Return to Transcripts main page
Dr. Drew
Chris Brown`s Arrest; Husband Hold wife Hostage for 12 Days; Florida Supreme Court Slams Circuit Judge Behavior; QB Colin Kaepernick Refuses to Stand for Anthem. Aired 7-8p ET
Aired August 31, 2016 - 19:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[19:00:00] DAN ABRAMS, HLN HOST: I`m Dan Abrams in for Dr. Drew. Remember last night when Chris Brown`s attorney told us there was nothing about the
allegations against him? And remember when I said that I had no sympathy for Brown as he railed against the police on Instagram? Well, now, he`s
been arrested again and the woman who accused him of threatening her with a gun says she feels validated.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: All these girls are crazy for Chris Brown.
KYUNG LAH, CNN CORRESPONDENT: The LAPD says a woman did call police for help, prompting the law enforcement response. Baylee Curan tells TMZ she`s
the one who called 911, saying during a party at his house, Brown pointed a weapon at her.
BAYLEE CURRAN, ACCUSED CHRIS BROWN OF ASSAULT: He pulled out a gun and he said get the "F" out of here and threatened me with it.
LAH: As the police presence grew, the singer posted videos on Instagram.
CHRIS BROWN, SINGER: Barricaded myself in my house. Have you seen my house?
MARK GERAGOS, CHRIS BROWN"S ATTORNEY: My client`s position is that we`re cooperating. There is no truth to it and we`re going to let it play out.
CHRIS RAMIREZ, LOS ANGELES POLICE DEPARTMEN: He`s going to be booked for ADW, assault with a deadly weapon.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ABRAMS: All right, joining me now is Anahita Sedaghatfar as an attorney, Darren Kavinoky, attorney and host of "Deadly Sins" on Investigation
Discovery, and Thema Davis, psychologist. Also joining me is Pat Lalama, managing editor of "Crime Watch Daily" with Chris Hansen. All right, so
Pat, what`s the latest on the arrest?
PAT LALAMA, CRIME WATCH DAILY MANAGING EDITOR: Well, the latest on the arrest is that he will have a court date on September 20th. It`s a felony
assault with a deadly weapon. One thing we need to consider here, his dues to society regarding the Rihanna incident are over and done with. So this
is a brand-new case. There`s no probation violation or anything of that ilk with this particular case, but it`s a serious charge. We`ll have to see how
it plays out.
ABRAMS: You know what gets me, is Brown`s accuser Baylee Curran now feeling the wrath of Chris Brown`s fans. Here is what she told ABC.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CURRAN: Well, I thought he was going to shoot me. He took the gun out like this, put it in my face and said get the "F" out. I was getting a lot of
hate mail from the fans, very, very hurtful saying, kill yourself, you`re a snitch, you`re a snake.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ABRAMS: Anahita, we see this in a lot of high-profile cases. Someone accuses a celebrity and they become the villain.
ANAHITA SEDAGHATFAR, ATTORNEY: Right. And unlike you, I actually have sympathy for Chris Brown here and I know he`s troubled. He clearly needs
help. We know that. He has a rap sheet longer than my arm. But the facts aren`t out yet so why are we already convicting him? I mean, if you look at
the accuser. Let`s look at her credibility. OK, she had her pageant crown taken away from her because she was doing unethical things. She has a
warrant out for her arrest.
DARREN KAVINOKY, INVESTIGATION DISCOVERY DEADLY SINS HOST: She was asked to give back the crown by the way.
SEDAGHATFAR: She has a warrant out for her arrest. She has a restraining order out against her, and Dan, she ran all over the media giving media
interviews, talking to TMZ, smiling. If a gun was really pointed at you and you feared for your life, would you be running and talking to anyone in the
media who would give you a camera?
ABRAMS: Why not? I mean what the -- why not?
SEDAGHATFAR: Well, if you question her credibility -- I`m not saying she`s not telling the truth, but when you look at it he said/she said case, I
think you have to look at the credibility of both parties. Her credibility in my mind is extremely questionable.
ABRAMS: Pat, you guys interviewed her. Did she seem not credible to you.
LALAMA: Here is my take. Now, do I know -- did I give her a lie detector? No. But my take is that the story sounds credible. She may be a nut case,
who knows? I mean I use that term very loosely here. Who knows what she is about psychologically? But the point is she seemed very credible in telling
the story and the thing that really got me, Dan, she talks about running down the driveway and she sees one of the crew, Chris Brown`s crew get in a
black jeep and come down the driveway in search of her and she was scared for her life.
It sounded real. For whatever problems she has -- the larceny allegations in New York and her pursuit of celebrity, that`s a separate issue. That
goes to credibility, but I think if there are enough people in that house who say I saw a gun pointed at her, that`s a crime.
