Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Interview With State Rep. James Talarico (D-TX); Interview With Rep. Jake Auchincloss (D-MA); Guilty Verdict Delivered in Laken Riley Murder Trial. Aired 11-11:30a ET

Aired November 20, 2024 - 11:00   ET

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

[11:00:58]

PAMELA BROWN, CNN HOST: A decision from the judge on the fate of a man accused of killing Georgia nursing student Laken Riley could come as soon as today. We are following closing arguments right now as we speak.

It's potentially make-or-break day for Republican Matt Gaetz. The House Ethics Committee today will discuss a report that, if released, could potentially doom his chances to serve as the next attorney general.

And biblical lessons in public school classrooms are one step closer to reality in Texas. We're going to look at how he could play out with one of the state's lawmakers. So be sure to stick around for that.

Hello, everyone. I am Pamela Brown in Washington and you're in the CNN NEWSROOM.

And we begin with breaking news. Moments ago, there was a recess in the Laken Riley murder trial and closing arguments just wrapped up. The prosecution rested its case Monday and the defense did the same this morning. The 22-year-old was murdered while out for a run earlier this year.

CNN's Ryan Young joins us live.

Ryan, we could be hearing the judge's decision in this case just hours from now.

RYAN YOUNG, CNN SENIOR NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, we could.

And that recess just happened moments ago, like you mentioned here, Pamela. But, look, for the last hour-and-a-half or so, we have been hearing about the evidence that both sides tried to prove their case. The prosecution, Sheila Ross, has been trying to point at the DNA evidence and the video evidence as Laken Riley was running along that day back in February when she was attacked, according to the prosecution, by Jose Ibarra.

Now, something that sort of surprised me in the last half-hour or so, the defense is actually pointing to Jose Ibarra's brother, Diego Ibarra, as being the one who may have attacked Laken Riley. And so that was something that was just put forward during those closing arguments, but this case centered around the -- not only the DNA evidence, but the video of disposing of evidence afterwards, the fact that her body was pulled off that trail.

And we heard from the prosecution today some of the evidence that sort of is shocking to hear. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SHEILA ROSS, SPECIAL PROSECUTOR: Laken Riley herself has given you all the evidence you need alone to find this man guilty of every single count in this indictment.

And as I said in my opening and what the evidence has shown in this case is that she did fight. And it is a direct result of that fight that gives you all the physical evidence you need to convict him. And if you only had that physical evidence, you would have enough to convict him.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

YOUNG: And, Pamela, the stuff that is tough to hear is the idea about that fight,when you look at the fact that Jose Ibarra had scratches all over his body, according to prosecution, that they took pictures of this, it looked like there were defensive wounds, that he used a rock like a hammer to hit her in the head over and over, puncturing the skull, according to prosecution.

Obviously, that was evidence that was hard to hear. And let's not forget about that body camera footage of officers arriving and still trying to give CPR to Laken Riley, even though she had already passed away. When you put this all together with the video evidence, you can kind of understand you were hoping to hear maybe a motive, something changed by the defense.

But the defense is now pushing towards that brother. But, once again, Sheila Ross got back up and said, the DNA evidence, the scratches should be enough to push this case forward, for Jose Ibarra to be found guilty.

Something we should remind all our viewers, this is not a jury trial. The judge will be making the decision in this. He is a no-nonsense judge. You have seen this case kind of flow along very quickly, the defense not more than half-of-a-day of testimony. So now we will see what happens as this has been rested so far.

And the judge will finally be able to make that decision -- Pamela.

BROWN: We will be following this very closely.

Ryan Young, thank you so much.

And we want to turn to more breaking news right now. Just into CNN, Donald Trump's legal team is asking Judge Merchan to dismiss the criminal hush money case now that he has been elected president.

CNN's Paula Reid joins us.

This wasn't a surprise, but it's still significant.

PAULA REID, CNN CHIEF LEGAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: It is significant.

In this two-page letter, Trump's lawyers lay out their arguments for why they believe this case should be tossed. Just yesterday, the Manhattan district attorney's office said they're OK with delaying sentencing in this case until after Trump is out of the White House.

