Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Why Wisconsin Matters to You; Jury Selection in Sandusky Case; Making History at the Palace; Political Dividing Lines Growing; Florida Counties Stop Voter Role Purge; Jury Selection In Sandusky Case; The Help Desk; Venus Crosses The Sun; Prince Philip In Hospital

Aired June 05, 2012 - 12:00   ET

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

SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN ANCHOR: Thank you, Kyra.

I'm Suzanne Malveaux. I want to get right to it.

New violence in Syria, opposition group reports 24 more people were killed today. Meanwhile, Syria's government announced it is expelling diplomats from 11 countries. This comes a week after those nations expelled Syrian officials in a coordinated response to a massacre in the ongoing violent crackdown against the opposition.

A royal moment, 60 years in the making.

(VIDEO CLIP PLAYS)

The fans celebrating her diamond jubilee. Crowds waited for hours, they waited for hours in the rain to catch a glimpse of the queen and other members of the royal family. You could see them on the balcony of Buckingham Palace. Another historic milestone.

In the next hour, the queen's speech. We're going to bring that to you live.

And if you don't think that today's recall election in Wisconsin has anything to do with you, think again. Governor Scott Walker's fight for political survival has big implications for November's presidential election.

Now, some see it as a referendum on the role of the size of government. Stakes are high for Democrats as well as Republicans. The race is really seen as a test of the Tea Party versus union support. It could give either President Obama or Mitt Romney an edge in Wisconsin as well.

Ted Rowlands, he is joining us live from Madison with an in- depth look at this race.

Ted, first of all, a lot of people watching this because you have got national figures who have weighed in on this, you've got union power, you have the issue of bargaining rights, you've got the Tea Party.

Do we have any idea which way this is going to go?

TED ROWLANDS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, right now the poll shows that Governor Walker does have a lead, but the lead is very small and within the margin of error, at least the latest polling indicates that. That's internal polling, though, the last major poll gave him a 7-point lead.

So, it really is going to come down to getting people out to vote. The Democrats need to push a lot of people out there. Both candidates are out there throughout the state today and they have armies on both sides making calls, it's going to come down to that getting out the vote -- as it always does. But Walker going in does have a slight lead.

MALVEAUX: Ted, I understand that really, the folks who are on the fence, the undecideds, they are not weighing in at this point. It's really all about those on both sides as you mentioned.

What is the turnout look like so far and how much more time do they have to go to the polls?

ROWLANDS: Well, the polls are open until 8:00 tonight. They opened 7:00 a.m. local time, Central Standard Time, so there is plenty of time. Long lines, though, have been reported, not only during today's polling but during the early voting periods, a lot of people came out all across the state to vote early so they could avoid the long lines. They are expecting record breaking numbers in terms of the turnout.

So, and it's a glorious day here, no reason if you want to go out to vote that you can't. The weather is just absolutely fantastic.

MALVEAUX: Ted, I understand that they are breaking all records, the governor himself breaking all records when it comes to people who have raised money for him to win this race, and also a lot of support coming from people who are out of state. Why is that so important?

ROWLANDS: Well, think about it. I mean, why would people pour money into a state's gubernatorial race, a recall race, if you know, a millionaire in another state doesn't really care about the daily lives ever Wisconsinites. That's not why they are pouring the money in. They're doing it because this is classic battle between the parties, in the middle of it is the unions.

And Walker has depleted the union power through his budget repair bill, which is now law here. And Republicans and conservatives, Tea Party types, they want to replicate what's going on here in Wisconsin for two reasons. They claim it helps communities be more nimble and fiscally responsible --

MALVEAUX: Right.

ROWLANDS: -- because they don't have to take in the health care from whatever the union gives them. But the other thing is political, Suzanne. Let's face it, most unions fund Democratic campaigns and candidates, and they get out the vote. So it's two-prong from the outside, then of course the unions are fighting back, they are pouring in money as well.

MALVEAUX: All right. Ted, a lot of people looking at that race saying this is a referendum on what we're going to see in November election and who becomes the next president. Thank you, Ted. Appreciate it.

Jury selection started in Jerry Sandusky's child sex abuse trial. Sandusky, he is the man, as you may recall, spent three decades as football coach at Penn State, here's more, as a founder of a charity that helped troubled kids. Now, he is facing 52 counts of child sex abuse.

