Return to Transcripts main page
Dr. Drew
Autistic Teen`s Parents Speak Out; Peyton Manning: Is The NFL`s Mr. Nice Guy Hiding A Dark Secret?; University of Tennessee Facing Lawsuit Around Sexual Assault; O.J. Simpson Miniseries: Fact or Fiction? Aired 9- 10p ET
Aired February 29, 2016 - 21:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(BEGIN VIDEOTPE)
[21:00:15] DR. DREW PINSKY, HLN HOST OF "DR. DREW" PROGRAM (voice-over): Tonight, a Dr. Drew exclusive. The parents of a teen with autism are here
to talk about the fire he set that killed his baby brother, his 15-year sentence and why he does not belong in prison. Plus, Peyton Manning. Is
the NFL`s Mr. Nice guy hiding a dark secret? Let us get started.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
PINSKY (on camera): And, a federal lawsuit has been filed by six former students, all women, against the University of Tennessee. They claim a
hostile sexual environment. This is with regard to male athletes that allegedly allowed rapes to occur. The women cite Peyton Manning during his
time there as quarterback 20 years ago. He, however, is not accused of rape. Take a look.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE REPORTER (voice-over): A former associate athletic trainer at the University of Tennessee says Peyton Manning, then 19, was
among a number of players who sexually harassed her. Jamie Naughright filed a discrimination complaint. She claims that she was examining
Manning who then sat on her face.
Naughright said she made the situation known, but that supervisory personnel did nothing about it. Her attorney`s charge that the influential
Manning family and the school covered things up to protect Peyton, star quarterback and future Super Bowl champion. These are 20-year-old
allegations. The case was settled in 1997 and Naughright left the school, but suits and countersuits followed.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PINSKY: And, Peyton Manning acknowledges in a book about him that his behavior was, quote, "Inappropriate, but then Naughright was not his
intended target. Apparently a teammate was." Manning says he was pulling his pants down to moon another player.
Joining us, AnneElise Goetz, Attorney; Thema Davis, Clinical Psychologist; Georgianna Kelman, Attorney; Chris Kluwe, former NFL Player, who has
publicly called out Manning on Twitter.
I also have Clay Traivis, Sports Journalist, OutkickTheCoverage.com and Fox Sports. And, I got Martin Savage, CNN Correspondent. Martin, that lawsuit
brought 20 years old. Manning, he is not -- it is not the issue specifically about him, is that right?
MARTIN SAVIDGE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: That is correct. This lawsuit -- his name is mentioned in it, but he is not a defendant in this case. The
lawyer that brought this suit stresses that over and over. It is about six University of Tennessee students, who they alleged that while at the
University they were raped by five athletes at the University of Tennessee over a period of 2013 and 2015.
The suit alleges that at the University, they had created or in some way fashioned a kind of atmosphere that is sexually charged within their
athletics program. And, the women contend, it is that which led to their attacks. Now, on top of that, the women are also saying that when they
went to the authorities to report these crimes that the University then tried to interfere, trying to in some way prevent them from getting the
justice that they deserve.
One woman said, she actually went to the hospital, had a rape kit test done, but the authorities never, ever looked at the results. And, then
what happened in this lawsuit, as you point out, is they go into deep history at 20 years ago with Peyton Manning. They are just trying to show,
they say that the University has a bad history when it comes to this. But, in no way are they saying that Peyton Manning is part of the case. It is
very, very serious in the allegations, but it is all present day.
PINSKY: All right, Martin. Thank you so much. I appreciate the report. Now, here is how the school responded to these allegations, quoting them,
"To claim that we have allowed a culture to exist contrary to our institutional commitment to providing a safe environment for our students
or that we do not support those who report sexual assault is just false."
Now, one of the girls was identified in the lawsuit, she is identified as Jane Doe number one. She spoke to CNN by phone. She described these
alleged -- her alleged rape incident. Have a listen to this.
(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)
JANE DOE #1, ACCUSED PEYTON MANNING OF SEXUAL ASSAULT: We started by watching a movie, and then he forced me to give him oral sex. And then he
took my clothes off, and he got on top of me and restrained me by my wrists and started raping me. And, then he looked at me in the face, and his face
changed. And, he looked at me and he said, "Let me tell you something, I do not like you. Do you hear me? I do not like you."
(END AUDIO CLIP)
PINSKY: Chris, I think -- there are two things here, is A. Is Peyton Manning involved in all these? And, why are people wanting to knock down a
guy that -- I mean, it is not Johnny Manziel, right? I mean this is a guy that has been living a certain kind of life.
[21:05:00] It is not -- like we love, you know, tearing people down. It is pathetic how we as a mob, as a culture love doing that. But, I think
what is at issue here and what gets everyone excited is a culture of rape. And, the question is, does football and that institution foster a culture
of rape?
CHRIS KLUWE, FMR. NFL PLAYER: Well, I think with Peyton`s deal, the thing that people are really upset about is that details are now getting out. It
is what you saw with Ray Rice when the video came out. You know, it is what you saw with Greg Hardy, when details of him came out.