[11:05:07]

But they said they're going to fight any attempt to dismiss this case, where Trump was, of course, convicted on 34 counts of falsifying business records. But, today, they laid out their arguments, the Trump team saying that now that Trump is president-elect, this case must be dismissed.

They say -- quote -- "Just as a sitting president is completely immune from any criminal process, so too is President Trump as president- elect."

So, they're asking the judge for a little more time to file their arguments for why they believe this will be dismissed. They also gave him the option to just dismiss it today. I don't think he's going to go for that. He's going to want this fully briefed. But it's notable to me that they asked for a little extra time.

The Manhattan DA said, let's get our filings in by December 9, but they asked for extra time because they want to see what Jack Smith is going to argue by December 2 in the federal cases. And here they note that back the federal prosecutors are winding down their cases, but that's completely different, Pamela, right, because those are federal cases.

If he enters the White House and wants to have those dismissed, he could. He made it clear he will. But state cases are outside the power of the executive branch. So this is a slightly different situation. The team also makes it clear they will continue to pursue their appeal options at the federal level. Sources familiar with their thinking tell me they're pretty confident they're going to get this tossed one way or another.

Unclear when Judge Juan Merchan will rule.

BROWN: I know you will stay on top of it. Thanks so much, Paula Reid.

And just two months from Inauguration Day, that's where we are, and Donald Trump's Cabinet is rapidly taking shape, with only a few roles left to be filled. Last hour, the president-elect announced Matt Whitaker, who you may remember served as acting attorney general during his first term, as his choice for NATO ambassador now.

Trump has also picked major Republican donor and former pro wrestling executive who is helping with his transition Linda McMahon for education secretary. She too served in Trump's first administration. And TV personality and surgeon Dr. Mehmet Oz has been tapped to lead the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.

Meanwhile, vice president-elect J.D. Vance is on Capitol Hill this morning in what could be a critical day for controversial attorney general pick Matt Gaetz. The House Ethics Committee is scheduled to meet today to discuss the Ethics report on him.

CNN Steve Contorno joins us now from Florida.

Steve, there's still a question mark, though, about who Trump's pick is for Treasury secretary, right?

STEVE CONTORNO, CNN REPORTER: That's correct.

And part of the intrigue around that pick was because they didn't know where Howard Lutnick would land in Trump's Cabinet. Lutnick, one of the co-chairs, another businessman who's very close to Donald Trump, did receive a job as commerce secretary, along with Linda McMahon, who you mentioned, and Mehmet Oz, all getting key posts in the last 24 hours, and that now with -- McMahon was also potentially in the mix for Treasury.

And there's been a lot of jockeying behind the scenes by Elon Musk and others and sort of this push and pull between whether or not they -- for Treasury, which is obviously a key role in setting the agenda for the president on his financial policies, whether they want someone who is close to Wall Street to give comfort to the businesses there and keep the S&P 500 soaring or if they wanted someone who is going to sort of break things up in the mold of some of the other changemakers that we have seen Trump pick so far.

And there are four names that we are looking at right now as potential contenders for this job. They include hedge fund manager Scott Bessent, Senator Bill Hagerty of Tennessee, Kevin Warsh, the former Fed Reserve governor, and Marc Rowan, a billionaire investor.

And at this point we still have just four secretary jobs left to fill. There's Labor, Agriculture, Treasury, and Housing and Urban Development. And as you said, Pamela, these jobs are being filled very quickly. At this point in 2016, Trump had just announced only two of his Cabinet positions. He has only four left to go this time around.

BROWN: All right, Steve Contorno, thank you so much for bringing us the latest on that front.

A lot to discuss now with Democratic Congressman Jake Auchincloss of Massachusetts.

Congressman, thanks for coming on.

Let's begin with Matt Gaetz. The House Ethics Committee is meeting today to discuss this report on allegations of sexual misconduct with a minor against the former congressman, among other allegations, but Trump, as we know, is not backing down on his choice. Let's listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

QUESTION: Mr. President, are you reconsidering the nomination of Matt Gaetz?