Sandusky is so well known in Pennsylvania, biggest challenge for the prosecutors and the defense right now, simply finding 12 jurors and alternates who don't have a strong opinion about the case.

I want to bring in Susan Candiotti. She is watching the trial from Pennsylvania.

And, Susan, that is if main point here. You've got jury selection. You've got to pick these folks. But you've got a very limited jury pool and this -- a ton of publicity around this case.

How is the judge going to do this?

SUSAN CANDIOTTI, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: It's going to be tough, don't you think? I think everyone thinks that's what's going to happen here.

So far, we know that they are working from a jury pool of 220 people. And at this hour, they continue to question 40 of those first 220, getting into some of the very questions that you raised.

For example, we've learned so far that of the 40 people questioned, 14 of them have worked or are retired from Penn State University. No surprise, it's a big employer here. Four of the people know Jerry Sandusky personally. Two of them know his wife personally. And two of them volunteer at the Second Mile, that's the charity from which Jerry Sandusky allegedly found some of his alleged victims, Suzanne.

MALVEAUX: That does seem difficult when they actually know who this guy is, they know his wife. Have we seen Sandusky at all today or his wife at the courthouse?

CANDIOTTI: Jerry Sandusky, oh, yes, arrived smiling. He has been listening to the questioning. His wife is not here this day. He's described as looking a bit worn out, certainly this is a -- it could mean a matter of whether he will spend the rest of his life in jail if he is found guilty of these charges. He has pleaded not guilty.

One of the other things we learned is that the judge said he will not sequester this jury. That's what he told the pool. He said I'm going to trust you not to watch the news, not to read the news, stay away from social media and in return, I'll let you sleep at home at night. We'll see what happens.

MALVEAUX: That is putting a lot of faith in the jurors there.

I understand that there is something else that is unique about this. This is the judge has ruled that the alleged victims, they are not allowed to testify anonymously or even under some sort of pseudonym or fake name. And CNN has decided, as our policy is it, that you protect the alleged victims, to prevent them from not coming forward.

But how is the judge going to handle that? I mean, it would seem to me as if that might sway some people not to go forward with this.

CANDIOTTI: Well, certainly attorneys, civil attorneys who represent alleged victims in this case wanted these witnesses to remain anonymous, known as John Doe number 1, John Doe number 2, or use pseudonyms. Otherwise they said this would take an emotional -- huge emotional toll on their clients.

And certainly they are now projecting this could have a chilling effect on other potential victims in this case or in other cases down the road. But the judge has said, no, these people are going to identify themselves in court, and, of course, it will be up to news organizations as you said, CNN would not be reporting the names regardless of potential sexual abuse, but there is a lot of fallout from this.

Nevertheless, Suzanne, the attorneys representing these victims say that so far no one is dropping out, that they want to move forward with this case and in the words of one, he wants to see justice done in regard to Jerry Sandusky.

MALVEAUX: All right. Susan Candiotti -- thank you, Susan.

We learned from Susan that the jury in the Sandusky trial will not be sequestered. Later in this hour, we're going to talk to Paul Callan, he's one of our legal guys, to find out why this is becoming actually a trend even in these high profile cases.

Here's what we're working on for this hour.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MALVEAUX (voice-over): The revolution may be over, but justice is about to be served for Moammar Gadhafi's henchmen in Libya.

Then forget sex, race or money. Right now, politics is dividing our country more than anything else.

And trumpets, cannons, horses, and massive crowds. The highlights of London's celebration of Queen Elizabeth.

(MUSIC)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MALVEAUX: Libya's former spy chief goes on trial. Buzeid Dorda, he was a member of Moammar Gadhafi's inner circle. He is the first official in the former regime to have answered for the attacks against civilians in last year's uprising that toppled Gadhafi.

Nic Robertson is joining us by phone from Tripoli.

And, Nic, first of all, tell us the role that he played here, how important a figure was he under Gadhafi's reign?

NIC ROBERTSON, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (via telephone): He's a figure who was very loyal to Gadhafi. He was the spy chief for the last two years of Gadhafi's world, a former prime minister, former Libyan representative to the U.N. He's not seen as somebody who's got a lot of blood on his hands himself but somebody by association with Gadhafi.

But today, he was charged with crimes that could carry the death penalty. He was charged with trying to insight civil war and also for killing protesters. So, very, very serious charges.

