here he goes.

VANCE: Thank you. Good afternoon.

I'm Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance. And I'm here today to provide further details regarding today's court proceedings. But afterwards, I will not be taking any questions.

Six weeks ago, an independent grand jury in Manhattan indicted the defendant on several serious charges based on its review of the evidence available at the time, which included the statements of the complainant, corroborating witnesses, police investigators, and forensic evidence. As our prosecutor said in court today, after the indictment against the defendant was filed, we continued as an office to investigate the case rigorously as we do and are obligated to do. That investigation raised concerns about the complaining witness' credibility. And we turn over to the defense the information that did rise to those concerns as we are ethnically and legally obligated to do.

In addition, because our request for substantial bail was based in part on our assessment of the strength of our case at the time of the indictment, we disclosed this information to the court today as well.

Today's proceedings did not dismiss the indictment or any of the charges against the defendant. Our prosecutors from the Manhattan D.A.'s office will to continue their investigation into these alleged crimes and will do so until we have uncovered all relevant facts.

The vindication of the rights of sex crime victims is among the highest priorities of this office. And with regard to the treatment of this victim, we believe we have done nothing but to support her in everything in power to maintain her privacy and to keep her safe and we will continue to do so.

After the indictment was filed, I stood here and I said that the highest duty of a prosecutor is to ensure that the safeguards of American law are provided to all who come before our courts. Our judicial system seeks to ensure fairness and justice for both victims and defendants.

As prosecutors, our duty is to do what is right in every case without fear or favor where ever that leads. The disclosures we made that led to today's proceedings reflect that principle. In this case, as within every case, our office's commitment is to the truth and the facts and that will govern how we proceed. Thank you very much.

MALVEAUX: Very brief statement from manhattan D.A, Cyrus Vance, Jr. He said he would not be taking any questions, but he also made it very clear that there had been information that had come forward after the indictment that investigation raised certain concerns and questions about the alleged victim's credibility, that they would bring that before the judge, that that was appropriate, and that the charges have not dismissed, that the investigation continues.

He also was quite defiant and said that we believe we've done nothing but support the alleged victim in this case.

I want to bring our Jeffrey Toobin back into the mix here.

Jeff, how does this complicate things? I mean, obviously, you have the D.A., who says we're going to move forward here. The charges have not been dismissed, but they have presented this evidence -- what they say is evidence -- that the victim is no longer credible.

How does that -- how does that impact what happens next?

TOOBIN: Well, it means that this case is hanging by a thread because you can't have a sexual assault prosecution even with DNA evidence as there apparently is in this case if the prosecution is asserting that the victim is a liar. Now, they don't say that in so many words, but they certainly are saying she has major credibility problems. They have consented to a complete and total surrender on bail conditions for Dominique Strauss-Kahn, the defendant.

So, yes, they are saying the prosecution has not been dropped, but they are not saying that it won't soon be dropped and you can be sure that the defense in this case led by Benjamin Brafman are going to say try this case or dismiss it. And it's not at all clear the prosecution in any position to try to it.

MALVEAUX: And, Jeff, final question -- do you have any idea when we will see Strauss-Kahn again back in this courtroom? When they will present further evidence that this is a case that will move forward? What happens next?

TOOBIN: Well, the short answer is we don't know to a precise date. In keeping with the procedures of cases like this, though, I have to say there are not many cases with so many bizarre and fast moving developments, but chances are, in a week or two, I would think, the prosecution and defense are going to have to make some real decisions about whether this case is moving forward. And the defense is going to be basically saying you guys got a fish or cut, and the prosecution's going to have a make a decision about whether this case is proceeding and I imagine that will be in the next few weeks.

MALVEAUX: All right. Jeffrey Toobin, thank you for putting it all to perspective. Obviously, a lot of twist and turns, dramatic case of Dominique Strauss-Kahn -- he is a free man. And there are some serious questions about the alleged victim in this case, but her attorney insists that she, indeed, was allegedly sexually assaulted.

We are also following another case very closely. A lot of people paying attention to Casey Anthony trial and we have just gotten some information that it's going to resume at 1:00 Eastern Time. That's 15 minutes from now. The judge says he is going to go full steam ahead.

I want to bring in our own Holly Hughes, who's been following this with us.

What do we anticipate in the next 15 minutes?

HOLLY HUGHES, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY/FORMER PROSECUTOR: Well, what we're going to see is both sides of attorneys getting ready. Prosecution is getting ready to examine their witnesses for the rebuttal case, Suzanne. And you better believe they're going to cut right to the heart of the matter.