DONALD TRUMP, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES (R) AND CURRENT U.S. PRESIDENT-ELECT: No.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: What do you think about this? Do you think the Gaetz Ethics report will be released?

REP. JAKE AUCHINCLOSS (D-MA): It should be.

It's germane to the Senate's advice-and-consent role, because it speaks to the character and lawlessness of Matt Gaetz. Unfortunately, Matt Gaetz is not the only grossly unqualified appointment to the Cabinet though. You have got Robert F. Kennedy as well, a man who in 2019 went to Samoa to derail their vaccination campaign; 83 people died, most of them children.

[11:10:14]

In the United States, the equivalent number would be more than 100,000 people. That's who he's appointing to lead our vaccination efforts in this country.

BROWN: Right. And, of course, for Matt Gaetz's part, he has denied any wrongdoing. And, certainly, RFK Jr. has been a controversial pick on his stance on vaccines, we have reported on extensively, but there are also priorities that he's talked about, about food and trying to make food healthier and so forth that people find appealing.

What do you say?

AUCHINCLOSS: I'm glad that he's caught up to where Michelle Obama was 15 years ago, but we can find a health and human services secretary to give kids healthier food and not give them polio.

Just because he happens to arrive at some sensible positions around ultra-processed food or PFAS does not mean that you appoint a conspiracist who thinks that AIDS is not caused by a virus, who thinks that high-speed Internet gives you leaky brain, who thinks that there is no such thing as a -- quote -- "safe and effective vaccine," who's a 9/11 truther.

And I can keep on going, but the Senate should have heard enough already. And we need some of these reasonable Republicans in the Senate, or so they claim during campaign season, to step up and perform their Article I responsibilities.

BROWN: And, certainly, there are a lot of conspiracy theories that he has pushed out there. Again, we have covered those on this show.

He has said he is not going to take away vaccines. He wants them to be studied more, but I know there is a consensus in the medical community about those concerns, what he said about vaccines, for sure.

I want to ask you about Trump's pick for NATO ambassador, Matt Whitaker, your thoughts on him. As you remember him, he was the acting attorney general under Trump.

AUCHINCLOSS: I don't have an informed opinion of him. I don't know his background. This announcement was just made.

What I can say more broadly is, NATO and the Biden administration for the next two months need to be MAGA-proofing Ukraine. So we need to lift restrictions on Ukraine's use of ATACMS and F-16s to strike Russian oil refinery capacity. We need to be securing this series of loans that are underwritten by the Russian frozen assets, so that they can build out their defense industrial base with a secure financial lifeline.

And we have got to rush materiel to Ukraine via air, not relying on shipments by sea.

BROWN: I want to dive into Ukraine a little bit more, because as we know the U.S. ambassador was -- I mean -- sorry -- the U.S. Embassy just closed there because there was concern about an overhead attack.

President Biden made another big policy shift yesterday, granting permission to send mines against humans to Ukrainian forces to slow Russian advances. That's just days after Biden gave Ukraine the green light to use long-range U.S. missiles in another policy reversal.

I want to listen to what Senator Mitch McConnell, Republican, says about this and why he argues the White House took too long.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. MITCH MCCONNELL (R-KY): I think the Biden administration has been too slow if they really want to help Ukraine win. I'm relieved that the ATACM ban, in effect, has been taken off the shoulders of the Ukrainians, but it should have been done months ago.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: Are Biden's actions too late, especially when we're about to enter the winter months and Russia could shut off power to those relying on it? And there is concern that it could also be drawing the U.S. and NATO closer into war with Russia?

AUCHINCLOSS: I have been calling for the lifting of restrictions on ATACMS and F-16s for at least six months now. This is later than I would have sought, but it is still progress.

But the most important word that Senator McConnell used right there was the word win. And that needs to be the objective of the United States and NATO, not lose, win. NATO has a billion people under its governance. It has an economy 20 times the size of Russia's. It has the best militaries in the world.

If we can't win in Ukraine, then what message are we sending to Tehran, to Beijing, to Pyongyang? We are up against an axis of autocracies, and strength is the language they understand.