MALVEAUX: What do they hope to learn from him? Is he one of those figures, I understand he is an intelligence figure, is he somebody they can get to pin some of the crimes on some of the others?

ROBERTSON: The government here believes that two things. I mean one, they believe they have to get the trials going ahead. They have to show the people of Libya they are making progress and there are courts of law to try people. There are 7,000 people in this country who are being held awaiting trial. So that part is important for the government.

But what they do hope is that you know, he will give them information on others who are detained. He is, in terms of being the most recent spy chief, somebody who will have a lot of information. But it's not clear that the government's getting that from him.

Today, he said in court that he had not heard the charges before and even the government couldn't tell us until today what those charges were going to be. So, the level about this disorganization as well.

MALVEAUX: Sure. Tell us about the Libyan people. Do they believe in this process of justice here? I mean, you've got a lot of these former Gadhafi officials, essentially, both in and -- in the country, some in the government, some outside. Do they think that this is going to be a fair trial? Do they think this guy is going to be held accountable?

ROBERTSON: I think most people here already think that he's guilty -- guilty by association with Gadhafi because he was so loyal to him. The first indications are from the human rights lawyer that we talked to, other people, the trial's getting proper start, a fair start. The buildings have been completely refurbished, the government clearly making a lot of effort in allowing live television coverage in the trial to sort of let people see, you know, blow by blow if you will what's happening inside there.

So, that is creating the impression that everything is going well but there are concerns about all the other people who are detained. Of those 7,000, more than half by militias t justice ministry doesn't control the country, doesn't control those people. There are reports continuing of torture of some of the detainees, even deaths over recent weeks of some detainees. So in the public's mind, they really recognize that the government here doesn't yet control this country.

This step of putting Dorda on trial is a step to convince them, but I think it's a long way from people knowing that this government is really in control of everything in the country, Suzanne.

MALVEAUX: And, Nic, really quickly here. We saw pictures of him behind that cage there. How is he being treated? I mean, how is he living now? Is he actually being fed well or is he in good health?

ROBERTSON: He looks pretty frail. When you compare pictures to when he was first captured in September last year, he's not the sort of strong looking man. He's walking with crutches today.

But I talked to his brother. He said he's getting better treatment now than before. Then I said, what was happening before? His brother kind of looked around at officials and sort of said, well, that was before we're talking about now. He didn't want to get into the details of the Dorda's conditions and situation, detention.

MALVEAUX: OK.

ROBERTSON: But he said they are improving. That was coming from his brother. So one has to take it at face value.

MALVEAUX: All right. Nic Robertson, thank you so much.

We're looking at royalty, British pride, London erupting in celebration of Queen Elizabeth. We got the highlights.

Don't forget, you can watch CNN live on a computer, while you're at work. Head to CNN.com/TV.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MALVEAUX: Sixty years on the throne, she is throwing a party. We're talking about Queen Elizabeth of course. Her diamond jubilee greeted by many adoring fans at the balcony in the Buckingham Palace. Let's just listen in.

(VIDEO CLIP PLAYS)

MALVEAUX: Doing her royal queen wave we've come to know.

Aircraft from the battle of Britain also saluting her with the fly-by. Check it out -- red, white and blue smoke from the planes. Very dramatic pictures.

Last night, she was the biggest star. Huge concert at the palace. There were other big star there is as well. Paul McCartney, Elton John to name a few. Check it out.

Wow. Brooke Baldwin, she is live in London for this big party here.

Brooke, wow, that's incredible. You had a front seat to a lot of this stuff. What was the highlight? I mean, where do you begin?

BROOKE BALDWIN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, file this under best assignment of my life. This is incredible. I really can't think of anything I think to compare this to.

I would say, if I had to pick three highlights today, one would be of course the shot we were waiting for when we see them all after they come back here to Buckingham Palace, out on the balcony.

Talking to our guests earlier today, it's the significance and the symbolism of this some of the monarchs she chose to join her. So, you see the queen first walking out herself. She is flanked by her son, so next stop really for the throne and that is Prince Charles, then you have William on her left.

I think seeing all of them and then the moment I think you showed some of the video where you see the RAF, the Royal Air Force fly past. It happened three times and to see the red, white and blue tails, that's when you saw her majesty grinning from ear to ear.