ABRAMS: Darren, let`s talk about the charges here and what he`s possibly facing and (inaudible) feel free to weigh in.
KAVINOKY: Sure. Well, it`s assault with a deadly weapon. The gun, which technically is a wobbler, meaning that now, the prosecutors have the
discretion to review the evidence and decide whether to file it as a misdemeanor or a felony even though he`s been arrested for the felony
arrest.
If he is convicted of a felony though, now it`s going to turn on what kind of gun is it because assault with a deadly weapon with a firearm carries a
maximum of four years unless it`s a semi automatic firearm in which case you can bump that number up to nine. So, I don`t know what kind of gun she
is alleging was pointed at her but it makes a big difference.
[19:05:00] ABRAMS: And what do you think -- what do you think went into the police decision to charge? I mean, why -- the credibility does become the
key, right? The accuser`s credibility. What sorts of things do you think that they went through to say, OK, look we believe it. We think it happened
enough we are going to arrest this guy and charge him.
KAVINOKY: Well, at that point, the police are under immense pressure to make a quick decision so it`s going to be based on people that they can
interview on the scene. Who knows, whether there`s videotape out there or some independent corroborating evidence that frankly in a he said/she said
kind of a case, it`s probably more...
SEDAGHATFAR: You talk about celebrity justice, if this was not a celebrity, I doubt that they would have made that decision, the authorities, that
early on. I feel like sometimes celebrity justice can work against a celebrity and you have...
THEMA DAVIS, PSYCHOLOGIST: But I think they`re going to raise -- if we`re going to raise the issue of credibility, then we have to look at Chris
Brown`s credibility and his track record in terms of violence against women. And I would say psychologically, the best predictor of future
behavior is past behavior. And his past behavior shows that he would be willing to go there if he was asked (ph).
ABRAMS: And I want to skip forward -- I want to let you answer this. I want to just tell the control to pull up the sound of Chris Brown talking about
the police, but go ahead Pat.
LALAMA: Well, I just want to say one thing. Consistency. I`m sure the lawyers, all of you who have been in this business for a long time, you
know, consistency is an important thing. And her story does seem to stay consistent with all the myriad media she`s spoken to. It doesn`t seem to
divert. She tells a story that sounds like it really happened.
ABRAMS: I got a lot of heat last night on social media about going after Chris Brown. And I`m going to play this again because what we`ve done is we
put together all the lovely comments that Chris Brown made about the police last night on Instagram. When they go to his house, remember, why did they
go to his house? Because a woman calls the police and alleges that he pulled a gun on her. The police didn`t just show up. She reports this. Here
is what he has to say about the police.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BROWN: I`m not coming out, for what? I ain`t this (BLEEP). I ain`t going to do (BLEEP). And it`s always going to be (BLEEP) the police, Black Lives
Matter (BLEEP). I don`t care. Y`all going to stop playing with me like I`m the villain out here like I`m going crazy. I`m not. When I call the police
for a stalker people that are endangering my life, they don`t come till the next day.
Let somebody (BLEEP) allegation about me. Oh, yeah, the whole (BLEEP) S.W.A.T. Team. Good luck. When you get the warrant or whatever you need to
do, you`re going to walk right up in here and you`re going to see nothing, you idiots. I`m tired of (BLEEP). You`re the worst gang in the world, the
police, and I said it (BLEEP) you.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ABRAMS: Anahita, for moment before you were saying that you were challenging me for having no sympathy for Chris Brown. And then you were
just listening to that and you were like, "Oh, my God, I can`t believe he said that."
SEDAGHATFAR: Yeah, that`s pretty bad. In fact is, that`s bad. But legally, look, Mark Geragos has come out and said we can prove we have evidence that
this did not happen. And of course the media tapes this and it`s a...
ABRAMS: What do you mean the media tapes? He put it on...
SEDAGHATFAR: The media has convicted him.
ABRAMS: Wait, he put it on.
SEDAGHATFAR: Have you read the headlines? But have you read the headlines? I agree from a PR perspective...
ABRAMS: What do you mean PR perspective? Don`t blame the media for him being an idiot.
SEDAGHATFAR: Standoff, OK, standoff with police -- Dan that was the headline. He assaults a woman with a gun. We don`t have all the facts. And
you know what, the end of the day I do, I blame the media for rushing to judgment and also putting pressure on authorities.
(CROSSTALK)
ABRAMS: OK, go ahead.
DAVIS: In this day and time, people do use social media as a way to garner some power.
