Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Toronto Mayor Admits To Smoking Crack, Says He Will Not Resign From Office; Knox's Former Boyfriend At Appeals Trial: Amanda Was The First Real Love Of My Life; Police Tase Father To Stop Him From Going Into Burning Home To Try To Save Boy; Stranded Couple Rescued After Days; Be The Next Jacques Cousteau; Former Inmate Testifies That Doctor Said, "I'm Getting Away With Murder

Aired November 06, 2013 - 14:30   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BROOKE BALDWIN, CNN ANCHOR: The mayor of the fourth largest city in North America admitting he smoked crack cocaine while in office, but if you think he's resigning, think again. He actually intends to run for re-election next year.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MAYOR ROB FORD, TORONTO: Yes, I have smoked crack cocaine. There is important work that we must advance and important decisions that must be made. For the sake of the taxpayers of this great city, for the sake of the taxpayers, we must get back to work immediately.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BALDWIN: OK, so here's the thing. The mayor has not been charged with a crime. His comments come nearly a week after Toronto's police chief said his department had a video showing the mayor smoking what appeared to be a crack pipe. And then soon after that was released, Mayor Ford's approval rating shot up five points. But can he get away with his admission without actually facing legal problems?

Let's talk about that with my colleague, Ashleigh Banfield, host of "LEGAL VIEW." Ashleigh Banfield, here's the thing, because not only did he admit to smoking crack, as he qualified in a drunken stupor, with just those words, can he get away with it legally?

ASHLEIGH BANFIELD, ANCHOR, CNN'S "LEGAL VIEW": First is, are you asking me this because I'm Canadian and horrifyingly embarrassed?

BALDWIN: You're my favorite Canadian.

BANFIELD: I am taking it on the chin all day on the story. Let me tell you this. What is fascinating is my first question was, wait a second, he made an admission to doing something illegal. Isn't that something you could charge him? It's a little different. Here, maybe, maybe not. There, maybe more so because there, it's just a circumstantial evidence you might need to actually bring forth a charge or lay a charge, as Canadians say. Here, you need something more substantial. Often times they'll say produce the evidence, actually a seizure of the drugs, because we're talking about possession. Not necessarily using. It's possession of an illegal substance. So the Canadians may have more leeway in that vein than we do. Here's where it all kind of co comes off the rails, Brooke.

BALDWIN: OK.

BANFIELD: He made an admission. The circumstantial evidence, he didn't say it was in that video where he did the smoking. If he said that, that would have given it circumstantial evidence so I can't tell you that it is as easy as it might seem to charge him.

BALDWIN: What next? Now with this admission, how do police move forward?

BANFIELD: Good one. So where you would want to put together the body of the case is with the other kinds of evidence. Same kind of things we have here, are there witnesses? Are there those who might have been in the crack house that day who might be in some trouble and might be in a plea bargain and might be willing to be the canary who squawks and take him down?

I have no idea, and nor does anyone else to my knowledge, what the Canadian authorities have right now in this investigation. But me thinks it's not a lot because it has been months and months since the story surfaced.

BALDWIN: Since I have you, my Canadian friend, I do have to ask, did you see the mayor's tie? What was up with Mayor Ford -- this is this early '90s NFL logo tie. I mean, this is the tie he chooses to wear when he's essentially begging the city for forgiveness.

BANFIELD: I can't explain all the Chris Farley moments in this, Brooke Baldwin, but what I can tell you this. It actually came up and my producer and I had a very quick conversation off air, and apparently, if you can get it online for $14 or so. I don't know if that's where the mayor of Toronto got it. That's all I'm saying. Nobody knows the CFL anyway here, so you're not going to get that offline.

BALDWIN: Who knew? Ashleigh Banfield, thank you.

BANFIELD: Nice to see you.

BALDWIN: A bombshell day in the retrial of Amanda Knox and her former boyfriend, Raffaele Sollecito. A court in Florence, Italy heard evidence that cast doubt on the weapon allegedly used to kill Knox's roommate, Meredith Kercher, and Knox's one-time Italian sweetheart took the stand. CNN's Erin McLaughlin is watching it all from London for us -- Erin.

ERIN MCLAUGHLIN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Brooke, while Amanda Knox remains in Seattle, her former boyfriend, Raffaele Sollecito made an emotional appeal in court, at times appearing as though he was on the brink of tears. Sollecito described how Amanda Knox was his first true love. He described their story as fabled and how his world was turned upside down after the murder of Meredith Kercher. He made this appeal to the six judges hearing the case. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RAFFAELE SOLLECITO, AMANDA KNOX'S FORMER BOYFRIEND (through translator): I ask you humbly to really look at reality, the reality of everything in relation to this incident and to consider the damage done.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MCLAUGHLIN: Now, neither Sollecito nor Knox was required to be in court. The judges in Florence also heard the results of DNA tests on the knife prosecutors say is the murder weapon. The knife had been found in Sollecito's apartment, but Knox's DNA, according to the new tests, was present on it. Knox's defense says that this was a kitchen knife she had used and could not be the murder weapon.