From what I heard, she loves that show of force in the air, so that really seemed to make her grin.

Then finally, Suzanne, I mean, I don't know if you can tell, the rain has calmed down. This whole procession seemed to be ahead of schedule so the queen could be in that 1902 state landau, without something over her head, because we knew the rain was coming.

And just to se the crowds pouring in from Trafalgar Square, all the way down to Mall, and then up here surrounding the front of the palace with their umbrellas and their dogs and their children just to catch a glimpse of this woman who in her 60 years they feel so indebted to, so much just gratitude. It was stunning.

MALVEAUX: How long was that applause? We were watching that. I mean, it seemed like it never ended.

BALDWIN: Which applause? I mean there were so many moments. Once we saw her finally coming back in and entering the main gates, it was massive hysteria down here, and then we waited and certainly they had their tea and perhaps kicked their heels up, came back on the balcony and again, you know, the massive applause and the chanting, hip, hip, hooray with the infantry on their knees in the front of the palace. I'm speechless.

MALVEAUX: Yes. And you can't help but be a tourist as well as a journalist. I mean, you got to take a couple of pictures.

BALDWIN: Oh, totally. I have no shame. I pulled out my iPhone, just like the rest of us here. I'm the only American surrounded by the Brits and we all have our iPhones in the middle of the live show taking pictures. I mean, how often do you get to say I was within a stone's throw of the queen. I got it on video.

MALVEAUX: All right. I want to see that next go round. Yes, it probably is the best assignment. Good for you.

Well, forget about sex, money and race. What divides Americans more than anything else? We're talking about politics. We're going to tell you what it means for the future of the White House.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MALVEAUX: United we stand, divided we fall, right? Well, you're going to have to get ready to fall pretty hard, because according to a new Pew Research study, our political views are now even more divisive as race, class or sex.

Tea Party protest to the recall showdown playing out today in Wisconsin. Easy to see of course the political fault lines.

Joining us to talk about this, CNN contributor John Avlon. He's senior political columnist of the "Newsweek" and "The Daily Beast".

And, boy, John, when you look at this, researchers looking at 48 ways to measure how our political values are and tracking them over these years. Here's what they find -- they find that this partisan gap almost doubled over the past 25 years, before you saw differences like 1987, 10 percent between, right? To 18 percent today.

We're talking about hyper partisanship in Washington.

Does this even come as a surprise to you that it is really this bad? Now they are measuring it and they have it in numbers.

JOHN AVLON, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Well, it's not a surprise but it's a remarkable way ever quantifying the problem in our politics. This out of control hyper partisanship that is leading to unprecedented division and dysfunction in Washington.

And you start to see as you said that now, political identification is more polarizing, more divisive, than racial identity, gender, class, age. That's startling. That is a -- should be a real wake-up call to us all, given our historic wrestling with these other issues in our country. It's a direct result of the kind of education we're getting with the rise of partisan media. This Kool-Aid that ends up getting force-fed to folks that they think people with political differences are somehow less American and fundamentally different than they are.

This is a troubling, troubling study and it should be a wake-up call.

MALVEAUX: Let's talk about what it shows. You've got the divide, the widest on things like social safety net, right? Or what surprised me was actually the environment. You have other things regarding unions and equal opportunity but really comes down to is the role of government and that people are so widely split on what the government should and should not be doing.

AVLON: Absolutely. And one of the things in these value cross tabs you see is a fundamental difference in terms of asymmetric polarization.

SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN ANCHOR: -- should and should not be doing.

JOHN AVLON, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Absolutely. And one of the things in these value cross tabs you see is a fundamental difference in terms of asymmetric polarization.

For example the environment, 25 years ago Republicans over 80 percent of them felt that government regulation was positive to preserve the environment. Now that's been cut in half to over 40 percent.

Same thing on philosophical divides about the social safety net so whereas in the past you did see both parties not so far together because there was an active center right as well as center left.

The growing ideological split on these issues does reflect the fact that the parties are more polarized than ever before and not incidentally you have a record number of independents in result in direct reaction to this polarization. People are saying this is ridiculous. They want something different.

MALVEAUX: What was interesting too about this is that you see this gap and it's starting to widen during Bush's years, George W. Bush, but then President Obama really, I mean, he gains a lot of traction during the campaign.