PINSKY: Well, the details, you see Ray Rice doing it.
KLUWE: Yes, exactly.
PINSKY: I do not see anything like that with Peyton Manning.
KLUWE: Well, no. So, the court documents that Sean King put out, those were -- a report had USA today sitting on those, you know, that they have
had it and just never published it. So, for a very large amount of people, those details were not known. It was just, "Oh, Peyton Manning kind of had
this thing."
And, for 20 years we have only gotten Peyton Manning`s side of the story. So, now, we are starting to see that there is another side of the story
that is really odds with this image that Peyton is trying to portray, you know, the down home country boy, driving the Buick with the Papa John`s.
It is like, well, wait a minute. If you are going to consistently go after this woman, because it was not just the one time. He wrote about her in
his book and he mentioned it in an interview.
PINSKY: This is this physical therapist --
KLUWE: Right. Right.
PINSKY: He mooned somebody and she ended up in the line of fire.
KLUWE: So, that is the interesting thing is that when you read the court documents, all of his teammates say that, "No, he was not mooning anyone."
They all consistently come out against Peyton.
PINSKY: What was he doing? How do you sit on somebody`s face?
KLUWE: But, that is what he done -- on her face.
(CROSSTALK)
PINSKY: One at a time. So, go ahead, Thema.
THEMA DAVIS, PH.D., CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGIST: It was intentional. As it is described. This is a professional woman. So, it is not just like
miscommunication and someone playing a prank. A professional woman who had been at the University for over ten years, who has her doctorate degree,
was checking his foot. He did not have his clothes on. He slid down to the edge of the table and put his penis on top of her head and his
testicles are in her face.
PINSKY: These are what the court document says.
DAVIS: Yes.
GEORGIANNA KELMAN, ATTORNEY: But, there is a bigger issue here. The University of Tennessee. They likely covered this up. He put them on the
map. We are focusing on Peyton Manning, we are not talking about what the University did. That is what we need to be focusing on, because truly the
facts, we do not have all the facts. And, now, one way or the other, it is being despaired --
PINSKY: Well, let me talk to --
KELMAN: 20 years ago.
PINSKY: I want to go to Clay. Clay, how do you defend all this?
CLAY TRAVIS, SPORTS JOURNALIST: Well, first of all, they are all wrong. In 1996, this woman actually gave a statement. I am going to read
exactlwill read exactly what her statement is. I am a lawyer, too. So, this is really hard to reconcile with her 2003 statement. This is what she
said. She was working on Peyton Manning`s foot when she heard laughter, and looked up to see his exposed rear end. She stated, she then pushed
Peyton Manning and said, "You are an ass."
That is her entire affidavit of her story from what happened in 1996. It was not until 2003 when she was fighting against summary judgment. And, in
her own plaintiff`s filing that suddenly after seven years for the first time, she said that he made contact with her. There is nobody who supports
the idea that he made contact are with her. Some of his teammates out there are saying that he may or may not have been addressing his mooning
either to her or to somebody else. That is in dispute.
There is no eyewitness that says he made contact with her. What is happening here is the Peyton Manning story is overlooking a larger story.
Somebody actually did something wrong. Chris Kluwe said, this was like Ray Rice and Greg Hardy. The actual worst thing that Peyton Manning did in
this story was moon somebody.
(CROSSTALK)
DAVIS: Absolutely not. Absolutely not.
PINSKY: Hold on. We all react in Clay. We are going to take a break. I just do not -- I cannot associate whatever this was -- listen. I am a --
the rape culture has me speechless. There is a rape culture in our society. There is. And, in athletics, it gets bad. I understand that.
And, we are talking about 20 years ago when it was horrible, probably. So, I am not defending the culture.
What I am saying is, when I got a guy like Ray Rice or I got Johnny Manziel, I got a pattern of stuff, and I got video, and I got violence, I
do not see where Peyton Manning registers on that scale. I do not see it. But, we will let the panel ring in for that in just a minute.
And, later, my exclusive. An interview with the parents of an autistic teen. The teen is serving a 15-year prison term for setting a fire that
tragically killed his own baby brother. Back after this.
(MUSIC PLAYING)
[21:10:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PEYTON MANNING, DENVER BRONCOS QUARTERBACK, ACCUSED OF SEXUAL ASSUALT: I enjoy college football. That is obvious. And, I want to be around it
another year. I want to be good player in the NFL. I want to be a high paid first round draft pick in the NFL. I want to be a good player in the
NFL and I am going to work hard to be that.
Obviously, that is going to be tough. I think this year is really going to help me out with that. Another season of experience, playing more games
and another year in the weight room, so it will make me better next year.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PEYTON MANNING: I have been asked about my legacy since I was about 25 years old, which I am not sure you can have a legacy when you are 25 years
old or even 37. I thought you had to be, like, 70.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PINSKY: Peyton Manning himself under fire after documents have surfaced that allege he sexually harassed a female trainer when he was a sophomore
in college. I am back with AnneElise, Thema, Georgianna, Chris, and Clay.