ABRAMS: I want to ask you that. I want to ask Tami about that. All these people, all these fans of Chris Brown, right, doing just the opposite of
what you`re saying, which is presuming -- but of course it`s not true. How could Chris Brown possibly commit this sort of crime? And his fans going
bananas on this woman. What is it that leads people to sort of get that incredible passion about a guy that they don`t know, and the only thing
they should know about him is the things that have happened in the past?
DAVIS: In psychology we call it...
LALAMAS: ...he`s made himself a victim and that`s what people love. He`s a big star and he`s a victim and he`s playing to all those people.
(CROSSTALK)
DAVIS: In psychology we have something called a halo effect. And so if you have one positive thing, people assume everything about you is positive. So
he`s talented, he can sing and he can dance. And so based on the talent that people decide that they`re going to believe he`s a good person and
anyone who they feel comes after him, they attack, which is really problematic. But it`s hard for us to separate talent from character.
KAVINOKY: Well, I just have to laugh a little bit. I can`t imagine the amount of Pepto-Bismol that Geragos is swallowing as his client is posting
on Instagram. The right to remain silent only helps you if you choose to exercise it. And posting things on Instagram generally is unwise.
ABRAMS: And one of the questions that arose because of that was, did he take any drugs et cetera or alcohol? Chris Brown reportedly drug tested
after his arrest. The results are not being made public tonight. But the question is, does it even matter, right? Does it matter? I mean, it may
matter for the custody part of it, but does it matter in terms of the criminal case?
SEDAGHATFAR: It`s not a defense. It might be a mitigating factor. It just depends on what the circumstances are but kudos to him for not speaking.
ABRAMS: A mitigating factor for who?
[19:10:00] SEDAGHATFAR: Yes, for Chris Brown.
ABRAMS: What?
SEDAGHATFAR: He was under the influence -- well because, yes, it`s a mitigating factor in terms of state of mind. For a specific intent crime,
it is. It`s not a defense, but it can be considered a mitigating factor in terms of state of mind.
ABRAMS: In sentencing.
LALAMA: By the way, Dan. By the way, just so you know, on the drug issue, she was asked -- we asked about was he under the influence? And she wanted
to protect him and his friends. She said, "You know, I don`t really want to go there and get people in trouble."
(CROSSTALK)
ABRAMS: Let`s listen to it. Here is what Baylee Curran said about the drug use at Chris Brown`s party.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HARVEY LEVIN, TMZ FOUNDER: Was there a lot of drinking and were there drugs there?
CURRAN: Um -- I honestly just want to give the information about what happened to me and I really don`t want to disclose anything further. I
don`t want any more trouble with Chris. I don`t want any more trouble with anybody else. I honestly did not ask for this.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ABRAMS: Ha, ha, ha.
(CROSSTALK)
ABRAMS: I wonder, let`s see. No.
(CROSSTALK)
DAVIS: ...protective of him, but I think that she is aware of the victim blaming that goes on. So, people assume, while you were there, so it must
be your fault. If you were using substances...
ABRAMS: But she also doesn`t want to admit that she was -- if...
DAVIS: Right, that`s what I`m saying.
LALAMA: I think she is afraid of revenge, too. I think she`s clearly afraid of the task (ph).
SEDAGHATFAR: Why is she going over every single media outlet and telling her story as if it was just a regular story? Come on. She wants her 10
minutes of fame. That`s what it seems like. If I was a juror on that case, I would say, you know what? I don`t know, I don`t think she`s that
credible.
DAVIS: I think (inaudible) is true, that she is interested in a public platform and he may have also pulled a gun on her.
LALAMA: And therein lies the problem when you have credibility issues in all these court cases that we cover, but you know, one thing that she said
is, you know, if I wanted to get famous, I would do it this way? I don`t no.
DAVIS: No, I think it was on credibility...
SEDAGHATFAR: Bad behavior gets rewarded and she knows that much, at least.
ABRAMS: All right, I don`t know. Look, he was arrested and we`ll be following the case. So, next up, we`re going to change topics. This next
story is awful, all right? The question is did a man accused of literally torturing his wife -- literally -- benefit from a bungled legal decision
that may have led him to murder her?
And later, a judge in big trouble for berating and jailing a domestic violence victim, it was all on tape. Back after this.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
YASMIN VOSSOUGHIAN, DAILY SHARE HOST: I`m Yasmin Vossoughian with the TMobile Daily Share at this hour. Just an amazing survival story -- a dog
jumping off a boat in Lake Michigan and swam six miles trying to find her owners. A couple was working on their stalled boat when their dog Reilly
lost track of them.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: In retrospect, I remember her coming out here to see where I was going and my poor assumption was that she would go back into
the cabin with her dad.