Because he promises I'm going to make this better, change the tone in Washington then you've got the realities of working with Congress. How do you manage to change this? Is there even a way when you look at the administration? Is there anything they can actually do to change the tone?

AVLON: Well, no question, hyper partisan head winds and as you said, this was President Obama's original appeal. Remember, there are no red states. There are no blue states. There are only the United States.

But as you say with this polarization that we start to see during the Bush administration explodes during the Obama years and it's in part because Republicans now because they are so polarized are overwhelmingly inclined to see the government in negative terms.

Whereas Democrats are overwhelmingly inclined to see the government and the president in positive terms so that's polarization being a self fulfilling prophesy. How to change it? Well, we need to start changing I think not only change the culture and that takes time.

Push back on this drum beat of partisan media, but also I think if we start to see some election reforms and congressional reforms to stop this incentive structure that causes our politicians to constantly play to the base rather than reaching out across the aisle to actually solve problems on behalf of the American people that might help as well.

MALVEAUX: All right I know a lot of people saying amen to that. So thank you, John. Appreciate it.

Have you wondered really what it's like to be on a presidential campaign trail? Covered several campaigns, it's not easy, tight deadlines, a little sleep. Wake up to the alarm clock not even sure what city you're in.

If you want of all of the behind the scenes scoop, hop on line right now and we're talking now, Wolf Blitzer and our political team are answering your questions in real time what it's like, log on to cnn.com/roundtable.

Remember, the hanging chads, there is a new debate over is the voting in the swing state of Florida. Both sides think it could swing the election.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MALVEAUX: Fight over the purging of voter rolls in the key battleground state of Florida. Legal counsel for Florida's election officers recommended that counties stop removing names from those voter lists.

After the Justice Department warned Florida that it failed to properly notify the federal government. Democratic Senator Bill Nelson says he is outraged by the purging.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SENATOR BILL NELSON (D), FLORIDA: In the year 2012, here we are taking people's right to vote away from them. I thought we settled this in all of the civil rights era back in the 50s and 60s.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MALVEAUX: "Miami Herald" political writer, Marc Caputo, he is joining us from Miami. Mark, first of all, I want to talk a little bit about this because we'll never forget back, you know, West Palm, I was in West Palm for weeks when the Florida officials doing the ballot recount trying to distinguish between hanging chads.

Now you've got Florida in the middle of another voting debacle here specifically, who asked in the first place for Florida's voting rolls to be purged, those voting lists?

MARC CAPUTO, POLITICAL WRITER, "MIAMI HERALD": That's a good question, Suzanne. It appears that Rick Scott had asked for it according to the AP, but then we hear from Rick Scott's people and folks who are close to Rick Scott.

That actually there are people in the Division of Elections who had mentioned to him, here is an initiative we're embarking on, what do you think? Scott said great, let's go for it.

MALVEAUX: What was the thinking behind it actually to take a look at these voter lists and start eliminating?

CAPUTO: Well, if you're not a citizen you shouldn't be registered to vote and you shouldn't be voting. I think that's the baseline is where the law is.

But more broadly, if you are a Republican you generally believe the voter rolls need to be clean and you're concerned about voter fraud.

If you're a Democrat, you think that these efforts are tantamount to voter suppression. This gets back to the last segment we're in a hyper partisan era doesn't seem you can do anything.

MALVEAUX: And so in light of that, the Justice Department gets involved, now saying you got to stop. How does Florida responding to? Do we have any idea how Florida officials are responding to that?

CAPUTO: Well, we don't. We know that they haven't responded and have until Wednesday. They could respond today or they could respond tomorrow. Who knows at 11:59 p.m., it didn't specify what time.

You know, I have a feeling that they are probably not going to fight the Justice Department on this, but that's just a feeling. I've been wrong before. There is a chance that Florida is going to say okay, sue us, Justice Department, because we think we have the right to do this.

MALVEAUX: We have a hint of what they might suggest. A spokesman for Florida Division of Elections told CNN his office is preparing a response and he says, the department of state has a duty under both state and federal laws to ensure that Florida's voter registration roles are current and accurate.

Therefore, identifying ineligible voters is something we are always doing. But clearly looks like the justice accident saying look, you violated federal rules here. They are going to have to explain themselves. But how do we think this is going to impact what is taking place in Florida? Who does it benefit and who does it hurt?