And, Chris, you think Manning needs to speak up and address this. And, you were telling us that you, yourself, come to football organizations with
complaints and have not been satisfied.
KLUWE: Yes. So, to kind of address Clay`s point as to why did all of a sudden, you know, she bring out these further details in 2003, it is --
well, as someone who has been involved in a lawsuit against an NFL team, you originally go into that kind of situation thinking, "OK. Well the team
says they are going to do this investigation. They are going to do the right thing. I can trust that."
And, then about six, seven to eight months down the line, you learn, OK, the team has corporate lawyers and they are really just kind of interested
in winning this case. And, so -- All right. Now, everything needs to be ammunitioned. You need to use everything that you have.
And, so, that means that when your initial affidavit was, "Oh, he put his, you know, his junk on me. I called him an ass and pushed him off," well,
there is a lot more to the story that maybe you did not say --
[21:15:05] PINSKY: It sounds like family court --
KLUWE: Right. Yes. Yes. All right .
PINSKY: But, AnneElise, you were just saying, this is a huge document of documenting a pattern of behavior at a particular institution. And, by the
way, people were tweeting me during the commercial break that this was not something hidden by the institution. Apparently, it was all over the news.
It was being discussed all the time. But, not this is a systematic approach at which he is mentioned a paragraph out of 65 pages, right?
ANNEELISE GOETZ, ATTORNEY: Right. So, we have a 60-some page document. This is one paragraph to show that we have historical problems at this
University. Manning is not -- it is not a smear campaign against Peyton Manning.
PINSKY: This is not like they are saying this young man had a historical pattern of participating in a sexual aggression against women.
GOETZ: Exactly. It is not him. It is not his historical pattern. It is looking at the campus. And, frankly, you talk about the rape culture, Dr.
Drew. And, the best thing that can happen for the media getting involved is to have Manning tied to it.
Because, now we are talking about it, and we are addressing once again this rape culture that we see in the professional sports, in the collegiate
sports, down to high school. Remember the Steubenville case?
PINSKY: Yes.
GOETZ: It goes all the way down to high school. And, so, we have to continue to have this conversation.
PINSKY: All right. All right. But, Thema, you say there is actually more to this.
DAVIS: Yes. My reading of it, immediately afterwards she went to a rape crisis center.
PINSKY: After she had whatever happened.
DAVIS: After whatever happened, she went to a crisis center and what is interesting to me is at what point, how would a woman have to present that
what she would be rallied around? This is a professional woman. This is someone who had worked for the University for years.
So, what would you have to do to be credible in the institution where people would rally around and support you? She ended up had to step away
from the job. She was asked by -- the report that I read, that she was asked by staff people to say that it was someone else involved, that it was
not him.
But, what I want to say is larger than that. If something stinks in the university campuses, where there is pervasive sexual harassment and it gets
silenced. So, he is one piece that as you are describing, it is a much larger issue. And, we have to pay attention to the larger issue.
KELMAN: He is their cash cow. They are going to rally behind him, no matter what. And, the issue is, yes, it was wildly publicized; however,
the actions the university took to hide it and to intimidate these victims, that is the issue. That is what needs to be addressed.
PINSKY: Clay, is that the issue?
TRAVIS: No. I question whether anybody on this panel has actually read any of the lawsuits to be honest with you. Peyton Manning is a small part
of this. And, if you, actually, look at the evidence this is like the UVA rape case with "Rolling Stone." Peyton Manning had nothing to do with
anything. So, if I take Peyton Manning out of the table, what we got here is somebody who is not telling the truth.
KELMAN: I am talking about the University, not Peyton Manning. It is their action not his.
TRAVIS: -- actual victims to be able to come forward. The title IX lawsuit is a substantial issue that should be discussed and deserves.
Instead people are getting distracted by a 20-year-old mooning. We are talking about a mooning.
(CROSSTALK)
PINSKY: Clay, I kind of agree with you, and it pretty much bothers me, by this. It is an important topic. It needs to be discussed, but to hang it
on Peyton Manning because people like to be are tantalized by the idea that this good guy is not such a good guy. That troubles me.
KLUWE: I think Peyton Manning gets you in the door, but the meat of the case is that this is a 20-year-old ago case illustrating the same precedent
of what happened at the University.
PINSKY: Rape culture.
KLUWE: Yes.
GOETZ: Exactly.
KLUWE It is a rape culture --
PINSKY: OK.
KLUWE: -- that is being covered up.
PINSKY: But, here now, we have -- so the mob gets going and now we have a women`s group calling for Papa John`s and nationwide. So, no one is going
to be happy until this man, Peyton Manning, loses a job or has some sort of pain inflicted on him personally or his family. So, he should lose his
commercials?
KELMAN: Absolutely not.
PINSKY: Is that the answer, Peyton Manning, who is a footnote in an important document, that he has to lose jobs before people are OK with it?
DAVIS: We also have to think about as we are feeling bad for him and his Papa John`s endorsement, let us feel bad for this woman.
PINSKY: I feel bad for this woman.
DAVIS: She is starting to build her career. So, I think that is what it is.
KELMAN: And, again, it is back to the NFL. It is back to the university.