Experts say that Kercher's DNA was not found on the sample recently tested, which of course bolsters Knox's case. Prosecutors have long argued that Kercher's DNA was found on the tip of the knife, but the defense says those results are invalid because there wasn't enough DNA to double test.

Now, according to her publicist, Amanda Knox is currently a student at the University of Washington. She's studying creative writing, though she is following this trial very closely. She's in regular contact with her attorneys. A verdict is expected early next year -- Brooke.

BALDWIN: Erin McLaughlin for us in London. Thank you.

Still ahead, this absolutely heartbreaking story out of a small town in Missouri, so there's this house fire and a father tries, wants to run inside to save his son. But the police arrive and they stop him. They don't allow him in the home. We'll tell you how the story ends. And the question we're asking, did the police have a right to stop that father? We're on the case next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BALDWIN: That New Jersey mall where a gunman opened fire this week is now back open for business. Retailers and employees at the Paramus Mall were allowed to return to work early today to prepare for the reopening and to collect their personal items left behind the night of that shooting. Customers were allowed back just a couple hours later.

Police say 20-year-old Richard Schopp fired at least six shots in the mall Monday night. He did not shoot anyone. He later turned the gun on himself and left behind a suicide note. His reason for the shooting still remains a mystery.

This is just heartbreaking. Imagine waking up, your house is on fire. You get out OK, but you suddenly realize your 3-year-old child is still inside, trapped. You think, obviously, you try to rush in to save your child, but police arrive and they stop you. And when you resist, police tase you, handcuff you, and put you in the back of a squad car.

Tragically, your child dies. That is exactly what happened in this town. It's called Louisiana, Missouri. It's a small town on the Mississippi River north of St. Louis. The city administrator described the sad circumstances that now have a lot of people asking, was it proper police procedure when a parent is trying to save their child in a life or death situation?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BOB JENNE, CITY ADMINISTRATOR, LOUISIANA, MISSOURI: Mr. Miller kicked in the door, trying to get in to go to the aid of riley. The fire chief felt that if Mr. Miller would have tried to enter, that he, too, might have wound up being a fatality. Obviously, Mr. Miller was adamant about wanting to get in and render assistance to riley, and he had to be subdued, and they eventually tased him. This is something we want to look in to and see was it the right thing to do at that time?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BALDWIN: Just awful. HLN legal analyst, Joey Jackson joins me now. Joey, were police in the right to stop this man, to tase this man?

JOEY JACKSON, HLN LEGAL ANALYST: It's an awful scenario, Brooke. There is no question about it. But what the police are going to say if it gets litigated and if it does, certainly wiser minds than mine will address whether or not that was proper or not, but from a strictly legal point of view, I think the police did have grounds to stop him. Here's why, Brooke.

The police are in a business of protecting and serving, of course, but you don't want to create a scenario where as you saw just on the tape that you played, you have another fatality. So as a result of that, what the police are going to say is that they erred on the side of caution. While certainly there's a moral imperative and you want to do everything you can to protect another life, you don't want another one lost. That's where the law, I think, will seek to protect them here.

BALDWIN: So let's just turn this around. You know, if police had allowed this father to run into this, you know, home in flames. The father, let's say, had died as well. Would we now also then be asking why didn't police stop them? Would police then be facing some other set of charges for allowing him to go in?

JACKSON: It's such a wonderful question, Brooke. That's the point. You know, under the public duty doctrine, what ends up happening is that the police have a duty to the general public, but a duty to none. What that means is sure they want to act to protect us all, but they don't have an obligation to protect any single individual. But if they do seek to intervene and something happens, you can sue them.

So as a result of that, if the police did indeed let someone go in, the stepfather in this instance, to perform a rescue, and it went bad, we could be, as you point out astutely, Brooke, be talking about a cause of action, a lawsuit against the police department for doing that. So it's really a double-edged sword.

It's tragic by all means, you think morally, police are there to help and they want to help and they do and they're brave, but at the end of the day, they are going to say they were prudent and did what they had to do, not what they wanted to do.

BALDWIN: And just to be clear, you know, we, CNN, did ask for a clarification on police policy in these situations, and what we got this long statement from the city administration, which simply laid out the facts of the tragedy. Basically repeated what we heard him say in that setup. Joey Jackson, thank you very much.

JACKSON: Pleasure, Brooke. Be well.

BALDWIN: A Wisconsin couple goes missing for days after leaving Yellowstone National Park. So just ahead, how this couple survived trapped in their car for the bitter, bitter cold for nearly a week.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BALDWIN: There was a big family reunion for one Wisconsin couple found safe after nearly a week stranded just outside Yellowstone National Park.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We're OK.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You're OK.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I'm home, I'm safe.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BALDWIN: Here's the story. Mark and Christine Watchke's car got stuck in heavy, heavy snow, subzero temperatures as they were leaving the park last Tuesday. In fact, this pair here, they were down to cookies and just a couple peanut butter and jelly sandwiches when this local rancher coming by on a snow mobile lucked upon them and discovered them. Family members told CNN affiliate KARE, they're so thankful this couple is alive and well.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GREG WATCHKE, MARK'S BROTHER: To get that call Monday morning and to hear the voice on -- it just -- I mean, again, you hear the phrase, words can't express, but now I really understand that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BALDWIN: Authorities say the rancher told them the Watchke's had plenty of fuel in their car to periodically keep the engine going so they could stay warm. If you have ever dreamed of being an underwater explorer, you may soon be able to without getting wet. That's today's "Technovations."