CAPUTO: Well, that's a tough question to answer. If you think about it, this isn't a whole lot of people, but then again in the 2000 election, there weren't a whole lot of people decided. That election was decided by 537 votes. Right now we have a list of about 2,600 suspected or better said potential non-citizens. Now, the overwhelming majority is in the Miami area, about 1,600 of those people, almost 1,700 are on that list are here in Miami.

So far the elections officials in Miami-Dade County have only been about able to verify about 500 of them. Of the 500, 13 were non- citizens and of them two had cast ballots.

Everyone else so far overwhelmingly has been shown to be a citizen and a lawful voter. We had run some analysis on it. About 58 percent of the rolls were Hispanic and most were independents who were targeted, Democrats more and whites and Republicans far less so.

MALVEAUX: I had a chance to speak to the head of the NAACP, Ben Jealous and he said one of the problems here is that this is disproportionately impacting those in the African-American community and Latino voters. That really seems to be where the fault line is.

CAPUTO: Yes, it is. That's a statistical thing. It's a really Hispanic or Latino voters. You know, when you target potential non- citizens, you're looking at immigrants, and in Florida most happen to be Hispanic, happen to be Latino. So your sample is going to be skewed. That's what's happening.

MALVEAUX: All right, well, Marc, we're obviously going to be following this. See what happens tomorrow when the Florida officials have to get back to the Justice Department and respond to what they are going to do.

Whether or not they are going to keep purging voters off the list or whether or not it's going to stop. Thanks, Marc. Good to see you.

CAPUTO: Never a dull moment here in Florida. Thanks for having me.

MALVEAUX: Never. All right, he's accused of sexually abusing 10 boys. Now after fire storm, Jerry Sandusky is finally going to stand trial.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MALVEAUX: Jury selection started in the Jerry Sandusky child abuse trial. He is a former Penn State assistant football coach who's been charged with sexually abusing 10 boys.

This is a case that has received a lot of publicity, already we have seen several potential jurors dismissed because they either have a close connection to the school, or even to Sandusky.

I want to bring in CNN legal analyst, Paul Callan to talk a little bit about this. First of all, one of the surprises that we heard from the judge is he's insisting that the identities of Sandusky's accusers be made public.

Now CNN is going to blur the faces of those who have accused him. We want to protect their anonymity. But what is the thinking here behind the judge's decision on this?

PAUL CALLAN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Well, the thinking is that first of all, under current case law, the public has a right to know and to look at the trial process to determine who the witnesses are in an important case.

Now, the only time that witness identity is shielded and this is upheld by the courts tends to be in cases where there is a threat, an organized crime case, for instance, an undercover police informant, there might be special circumstances like that.

You also might have a situation where a child was involved while he is a child. But remember, in the Sandusky case, virtually all of the witnesses are adults.

MALVEAUX: But couldn't this potentially keep them, I mean, future alleged victims from coming forward? Would this possibly act as a disincentive when you have other cases?

CALLAN: Well, it certainly will act as a disincentive, but the same disincentive applies really to any sort of a murder case. I mean suppose hypothetically it was a murder case. Any kind of a criminal case, I meant to say. Suppose it was a murder case and the witnesses came in to testify and you would say, well, if their identity is revealed, no one will testify in murder cases and eventually we'd be left with secret trials in America. And the presumption under the Constitution is open trials, open disclosure. Now, the press may choose not to reveal names, but that's been a custom, a journalistic custom. The courts have traditionally been open about revealing witness names at the time of trial.

MALVEAUX: And how do you actually manage to get an impartial jury when you look at the number of people, I believe there was a figure one in 10, folks either who worked for the university, Penn State, or employed by the university, and some people who know this guy. They know Sandusky. How do you do that in a limited jury pool and in such a high profile case?

CALLAN: Well, it's extraordinarily difficult, Suzanne, in this particular case. And, you know, if we compare it to other high profile cases, say the O.J. Simpson case or the Casey Anthony case, now, those were cases where you had an enormous amount of publicity and you would say, how can you find somebody who knows nothing about the case to serve.

MALVEAUX: Sure.

CALLAN: This is those cases times 10 because it's taking place in this small community in Pennsylvania that derives really all of its income, all of its employment from Penn State University. Everybody knows everybody else.