We had two really big issues in this case, and they both go to first degree murder. Number one, the defense put on Dr. Warner Spitz, who is a forensic pathologist. And he said Dr. G., the state's medical examiner, should have opened up that skull. I found brain matter inside. The prosecution is prepared to put on their forensic anthropologist who conducted a washing of that baby's skull and said, when I did that wash, I did that rinse out, there wasn't brain matter in there. That directly refutes what the defense said. And the second really big thing is that Cindy Anthony took the stand in the defense case and she said that all of those searches for chloroform were done by her. That's significant because the prosecution says this is first degree murder because Casey premeditated. She planned ahead. For months ahead of time, she conducted 84 computer searches for chloroform. They're alleging she used that chloroform on her little baby girl, Caylee, who was the victim in this case, and then duct taped her mouth.

So when Cindy, who is Casey Anthony's mother, the defendant's mother, takes the stand and says, oh, no, those searches were all mine, of course that's a problem. The prosecutors are going to bring in Cindy's bosses because they have work records and the work records prove Cindy was at work. But when she took the stand for the defense, she said, oh, no, no, those records aren't accurate. I could come and go as I pleased. I wasn't really there, I was home doing the computer searches. Prosecutors have the president of the company that Cindy Anthony worked for and they're going to put that president on the stand to say our records are accurate. When an employee is in the building, it shows on the time card. If they can prove that Cindy Anthony lied, it is a dark day for the defense, Suzanne.

MALVEAUX: And, Holly, what do we -- what do you think about who presented a better case? The prosecutors or the defense? What do we make of Casey Anthony's fate here?

HUGHES: Wow, I think by far the prosecution put on a better case. And, you know, to be very serious about it, I know sometimes we joke to lighten it up because it is a murder case, it is very serious stuff. And what the prosecution did was build their puzzle one piece at a time, Suzanne. They went through step by step. They took that jury into the life of Casey Anthony. This is what she did for the 31 days her baby was missing. This is what happened when we found the baby's bones. This is the only person it leads back to. They've got that death band on that hair in the trunk of the car.

Suzanne, there's no good reason for a death band, which means decomposition had occurred in that baby's hair when it fell out in the trunk of her mother's car. The smell from people who know what the smell means. Even if you disregard the science, we were talking to Richard Herman earlier who said the sniffer machine is junk. But here's the thing, Suzanne, her mother is a nurse, her father is a homicide detective. The tow truck driver has smelled decomposing bodies. The lead detective, Yuri Melich. All those folks and more said it is the smell of human decomposition.

And as a prosecutor, Suzanne, I've personally been on scenes with decomposed bodies. I've smelled human decomposition. And let me tell you something, you don't forget it and you don't mistake it for rotten pizza.

MALVEAUX: OK. Well, Holly, thank you. We'll be watching. Ten minutes away now. That court case is going to resume and we'll be paying very close attention.

Thank you, Holly. HUGHES: Great (ph).

MALVEAUX: Well, NBA players are locked out. I'm going to ask one of basketball's greatest if the labor fight is soon going to sink the season. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar. He's in the CNN NEWSROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MALVEAUX: Now to the NBA lockout. Basketball fans and those TV sponsors are asking, will we have pro ball later this year? Players say they don't want a lockout, but NBA Commissioner Dave Stern says most teams in the league are hurting.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DAVID STERN, NBA COMMISSIONER: The goal here has been to make the league profitable and to have a league where all 30 teams can compete. And since neither of those goals stated earlier have been achieved, the owners really don't have any choice.

DEREK FISHER, LOS ANGELES LAKERS: A lot of our fans and people that follow our game that although we're not going to miss any games at this point, still just don't like the prospect of a lockout. We don't like it either.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MALVEAUX: Joining me from Los Angeles to talk about this is one of the greatest players in the game's history. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar.

Kareem, I mean, it's very nice to see you. I remember you -- watching you as a kid. You won six championships, scored the most points in league history. What do you think about this? Should there be, will there be a season this fall?

KAREEM ABDUL-JABBAR, FORMER PRO BASKETBALL PLAYER: Well, I doubt there's going to be a season. The owners have too many problems that they need to solve and they have to get those problems resolved before they can continue to do business. So many of the teams are losing money that it makes it almost imperative that the owner haves to get some resolution of the issues that are so important to them.

They're paying a lot of the players too much money. Some of the guys that are sitting on the bench and don't play much are making way too much money to justify that expenditure by the owners. The small market teams are having a hard time competing with the teams in big markets because there's no revenue sharing and that's basically an issue that the owners have to settle among themselves. But there are a lot of little things that affect the whole -- the big picture and they all need to be resolved before they can go forward.