BROWN: So it sounds like you agree with Mitch McConnell that this came too late in that -- in what the objective is.

AUCHINCLOSS: It doesn't happen very often, but, on this front, I have long appreciated Senator McConnell's strident and unwavering support for Ukraine.

BROWN: All right, Congressman Jake Auchincloss, thank you so much. Duly noted.

AUCHINCLOSS: Take care.

BROWN: Still to come, I will talk with a Christian Texas lawmaker who is among those pushing back on the proposal to include Bible lessons for students beginning in kindergarten.

We're going to have this discussion after the break. Stay with us. You're in the CNN NEWSROOM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:19:25]

BROWN: Well, Texas is now one step closer to allowing Bible lessons and public elementary schools following this preliminary vote on Tuesday.

Eight out of 15 state school board members backed the proposal. The final vote is set for Friday. And, if approved, schools would have the option to require Christian lessons be taught in reading and English classes as early as kindergarten. Those that adopt such curriculum would also receive an extra $40 per student for doing so.

Texas State Representative James Talarico, a Democrat, joins us now.

So, you are a devout Christian. You are a seminary student. You want to become a minister, ultimately. Yet you oppose this implementation of Bible lessons into elementary curriculum in Texas. Why so?

[11:20:12]

STATE REP. JAMES TALARICO (D-TX): Well, as a former Texas public school teacher and a current seminary student, I know that there's a difference between preaching and teaching.

Under federal law, the Bible can be taught in schools as an academic text, but not in a devotional way. In other words, public schools are not Sunday schools, or, as Governor Greg Abbott is fond of saying, schools are for education, not indoctrination.

And I'm not the only one who thinks that this new curriculum is unconstitutional. The Texas Republicans who created this curriculum include immunity for Texas public school teachers who violate the Establishment Clause of the United States Constitution, otherwise known as the separation of church and state.

I just want to say that again for your viewers. This curriculum includes immunity for teachers violating the Constitution of the United States. This new curriculum is not just unconstitutional. It's not just un-American. It's also deeply un-Christian.

BROWN: So I want to talk about what the proponents of this say about what you just laid out there, but also just follow up on what you pointed out about the Supreme Court, what it has said on this matter.

The Supreme Court has been consistent that there should be separation of church and state and public schools, but it has also said, as you noted, that the Bible can be taught in classrooms in an academic context. So are there Bible lessons that you think are appropriate to be taught in the classroom, given what the Supreme Court has said?

TALARICO: Yes, I think our students should learn about the great faith traditions of the world, including Christianity. It's necessary for them to understand history, understand literature, understand culture.

The problem is that this new curriculum elevates Christianity above the other faith traditions around the world. And, in fact, it preaches, instead of teaches. It says that Jesus rose from the dead. It says that Christianity developed the golden rule. In fact...

BROWN: I'm so sorry.

Representative, we're getting some breaking news in. We're getting some breaking news about the Laken Riley trial, so we have to go to that.

Thank you.

(JOINED IN PROGRESS)

JUDGE H. PATRICK HAGGARD, ATHENS-CLARKE COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT: ... a different role than we typically see.

I will tell you that I make -- you may have seen me. I make notes during the trial. I probably filled up two legal pads full of notes during the trial. But the closings, I wanted to just listen. And that's what I did.

But I wrote down two things in the closing. One was a statement by Ms. Ross that the evidence was overwhelming and powerful. And then I also wrote down what Ms. Beck said, that I'm required to set aside my emotions. That's the same thing that we tell jurors in what -- when we give them their job. I would -- that's the way I have to approach this.

And I did. Both of those statements are correct.

I will now announce the verdict.

In the state of Georgia v. Jose Antonio Ibarra, case SU-24CR-0323, count one, malice murder, I find the defendant guilty. Count two, felony murder, I find the defendant guilty. Count three, felony murder, I find the defendant guilty. Count four, felony murder, I find the defendant guilty. Count five, kidnapping with bodily injury, I find the defendant

guilty. Count six, aggravated assault with intent to rape, I find the defendant guilty. Count seven, aggravated battery, I find the defendant guilty. Count eight, obstruction or hindering a 911 call, I find the defendant guilty. Count nine, tampering with evidence, I find the defendant guilty. Count 10, Peeping Tom, I find the defendant guilty.