MALVEAUX: Yes. CALLAN: So, this is going to be an extraordinarily difficult situation. Now, you're never going to find somebody who hasn't heard about the case or hasn't read something about the case. But you will eventually find people who will say, I can put that aside and limit my decision to what I hear in the courtroom. The evidence only. And that's what the judge is looking for.

MALVEAUX: And, Paul, though, I mean, to that end, though, the judge has now said he's not sequestering the jury and he's made them promise that they're not going to get on the Internet or watch TV. I mean is that really a reliable, I mean to actually say, OK, it's in your hands, I trust you guys?

CALLAN: It's not particularly reliable. I think most lawyers who try cases, especially high profile cases, think that the jurors probably do get some information improperly from these sources. But sequestration is almost never used in the United States now. At one time it was quite common. Now it's really not used. The O.J. Simpson case, for instance, I was reading estimates that the sequestration cost $3 million in that case. Casey Anthony case, $300,000 to sequester the jury. You know something, county governments don't have the money to sequester juries even if they want to. So judges give instructions and they hope that jurors will follow those instructions.

MALVEAUX: OK. You've got to just kind of have faith, I guess. All right, Paul, thank you. Appreciate it.

CALLAN: You're welcome. Nice being with you.

MALVEAUX: This has only happened seven time since the time of Galileo. That's right. We're going to show you how to get a good look at the shadow of Venus passing across the sun.

POPPY HARLOW, CNNMONEY.COM: Hey, there. Thanks so much for joining us. Today on "The Help Desk" we're talking about mortgages. And joining me to help do that, Lynnette Khalfani-Cox is a personal finance author and founder of the financial advice blog askthemoneycoach.com, and David Novick is a certified financial planner and adjunct professor of finance at NYU.

Lynnette, this first question, for you. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: If I'm interested in buying a home, should I lever up while rates are low?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HARLOW: What do you think?

LYNNETTE KHALFANI-COX, FOUNDER, ASKTHEMONEYCOACH.COM: Well, I don't like the word lever up. I mean that sounds like taking on a lot of debt. No, no, no. Don't go back to the old days.

HARLOW: Sounds like 2007. KHALFANI-COX: But it is a great time to get a mortgage if you qualify. You know, rates for the 30-year fixed rate mortgage actually recently hit a record low, 3.75 percent.

HARLOW: Yes.

KHALFANI-COX: The lowest ever since 1950, since a 30-year has been offered. So definitely that's the case.

If you have good credit, a 700-plus FICO score, and you can afford it, you've had the savings and you've done the discipline work to be able to afford the home, then I think it is a great time. But don't overextend yourself.

HARLOW: What do you think, David, always a 30-year fixed safest in this environment or is it really case by case still?

DAVID NOVICK, CERTIFIED FINANCIAL PLANNER, PROMETHEUS CAPITAL MANAGEMENT: It depends on the current situation.

HARLOW: Yes.

NOVICK: If you're going to be in the house long term, a 30-year fixed is a great deal right now because of how low the historic interest rates are. But you also have to look at how long you're going to be there. For example, let's say you're an executive, you're going to be there for three to five years. Doesn't really make sense to get a 30-year mortgage. You may be able to get an adjustable mortgage that locks in the rate for a short period of time.

HARLOW: Yes.

NOVICK: Maybe you're going to be retiring in 10 or 15 years and you want to have the house paid off when you retire. So, generally, a 30-year mortgage is a good deal, but you want to tailor it to your situation.

HARLOW: Absolutely. Guys, thank you very much. Appreciate it.

If you've got a question you want our financial experts to tackle, just upload a 30-second video with your question to ireport.com.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MALVEAUX: An amazing celestial show taking place tonight. Venus is going to pass in front of the sun.

CHAD MYERS, AMS METEOROLOGIST: Yes.

MALVEAUX: Pretty cool stuff. Chad, you can explain how this works and whether or not we're going to be able to see it. And this is in our lifetime, right? Because after this --

MYERS: This is it.

MALVEAUX: The next time is a little bit way down the road, right?

MYERS: This is it. We're going to need -- we're going to need some real good medicine to see the next one.

MALVEAUX: It's 100 -- how many years away?

MYERS: 2117 will be the year that it happens again.

MALVEAUX: And we'll be like 150.