PINSKY: Football. Yes.
KLUWE: So, here is the thing, though. Peyton sold you his vision, right? You are sold on the vision of Peyton. He has made his millions of dollars.
She went from making, I think, was $62,000 a year at her job of University of Tennessee to $42,000 a year at the University of Florida when she had to
move. That is a huge pay cut for someone. And, now, she has had to live with the fact that she can no longer pursue that career because of those
actions.
PINSKY: But, Chris, listen. I am -- but it is the university that maybe covering it up, allegedly. It is the university.
KLUWE: Yes, she got a settlement.
PINSKY: OK. She got a settlement. Things worked out ok with her. It was 20 years ago that this screwball as a sophomore in college did something
that he should not have done. Never again. Never anything like that in his life. And what, we are going to make him lose a job because we are not
happy unless he loses a job? How about the university paying a settlement, which they did.
KLUWE: Has he showed any remorse?
PINSKY: If he shows remorse, maybe he -- by the way, if he shows remorse, maybe he will have an actual liability. Clay, finish this up for me.
TRAVIS: If he shows remorse, she will sue him again for non-disclosure violating that agreement. Chris just said she lost $20,000. She got
$300,000. That is 15 years of salary that she made up just like that.
[21:20:04] PINSKY: Which it did, which we are not saying that is bad.
DAVIS: Money does not heal the pain.
(CROSSTALKS)
TRAVIS: And, Peyton Manning is being railroaded here, Drew. I am on your team.
KLUWE: He broke the NDA twice after that.
PINSKY: He did.
KLUWE: Yes. She sued him again, because he broke NDA. Once in his book, once in an interview. So, this idea that Peyton Manning is being
railroaded is ludicrous. He chose to keep talking about this.
DAVIS: And, he mailed her a document that came to her house while she was in South Africa. So, she is not the one who decided to get this going
again.
PINSKY: And, let me be clear, I am not OK with any of this. This is not OK behavior. I am not OK with him coming after her. I am not OK with how
it happened. But, look, people that are a problem that we should be attacking as a mob have a pattern of behavior their whole life.
They are not somebody that did something when they were 19 and never again. Now, this thing, this back and forth between the two of them, I do not know
the details to know what is OK, who is right, who is wrong and how the battled between the two of them is being playing out.
There is a lot more complex issues there than just what happened on that day. It is not OK. Nothing OK about any of this. But should people,
family and their ability to make a living be harmed on either side? I do not think so.
Next up, a deadly fire set by a teen with autism lands him in prison for 15 years. His parents are here to tell us why jail is just not the place for
him. Back after this.
(MUSIC PLAYING)
[21:25:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE REPORTER: A 17-year-old boy with autism collapses in court, facing murder charges in the death of his 14-month-old brother.
Matt Morgan was babysitting when a fire broke out. The baby died and prosecutors say the teen is to blame. They claim he was fascinated by fire
and purposely started it.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
[2125:08] WILLIAM KELLER, SPECIAL AGENT AT SOUTH CAROLINA LAW ENFORCEMENT: It has never been my experience that somebody would accidentally set a fire
in a room with a 14-month-old.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE REPORTER: But, the teen`s family insisted the son is innocent. They say investigators coerced a confession.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
PINSKY: Now, Matt Morgan has accepted a plea deal and will spend the next 15 years in prison. The question is that the right place for him. And,
now, his parents are being blamed for allowing the autistic child, the teenager with a fire fascination to babysit an infant. And, they are here
for an exclusive interview with us.
I am back with AnneElise, Thema, Georgianna and joining us is Georgianna`s husband, Joanthan Kelman. Fist time we have had a married couple on the
set, except me and my wife. We have actually survived this. And, these two have a son, who himself is developmentally disabled. So, AnneElise, is
it fair that people target these parents?
GOETZ: Well, you are looking for someone to blame. I think, America, whenever you lose a life of a 14-month-old, you are looking for, who is at
fault here. And, there is this general reaction of this autistic child should not be going to jail. Well, if he is not going to jail then who
should be, because someone died. There was a fire and we need answers.
PINSKY: Whom do we blame?
GOETZ: As a community, whom do you blame?
PINSKY: Whom do you blame? Now, as parents of a child with challenges, do you see it differently?
JONATHAN KELMAN, SON IS DEVELOPMENTALLY DISABLED: Yes. I see this a little bit differently than others who do not have a child with special
needs. Having a child with special needs as a parent, you know your child better than anybody else. And, if you know your child is fascinated with
something, you have to be very careful.
And, the fact that they left this child, who previously -- a week or so previously was playing with fire and then they left him to watch an infant,
is just unacceptable. As I believe Dr. Drew has said in the past, big people are supposed to watch little people.
PINSKY: Absolutely.
DAVIS: But --
PINSKY: But, they did allow that.
JONATHAN KELMAN: Well, the problem is, the big person that I am talking about is the parents.
PINSKY: Yes.
JONATHAN KELMAN: The parents left a child with a fascination for fire.