I certainly will allow both sides to look at this, if you want to do it.

[11:25:10]

The next step is sentencing. I'm prepared to go forward with that now. Or if either side suggests that you need a few minutes, an hour break or something to do that, then I will -- I will certainly do that as well, consider that.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: (OFF-MIKE)

HAGGARD: Sure.

(AUDIO GAP)

HAGGARD: I understand. I understand.

We will recess until 12:30, recess until 12:30.

Will that work?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes, sir.

HAGGARD: OK. Thank you.

BROWN: All right, we just heard from the judge in the Laken Riley trial his decision that Jose Ibarra is guilty of 10 counts, including four counts of murder.

The judge very clear there. He was guilty of these 10 counts, the most serious being murder, four counts of that.

Joey Jackson, our legal analyst, I want to bring you in.

The judge announced his decision very quickly after closing arguments. And he says he is prepared to move forward with sentencing now.

JOEY JACKSON, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Yes, Pamela, it's not really surprising with respect to the verdict in terms of the guilt on all 10 charges.

The evidence in this case was entirely overwhelming that pointed to Jose Ibarra as the person who would now be a convicted felon for having engaged in this heinous act. Specifically, I think that what happened was is, the prosecution put on a case where you don't listen to what we say, but look at what the evidence shows. And the evidence showed, in terms of technology, his phone being at

that location, her phone, the smartphone that she had indicating it stopping at a specific time on the trail, being dragged into the woods at a specific point in time,in addition to that, the scratches that Mr. Ibarra had on him, not explainable, only if it related to -- could explain it if it relates to what the allegation was and now what the fact has been proven, that he was attempting to rape and kidnap her, et cetera.

Because the fingernails of Laken Riley, underneath them were his DNA. The jacket that he had that was thrown in the dumpster with respect to him leaving the particular scene, having blood and hair fibers on him. So, not surprising in terms of the verdict, and I thought maybe it would take a little bit longer, but the judge explained -- when I say longer in terms of the deliberation, the judge explaining that, saying, look, all throughout this case I have taken copious notes with regard to listening to everything.

And in closing argument, I simply absorbed it and wrote down a couple of things, number one, the overwhelming nature of the evidence,number two, separating my emotion from the equation. I think the judge did both of that.

And if you followed the trial closely, Pamela, it's very clear that the judge got it right.

BROWN: And you heard the crying, I think, in the background. It sounded like sobs, and you have to think about Laken Riley's family members, her mom, who has been sitting in on this trial looking at all of this evidence and how emotional this must be for her, right?

We know part of the evidence that was laid out was that Laken Riley had called her when she started her run, and the mom missed the call and called her back when it was too late after that 911 call, and the prosecution really laying out the case in the closing argument today that Laken Riley in the fight for her life gave all the evidence needed to convict Jose Ibarra of this with that DNA under her fingernails.

Now we're waiting for the sentencing. There's a break right now that the judge has announced, and then he's ready, he said, for the sentencing. What does Jose Ibarra face?

JACKSON: Yes, Pamela, to your point, I could not imagine, no, what the family certainly is going through and has gone through, and to your very core and important and excellent point.

The bottom line is that when a mom is calling her on that day, them showing, the prosecution, the litany of text messages and phone calls, hey, I'm getting worried, I'm getting nervous, where are you, and so, yes, very significant testimony and certainly impactful and emotional testimony.

In terms of where we go to next, the state has been asking for life without the possibility of parole. I think that's exactly what they will get. Now, we have multiple charges here, as we know. We saw the judge lay out the 10, including the malice murder, premeditated murder, felony murder, murder committed in commission of a felony, the battery, in terms of the rocks to the head, the strangulation, et cetera, the Peeping Tom.

Wow. But I think that's exactly what they will get here when the judge renders sentencing. I know they're coming back at 12:30 to do just that, but that's the sentence that he's facing.