MYERS: Yes. I'll be older than you still. You're trying to catch me.

It is a small little disc that's going to pass in front of the sun. It will be a silhouette of Venus that passes in front of the sun. The only problem is, this thing is only going to be about 1,000 times smaller than the sun. So here's the disc you're going to see. And if you think about it, you could put 1,000 discs that size inside the sun. So it isn't going to be worth trying to look at with really the naked eye, honestly. You're going to have to have some -- the best place I believe to watch this whole thing is going to be on television. NASA will be covering it. Nasa. -- it will be streamed live. It's a great event simply because of the way three dimensionality lines up. You have to think, all these planets are going all different directions and then, all of a sudden, one of the planets gets in the way. Now, it's so much smaller than the moon compared to the sun because the moon is so much closer. And when the moon makes its eclipse, it almost takes the entire sun and blocks it out.

Don't look at this without the proper eye protection. And that does not mean a couple of pair of sunglasses. Not going to be able to see it here in Africa or South America. But every place else in the world, on the globe, you'll be able to see it. That's kind of cool. Because a lot of times when you get to these solar eclipses, you only can see in a couple places.

Now, the other thing we're going to worry about it a little bit of cloud cover. Probably down here across the southeast and all of Florida. D.C., up the East Coast, there's going to be some clouds. The best place will be southern California where we will have our cameras trained on the sun, showing you those live events. So please don't look at the sun. Please.

MALVEAUX: All right, we'll have to take a look on the television.

MYERS: That's right.

MALVEAUX: All right, thank you, Chad.

MYERS: You're welcome.

MALVEAUX: A massive party in London for the queen. But her husband was not by her side. Prince Philip, he is hospitalized with an infection that could pose a real danger for an older patient. We're going to talk about the risks. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MALVEAUX: While the queen's celebrating her 60 years as the British monarch, her husband, Prince Philip, he is in the hospital with a bladder infection. And we are not sure how he's doing, but we want to get a sense of whether or not it is a serious situation. I want to bring in Elizabeth Cohen to talk a little bit about this.

And certainly for older patients it might be more significant.

ELIZABETH COHEN, CNN SENIOR MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: Right. As you get older, it can become more and more significant. We know that it was considered significant enough that he was put in the hospital. We were told for observation for a few days.

Now, bladder infections come in all sorts of shades. So, for example, you might have a bladder infection even in a man his age where you could just give him antibiotics and he could go home. Treated out patient. But, on the other hand, they can be extremely serious and a bladder infection could cause a kidney infection, could cause a bloodstream infection, could cause death.

Now, we have absolutely no reason whatsoever to think that it's the severe type for him. Maybe they're keeping him in hospital because he's Prince Philip and they want to, you know, make sure they're doing the right thing. We just don't know what end of the spectrum he's on.

MALVEAUX: And how does that happen? How does one get a bladder infection? Is that common?

COHEN: Right. Bacteria -- it's actually much more common in women than in is in men. Although as men get older, they're more prone to it. And so it's an infection, obviously, of the bladder. And, for men, what it can be is that the prostate grows bigger and that could cause it. It could be kidney stones that could cause it. There can be several things that can cause it. And sometimes doctors are -- they're really just as concerned about the causes, which can be a sign of something big, and not just the infection itself. They want to know what's behind it.

MALVEAUX: And we are now learning from our Dan Rivers that he is doing fine. That he is feeling better and that he is in good spirits, which is good.

COHEN: That's right.

MALVEAUX: Anyway that you can prevent this?

COHEN: Not really. I mean I think that at the first signs of it, you certainly want to seek medical infection. A true bladder infection, you would have a fever, for example, and you would feel unwell. And people his age, older people, sometimes get confused for some reason when they have a bladder infection. It's not entirely clear why that happens.

But one thing that you should be careful of with an older person, when they're diagnosed with a bladder infection, make sure that it really is a bladder infection. Because sometimes they'll look at your urine and see bacteria. That doesn't mean you have a bladder infection. You want to make sure that it really is a bladder infection before you're treated for one.

MALVEAUX: All right. Well, we wish him all the best in his recovery.

COHEN: That's right.

MALVEAUX: It sounds like he's going to be just fine.

COHEN: Good.

MALVEAUX: All right, thank you, Elizabeth. Appreciate it.

COHEN: Thanks.