GEORGIANNA KELMAN: I will give you an example related directly to me. My child has a seizure disorder. For the past two years, he has been seizure
free. We have left him alone a few times, because he has expressed he wants to be independent, for 20 minutes at a time. I was really
comfortable that we had passed that phase.
A week ago he had a massive seizure at school. So, I am warning -- I am now -- there was a huge wake-up call. I will never leave my child alone
again. If I do and something happens to him, it is a 100 percent on me. It is similar.
PINSKY: So, let us bring in the parents. I got Myke and Julie here. They are with us now. They are Matt Morgan`s parents. Now, Mike and Julie,
first of all, thank you for joining us. I appreciate you being willing to discuss this with us.
MYKE HILL, MATT MORGAN`S STEPFATHER: Thank you.
JULIE HILL, MATTHEW MORGAN`S MOTHER: Thank you.
PINSKY: And, you know, this is probably going to be a tough conversation, because people are wanting to blame you. And, this is a tragedy. Let us
not sugar coat it. This is a horrible thing. It must feel as though you have lost two children. We are starting from a place where I am not
looking for more victims here, but people do ask, how did they let this happen?
JULIE HILL: Of course, they ask that. But, the thing is one statement that was just made that you know your child better than anyone, and that is
true. What people are hearing is what the prosecution says my son had. A fascination with fire brings people to think that he loved to set things on
fire and watch them burn does not at all true. He would never hurt his brother, and with the disabilities --
PINSKY: but, Julie, let us say this --
JULIE HILL: -- because he is not severely autistic.
PINSKY: He is not severely autistic. He is not?
JULIE HILL: No, he is not severely autistic. He, under the umbrella term of autism in the DSM-5 --
PINSKY: Yes.
JULIE HILL: The psychiatrist did not find him autistic, but with autistic tendencies.
PINSKY: Oh.
JULIE HILL: Under the old versions of the DSM, he would be on the autism spectrum.
PINSKY: OK. Got it.
GEORGIANNA KELMAN: May I ask what his developmental age is?
JULIE HILL: I am sorry.
GEORGIANNA KELMAN: I know he is 17. His own developmental age?
PINSKY: Yes.
JULIE HILL: They have said that emotionally, he would be targeted at somewhere around 14, about three years behind emotionally. But,
cognitively, he does understand and he can function as well as any other person. He has issues with school work and has to be taught how to -- he
was taught how to take care of a baby. We did not just leave him with the baby without teaching him what it means.
[21:30:23] PINSKY: Julie, I got to be honest. And, I want to hear from Myke, too, if you do not mind. But, here is my thing. This is me. You
know, Dr. Drew, age 17. Not me trained, me as a 17-year-old screwball like all male screwballs are, as 17-year-olds males are. If you had given me
responsibility for an infant, I would have screwed it up. There is no way I could have done it.
Did you have, Myke, any concerns? You have been a 17-year-old male. You know how our brains work and then you got a child that has challenges. Did
it bother you, did you worry about leaving him alone with an infant?
MYKE HILL, MATT MORGAN`S STEPFATHER: Not a bit. I mean I am the oldest in my family. I have had to babysit my brothers and sisters growing up.
PINSKY: How many kids were in your family of origin, Myke?
MYKE HILL: Me, myself, I have a younger sister and a brother, who is ten years younger than me.
PINSKY: So, three. And, how many kids do you, guys, have, the two of you?
JULIE HILL: In total we have five children. Including Josh.
PINSKY: Five kids.
JULIE HILL: He was in charge that morning. Yes.
PINSKY: Why so many kids if you cannot -- Thema, help me.
JULIE HILL: Because God gives us children.
DAVIS: Yes. And I understands that.
JULIE HILL: God gives us children. We do not believe in not having them.
PINSKY: So, wait a second. Hang on a second. Hold on a second.
JULIE HILL: OK.
PINSKY: So, you do not believe in birth control of any type?
JULIE HILL: I am not saying we do not believe in birth controls of any type. But, we were blessed with five children, so we had five children.
PINSKY: Thema, go ahead.
JULIE HILL: We do not believe in terminating them.
PINSKY: Oh, no, no, I am not suggesting that.
DAVIS: I understand just from reading your interview that a part of the challenge was economic. In terms of at the time you had one car and you
had --
PINSKY: But, that is why I am asking why so many kids, though, because --
DAVIS: But, I think probably with more resources you would have made a different decision. But, maybe you can shed light for people to get a
sense of your decision-making or the regret?
GEORGIANNA KELMAN: I am wondering if you have any support? Do you access resources?
PINSKY: I will tell you what? Let us leave them with those questions. I will let you, guys, think about that across the break. Resources are key.
Resources are scant for people --
GEORGIANNA KELMAN: Absolutely.
PINSKY: Again, in particular with kids with special needs.
GEORGIANNA KELMAN: That is all I do for a living is fight for resources.
PINSKY: And, you know, how hard that is. You and I had these conversations before.
GEORGIANNA KELMAN: It is impossible --
PINSKY: It is hard for people to get the resources they need. And, so, you should feel sympathy for people that are trying and struggling. But,
why so many kids? But, OK, we will continue this conversation.