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BALDWIN (voice-over): Eric Stackpole and David Lang are two young entrepreneurs looking to become the next Jacques Cousteau.

ERIC STACKPOLE, OPENROV: Jacques Cousteau changed the way ocean exploration was done.

DAVID LANG, OPENROV: He invited people to explore along with him. So for us, it's the same thing.

BALDWIN: They're working on an underwater robotic submarine that anyone can own and use. Priced at less than $1,000, it would give amateur explorers Cousteau-like access. This is the "OpenROV."

STACKPOLE: ROV stands for remotely operated vehicle. I can put this in the water and fly it around. It's got a video camera on it so you can see what it sees live.

BALDWIN: Users build the ROVs themselves and are encouraged to submit new designs and ideas.

STACKPOLE: The open ROV is an open source community. If the ROV is having some sort of a problem and we can't figure out how to handle it, I can go to the forums. As I sleep, the problem is going across Europe. By the end of lunch, I could have five or six good solutions.

BALDWIN: Making it easier for the ever-changing ROV to go into more unchartered waters.

STACKPOLE: People often ask is, is this something that's a toy that's fun to build and play with or something you expect to be used by real researchers? Our answer certainly is both.

LANG: We hear from people all the time, conservation organizations who want to check on species, fish and game groups, teachers who want to get these into classrooms and we're excited about all of them.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BALDWIN: Coming up, the one-time Black Panther who decided to hijack a flight back in the 1980s is now back on U.S. soil because he wants to be. And CNN had the only reporter on that plane. We will tell you what happened when they touched down.

Plus, explosive testimony today in the trial of that doctor accused of drugging and drowning his wife. Hear what an inmate said the doctor told him behind bars next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BALDWIN: In Provo, Utah, jurors in a murder trial of Dr. Martin Macneill heard some of the most potentially damaging testimony today. A former inmate says the doctor basically confessed to him about killing his wife while they were doing time together in jail.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JASON POIRIER, WAS IN JAIL WITH MACNEILL: I can get away with a lot of things.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What else did he say?

POIRIER: For instance, like, I'm getting away with my murder.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: OK. Do you recall -- OK. Did he say anything else about that?

POIRIER: About his wife?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: OK.

POIRIER: Yes, he was getting away with the murder of his wife.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Did he say he murdered his wife?

POIRIER: He didn't say it like that, but he said I'm getting away with murdering my wife.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

BALDWIN: Let me bring in HLN's Jane Velez-Mitchell. Jane, this is Jason Poirier, hardly an ideal witness, a guy who spent time behind bars and he testified with limited immunity because he has outstanding felony charges against him. That said, when I hear him say, I'm getting away with my murder. This is what this doctor apparently said to him. How damaging is that?

JANE VELEZ-MITCHELL, HOST, HLN'S "JANE VELEZ-MITCHELL": Look, this guy is a criminal. He is an admitted liar. He is an admitted thief. The defense said you got a sweetheart deal for saying what you said and you had every reason to lie, but if you believe him, it's very damaging because ultimately, he says that Dr. Macneill confessed to him. He said, the way it happened was they were behind bars together.

He noticed the doc was wearing shoes that were special, weren't the standard issue. He said, why do you get to wear those special shoes? He said, I get away with a lot. I'm getting away with the murder of my wife. So that's the confession. Was he bragging? We know Dr. Macneill is an arrogant man, and in the course of bragging, did he inadvertently confess?

This is so crucial, Brooke, because there is no forensic evidence that really says murder with a red flag. Three medical experts for the state have been unable to say this is homicide. Remember the prosecution believes that Dr. Macneill to be with his mistress, forced his wife to get a face lift she didn't want, then applied her with a bunch of pain killers and gets her in the tub. But it's very hard to distinguish that from somebody taking pain killers and getting in the tub and drowning accidentally. BALDWIN: So we've heard from these experts. We have heard from multiple children. We have heard now from these inmates who Dr. Macneill spent time with. What is next here? When do we go to the jury?

MITCHELL: Gypsy is coming back.

BALDWIN: Gypsy is back.

MITCHELL: She's back, and she kind of skated through the testimony, ended up being pretty much a hostile witness for the prosecution, seen to be trying to help her ex-lover, and there was even speculation, maybe if she thinks he gets off, they'll be back together again. Now they want another bite at that apple and they want to get her to admit this was a very serious, serious affair indeed.

Not some casual thing. Her own mother took the stand and said three months after Mrs. Macneill died, allegedly murdered, Dr. Macneill is on his knees, proposing to Gypsy in front of a crowd of people.

BALDWIN: OK, we look for Gypsy yet again on the stand. Jane Velez- Mitchell, we'll continue this conversation as we know you're following this trial out of Provo. Jane, thank you very much. We can watch you each and every night on HLN at 7:00 p.m. Eastern Time.