MALVEAUX: Sure. Who should be giving up more, the players or the owners?

ABDUL-JABBAR: Well, I think every side has to be compassionate about what the other side is -- what their issues are. If that can happen, then they can resolve this. But, you know, when everybody's just fighting for their little piece of the pie and they don't want to give up anything, it makes it very difficult for any resolution to take place. And sometimes it takes time for that to sink in on both sides. So, you know, what do you do?

MALVEAUX: It's a tough thing. A lot of fans wondering that very question. We don't want to let you go without asking about LeBron James. He took a lot of heat this year for signing with Miami and then underperforming in the finals. What do you think about that? Do you think it's fair for him to shoulder so much of the blame there?

ABDUL-JABBAR: Well, I don't think that any one person can win the world championship for a team. It's impossible. It's a team game and I think the Dallas team proved that this year in how they won the world championship.

But I think LeBron put a lot of pressure on himself just by the way he handled the public spotlight on him. I think he got into it a little bit too much and made a lot of people feel that he could do it all. And then when he didn't do it all by himself, which is an impossible thing, they came down on him.

So, you know, lot of this is his own fault, but I'm sure that he'll handle it better as time goes on. He probably learned a lot from this and will take a different posture with the public as time goes on.

MALVEAUX: All right. OK. All right, well, thank you so much for your perspective. We miss the sky hook, the short shorts back in the day, but it's such a pleasure to see you, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar. Thanks again.

ABDUL-JABBAR: Nice to see you, Suzanne. Thank you for having me.

MALVEAUX: It's a pleasure.

Well, we'll be watching those labor talks as well and we're going to be back after this quick break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN ANCHOR: CNN's "In Depth" focus this week, the face of changing America. We take a look now at how the U.S. is changing on many levels. In Texas, there's a fight over the state's four congressional -- the new congressional seats. And our Ed Lavandera take a look at it.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ED LAVANDERA, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Whenever a redistricting showdown looms in Texas, political pundits can't help but think there's got to be better way. But each suggestion ends in a punch line as the editor in chief of the texastribune.org found out.

EVAN SMITH, EDITOR-IN-CHIEF, THE TEXAS TRIBUNE: (INAUDIBLE) maybe we ought to take the process of re-drawing these maps out of the hands of politicians and put them in the hands of technocrats. What do you think about that?

KEL SELIGER (R), TEXAS STATE SENATOR: We ought to take the calories out of fried chicken, too, but --

SMITH: Not entirely possible.

LAVANDERA: The last redistricting battle in Texas ended with Texas Democrats fleeing the state to block the Republicans' plan for a new congressional map. Fifty-one lawmakers secretly escaped to Ardmore, Oklahoma. They spent days hanging around the pool of a Holiday Inn Hotel trying to kill the bill. Redistricting brings out the worst in politics. Just ask long time political columnist Dave McNeely.

DAVE MCNEELY, TEXAS POLITICAL COLUMNIST: The long (INAUDIBLE). It's a time when people who have previously been friends can become enemies and it's a time when, if revenge can be gotten by those this power, it will be.

LAVANDERA: So welcome to the latest round of Texas redistricting. It's even more intense this time around because of the state's population growth. Texas will get four new congressional seats, but Democrats say at least two of the new districts should be drawn from minority candidates.

TREY MARTINEZ FISCHER (D), TEXAS STATE HOUSE: Ninety percent of all growth in the last decade in this state was minority growth. Sixty- five percent of that alone, Latinos. So you would expect that these new congressional districts would reflect the minority populations that created the opportunity. And, unfortunately, they don't.

LAVANDERA: Democratic groups have already filed lawsuits to block the Republicans' plan, which is still waiting for Governor Rick Perry's approval. Republicans argue that because Texas is a conservative state, that the new districts should reflect that. Republicans hold a super majority in the state legislature and were able to pass their plan without Democratic support, and are now planning to battle it out in court.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BURT SOLOMONS (R), TEXAS STATE HOUSE: Everything in context with this congressional map (ph) seems to be leading to the courthouse. No matter what Mr. Sullivan and I or the legislature does, it's going - it's going to go to the courthouse because the group seems intent on making sure it goes to the courthouse.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Hold on, it's going to be another bumpy political ride.

SUZANNE MALVEAU, CNN ANCHOR: CNN NEWSROOM continues right now with Randi Kaye. Hey, Randi.