Later, O.J. Simpson in a miniseries about his trial; how much is fact, how much is fiction. Harvey Levin joins us. We will talk about all this after
the break.
(MUSIC PLAYING)
[21:35:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PINSKY (voice-over): A teen with autism is accused of killing his 14- month-old brother by deliberately setting the fire that claimed his life.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE REPORTER (voice-over): Matt Morgan sank to the floor before leaving the courtroom saying softly that he wanted his mother.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE REPORTER (voice-over): Matt Morgan was babysitting when a fire broke out. The baby died and prosecutors say the teen is to
blame.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GOETZ: I think that this case has a lot more evidence that people are kind of glossing over that shows this guy did commit this crime
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SPIRIT, PSYCHOTHERAPIST: I am so pissed not at the boy, but at his parents. Whatever he gets, Dr. Drew his parents should get double the
amount of time.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PINSKY: Well, the parents at the center of this controversy, Myke and Julie Hill join us exclusively. I am back with AnneElise, Thema,
Georgianna, and Jonathan. And, Myke and Julie, let me just restate something, and that is -- Listen, my heart breaks for you guys.
You have a dead infant and you have a son you love in prison. This is a tragedy. This I, you know -- but we are talking about it. And, so, you
kind of have to try to understand what is going on here. You want to make sure it does not happen to somebody else for sure.
And, my question I was trying to frame before the break was if you knew that the economic situation was so stressful for you guys, which I get that
it is and there was such limited resources and we will address that in a second, but why have more kids? That is going to make your economic
distress so much worse.
MYKE HILL: My question would be why are people worried about our economic distress and not worrying about the discrepancies in the officer`s
statements or the fact that our son was held for five hours being bullied by three large men.
PINSKY: OK. I am with you on that one, because to me it reminds me of the Brendan Dassey situation in "Making a Murderer." It reminds me exactly of
that. And, I am going to address that in a second. Before we do, Georgianna, I will ask you a question again about that resources.
GEORGIANNA KELMAN: Well, I want to -- I understand they have five children, which I can only imagine the hardship. But, what I want to know
is what resources do you access. South Carolina is different than California. In California, you have what is called respite care.
You go to the regional center. Your child is qualified for services and you are entitled to a certain number of hours per week where your child
never has to be alone. You have someone that the state pays for, that is at home watching your child.
PINSKY: Well, do you have anything like that? Let us just get to that -- guys.
JULIE HILL: I had my son evaluated by the appropriate department of disabilities when he was younger.
PINSKY: Yes.
JULIE HILL: They did not find that he was, quote/unquote --
PINSKY: There you go.
JULIE HILL: "Autistic enough to qualify for such things."
PINSKY: Got it. Got it.
JULIE HILL: Like I said. He is very functional.
GEORGIANNA KELMAN: But, you got to keep fighting.
JULIE HILL: On the spectrum, he is closer -- oh, no, we continued.
[21:40:00] PINSKY: Yes. And, Georgianna, if I did not know you, I would not know to do it. I strongly say.
GEOGIANNA KELMAN: And, that is the problem with parents.
PINSKY: Let us get to the confession. You, guys, want to talk about that. I just got a couple of minutes to do so, because this is an outrageous part
of the story. In his own handwriting, your son, quote, says, "I did not cook, burn or light anything at all, have not played with fire," there it
is, "in two weeks."
The investigators` version of Matt`s interrogation is they say, quote, "Morgan said he set both fires by accident." So, Myke, what was going on
there? How come they do not let you, guys, in the room or attorney in the room? What was that all about?
MYKE HILL: Honestly, they just wanted him as their target. This was their plan from the get-go. Because if josh had not passed in that fire then
this would have been swept under the rug as a big tragic accident, there would have been nothing else about it.
GOETZ: But, I think the problem here is that when they had the investigator come in, they found that people had -- they found that the two
fires had been set. And, as a result that is why they started looking into arson. It was not someone died, we are going to find someone.
It was we had an investigation. Someone set these fires. We need to figure out if there was foul play going on here. That is why there was an
investigation. That is why the prosecutor was involved. That is why the police are involved. It was not just to attack, go after your son.
JONATHAN KELMAN: The question though --
GEORGIANNA KELMAN: The question is was that proper procedure, though? You have, at the end of the day, a child with autism. And, he was interrogated
for five hours. It was not recorded. So, how do we know that in fact, he confessed?
GOETZ: I, actually, do not think that -- I think the confession situation is it is not good for the prosecutor.
GEORGIANNA KELMAN: Absolutely not.
JONATHAN KELMAN: Yes.
GOETZ: And, I think that it actually had gone to court and because he pled guilty, we are not going to see it go to court. But, if it actually gone
to court, the defense attorney might have been able to get it thrown out.
PINSKY: All right. So, why did not it go to court? It did not go to court, Julie -- I know Myke is having some trouble technically, Julie But,
is it the fact that he did not go to court? Why did not he go to court, because of the so-called confession?
JULIE HILL: Excuse me. The reason he did not go to court -- or rather to trial is because, one, he did have those confessions that it was the
prosecutor`s word mostly against his, whether or not he had actually said those things.
PINSKY: And, why were not you there or the attorneys there with him?
JULIE HILL: And, whether he was bullied.
PINSKY: Right. How come there was no one there with him. Can you tell us that.
(CROSSTALKS)
GEORGIANNA KELMAN: Has he read his Miranda rights?
JONATHAN KELMAN: They are not going to allow that. They are going to put him in his own room.
PINSKY: Wow! Wait a second.
JULIE HILL: Well, the reason we are not allowed in there --
PINSKY: Go ahead.
JULIE HILL: I requested it. We requested -- we told them from the beginning. They actually took us out of the room before they took him, so
we did not know at first that he was being interrogated. We told them that he has learning disabilities. And, had trouble understanding some of the
more complex questions that I was sure they were asking him. They told me since he was 17 years old, it was not required that we be there.
PINSKY: I understand that. Jonathan, you are saying they would not allow that?
JONATHAN KELMAN: Why would they allow the parents in there when they know that they are going to get a confession from this child.
PINSKY: But, they are going to muscle a confession from him. How is that OK?
JONATHAN KELMAN: This is not new. This happens all the time.
(CROSSTALKS)
GEROGIANNA KELMAN: It happened in South Carolina.
JONATHAN KELMAN: Officers are good at playing good guy, bad guy. And, I guarantee when they were in that room, they kept telling this poor child
that he could go home.
PINSKY: I saw the Brendan Dassey thing and I saw read what the pre- interview from the parents who said that this kid believed a police -- that they are going to shoot him if he did not give them the right sort of --
you can get out of this interview unless tell them what they need to hear.
So, listen, Julie and Myke, we are not going to be able to solve this tonight. There is a lot of complexity to your case. You know, we are
trying to understand how it happened. We want to know what went wrong with the system. But, mostly, I want you to know I appreciate you being here.
And, regardless of all the conversations we have, our heart breaks for you with this story. It is a tragedy. And, I could just imagine -- I cannot
imagine, truth be known, what you must be going through. A dead infant and a teenage child you love in prison, himself suffering for what had
happened.
Already -- forget the prison sentences. He has another prison sentence, which is he knows that he is being blamed for his brother is death. It is
awful. And, I appreciate you, guys, being here. Hopefully, I will have another chance to speak with you. Good luck, OK?
JULIE HILL: Thanks.
PINSKY: All right. Next, we are going to take a look at the latest episode of "The People v. O.J. Simpson. Back after this.
(MUSIC PLAYING)
[21:45:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CUBA GOODING JR., AS O.J. SIMPSON IN "THE PEOPLE V. O.J. SIMPSON" T.V. MINISERIES: You have got to know this. I loved her. I loved Nicole more
than you can possibly imagine. She is the mother of my children. I did not do it. I did not. I could not have done it. I swear. There is no
way I could have killed her. No way.
COURTNEY B. VANCE, AS JOHNNIE COCHRAN IN "THE PEOPLE V. O.J. SIMPSON" T.V. MINISERIES: We get one black juror, just one and I give you a hung jury.
When I give you a hung jury, you are going home.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PINSKY: That may have been the moment that changed the fate for O.J. That is as depicted on the FX series "The People V. O.J. Simpson." I am back
with Rolonda Watts, the host of the podcast "Rolonda on Demand." She had covered the Simpson case.
Still with us Thema, Georgianna and Jonathan. In this particular episode was about Johnnie Cochran`s legal strategy, which was to claim that a
racist and corrupt LAPD framed Simpson for murder. And, Rolonda, that was a strategy. How then did they convince the jury?
[21:50:00] ROLONDA WATTS, HOST OF "ROLONDA ON DEMAN" PODCAST: Oh my God! It was a brilliant strategy at that. Because, you know, two years before
this time, Los Angeles had blown up over the Rodney King situation. And, to have that one piece of doubt that quite obviously there were many who
believed that the police could have set up O.J., that there was a conspiracy.
PINSKY: And, was there a score to settle?
WATTS: And, probably.
PINSKY: Because that was never made explicit.
WATTS: No. But, that results -- It was just a time when so much information was coming out about Mark Fuhrman and his racist background and
even the police officers were ashamed of some of the things that Mark Fuhrman had done. So, that with the climate of the contrary at that time,
it was "We got to get one here" and it was also, "Well, maybe he could have been set up."
PINSKY: Right. Who could trust this police department? Well, I also got Harvey Levin on the phone. He is the executive producer at TMZ. He also
got a new show called "South of Wilshire." He covered the O.J. trial. Welcome, Harvey.
HARVEY LEVIN, COVERED O.J. SIMPSON TRIAL: Hey, Dr. Drew.
PINSKY: We enjoy the new game show. It happens in a cafeteria. You got to see it -- to explain -- to me to tell you what happens. It is hard to
explain. But, you said, back to the O.J. trial that the change of the location of the trial was a critical decision. Explain that.
LEVIN: I think it was the critical decision. By the way, we are going to get back to that game show for the explanation. Let me just say that the
single biggest decision and single biggest misstep, even bigger than the gloves was the decision by the district attorney to move the case from
Santa Monica where it should have been tried to downtown Los Angeles.
And , here is why. When you watch the show, it made it seem like the D.A. moved the trial because he was worried about a possible Rodney King-type
verdict and a subsequent riot. That was not the case.
I mean, look, there were a lot of people involved in this, who talked to me and said, look, I am not criticizing the D.A. necessarily for wanting to
manage the case because he is the D.A., but it is easier to manage the case when you are in downtown L.A. where his office is than Santa Monica, which
is miles away. The problem is this. If the case were tried in Santa Monica, it would have been an all white jury.
PINSKY: Yes.
LEVIN: And, by the way, a jury of O.J. Simpson`s peers. He lived in Brentwood, that is where the murders were and that who his friends were.
And, so, it would have been tried in Santa Monica. They could not make an argument that, "Oh, God! They are trying O.J. with a white jury. He lived
there. That was his life.
And, Johnnie Cochran could not have even raised this issue of the police are racists and they planted the evidence. It would not have gone over
with this jury. He has absolutely been guilty.
PINSKY: And, Harvey --
LEVIN: And, I do not think Johnnie would have ever even raised the racial defense. By the end of the criminal trial in downtown Los Angeles, 11 of
12 jurors were black. And, I think Rolonda is right that there were enough problems in the African-American community in L.A. where people knew people
who were setup that they were a receptive audience.
PINSKY: And, originally, O.J. refused to allow Cochran to be part of the defense team, right?
WATTS: He wanted a guy named Gerry Spence. The word is that, that is who he wanted. And, he fought that, but as we saw in th displayed in the
movie, that was who he had to have at that point.
PINSKY: We got to a break. It is -- he won the case.
WATTS: Won the case.
PINSKY: But we will be right back after the break. We are going to keep this conversation going. Please do stay with us. More to say.
(MUSIC PLAYING)
[21:55:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CUBA GOODING, JR., AS O.J. SIMPSON: You want to make this a black thing. That is why you want Cochran, but I am not black. I am O.J.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PINSKY: We are talking about O.J. Simpson as depicted on FX series "The People V. O.J. Simpson." And, Jonathan, you have a question I want to toss
out to Harvey, go ahead.
JONATHAN KELMAN: I guess, Harvey, is not it true that if the more money you have, the better defense you are going to have?
PINSKY: Now, the legal system is rigged if you are a famous athlete with a lot of money, it is rigged on your behalf?
JONATHAN KELMAN: It feels that way.
PINSKY: Go ahead, Harvey.
LEVIN: Absolutely. I mean, you can get justice -- you can get the best justice money can buy and they did. He did with Johnnie -- I got to tell
you something. Johnnie Cochran seen a lot of lawyers. He is like an artist. I think of Johnnie Cochran like a Picasso. He was incredible. He
is also expensive.
And, they had F. Lee Bailey. They have Robert Shapiro. They have Barry Scheck. They have Peter Neufeld. They had a lot of people on that team.
But, you know what, it bought them an acquittal. And, I think that -- I cannot think of anybody really other than Johnnie who could have pulled it
off. It was unbelievable watching it unfold. And, for all of you, guys, there who saw it, it was a sight to behold.
PINSKY: Harvey, is there something wrong --
LEVIN: And, yes, if you get good lawyers, they are expensive and good lawyers can get you off.
PINSKY: Well, I do not have enough time to get into the system. But, I wanted you, from Rolonda who have to saw the artist at work.
WATTS: Yes. He was absolutely brilliant man, who was also a KAPPA. He was a frat brother of my dad`s.
PINSKY: Oh, wow!
WATTS: So, I got to sit and watch him like just behind the scenes, which is just a fascinating man.
PINSKY: I did a presentation with him and Judith Regan at Carnegie Hall. Believe it or not. It was on behalf of Michael Jackson -- long story.
But, he could not have been more gracious.
WATTS: He is a cool cat.
PINSKY: Yes, cool dude.
WATTS: He is a cool dude.
PINSKY: And his son. You forget this piece, his son is a police officer.
WATTS: Yes.
PINSKY: Remember this? He was in the LAPD, if I remember it right.
WATTS: Yes.
DAVIS: Some people in the community were not just cheering for O.J., but were cheering for Johnnie Cochran. They saw him as a hero of the
community.
WATTS: Absolutely.
PINSKY: That is really interesting.
WATTS: Absolutely.
PINSKY: Well, we will keep watching this series on FX. Harvey, again, I have no time left. But, we will watch for you on "South of Wilshire," OK,
and on TMZ. I appreciate you joining us. Please DVR this show then you can watch us any time.
And, do tell a friend if you like this program. We hope that is the way we get things done here by word of mouth. So, please get the word out that we
are having a good time here. So, please tell a friend. And, I appreciate the panel, all of you for joining us today. I appreciate you, guys, for
watching and we will see you next time.
[22:00:00] (AUDIENCE APPLAUDING)
(MUSIC PLAYING)
END