(EN VIDEO CLIP)
VOSSOUGHIAN: The couple radioed dog overboard when they couldn`t find Reilly. A fisherman`s wife also got the word out about the dog via
Facebook. Thousands of people saw the info and eventually he was found at a camp ground about 12 miles away. Thankfully, Reilly is okay.
[19:15:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This man, Kevin Ewing, allegedly held his wife hostage for 12 days subjecting her to brutal torture. She managed to escape and
walked into a bank and asking a teller to call 911. That was last month. Ewing was released on bond and two days ago he allegedly kidnapped his wife
again and she turned up dead. She`d been shot. Authorities believe her husband did it.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: She was scared to death of him. He threatened her all the time. He beat her at several times. I tried to get her away, but no, I
don`t know what the deal was. Well, it`s over now.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ABRAMS: A husband out on bond for the alleged torture of his wife in July, now accused of finally killing her. The question tonight, how the heck did
Kevin Ewing get released at all? Authorities believe he killed her Tuesday and then tried to kill himself. Dan Abrams back with Anahita, Darren, Thema
and Pat. All right, so Pat, what do we know about how this happened?
LALAMA: All right, let`s go back to last month when he allegedly held her for 11 days. At that time, she claimed that he branded her with a hot dog
stick, bashed her knees with a hammer, put gashes in her head, and tied cords around her neck. It was horrific, horrific, horrific, right?
So, the judge gives him $100,000 bond. He makes it. He gets an ankle bracelet. Now, here`s where it gets a little interesting. Apparently, when
he got out of jail, they went back to living with each other at his mom`s house. So, they get into another altercation a couple of days ago.
According to his mother, she says he`s waving a gun telling her to pack her bags and you know the rest. They find her in the barn dead.
ABRAMS: I`m often the one in these kinds` cases trying to explain to the public that the purpose of bond is not to punish, right? It`s to make sure
that someone shows up for court and they are not a danger to society. Not a danger to society. Explain to me in a case like this where he has done
something like this, how you end up with a bond that is so low? Go ahead.
KAVINOKY: I`ll take that, well, as far as the number, that`s on the judge. There`s a hearing that`s held and the judge decides what`s the number where
to presume the guy`s guilty, this is the only place in criminal justice system in bail or bond hearing, where we presume people are guilty, we say
what`s the right number to make sure that they show up exactly as you said? So, we have a right that`s based in the constitution to having a reasonable
bail. Now the question is...
ABRAMS: In most cases you don`t always have to grant bail.
KAVINOKY: No, you don`t always but the cases where they`re typically not granted are those where you`ve got a capital, say murder case.
ABRAMS: Or a case where someone`s a real danger to society. Let me read the torture details real quick and then Anahita I`m going to let you get it.
Tied her up with zip ties and duct tape is the allegation. Pistol whipped, used a hammer on her knees, branded her on the legs with a hot dog skewer,
spit in her face, forced her to sleep with a cord around her neck.
SEDAGHATFAR: Yeah, that`s pretty bad. I was shocked at the bail amount as well, but I have to say, I don`t like second-guessing judges. They have a
tough job. And I`m getting a little bit concerned that now we`re kind of going towards the side where judges are going to be making rulings based
upon public sentiment and public outrage, instead of judicial discretion and judicial independence and that`s not how it works...
[19:20:00] ABRAMS: Here, look, I agree. You know, in these cases we`ve been talking a lot in the sex assault cases, right. These white privileged guys
are getting more lenient sentences. People are calling for recalls of the judges, this and that (ph).
OK, I`ve always taken the position it is fair to criticize these judges because in all of those cases, the sentence was lenient. But when you start
talking about impeaching judges, et cetera, it`s supposed to be for really egregious conduct. What I don`t get is why the public isn`t yelling and
screaming in a case like this one.
You want to talk protect our women? This is the worst of the worst. These kinds of allegations are some of the worst I`ve heard and yet this guy gets
out and we`re not hearing the sort of the public at-large saying, wait a second, this is crazy. Tami, what is the psychological explanation behind
the difference? Is it because sex assault cases are different?
DAVIS: I think it is sexism and patriarchy when we look at. If he had done the same thing to a stranger, to a man walking down the street, people
would have seen it as outrageous. I think when people hear that someone is your partner, your spouse, your wife, then they dilute their emotional
impact and say, well, couples have spats or couples have issues.
And I think it`s outrageous and I don`t have a problem with -- and I think also in terms of media coverage, a lot of people have not heard about this
case. I think as soon as you hear the details, people are outraged.
(CROSSTALK)
SEDAGHATFAR: I agree with you in terms of what people think and the outrage is that, I read some comments on social media where they`re like, why
didn`t she leave him? He had abused her for so many years and it`s like that is not how abused women behave, and you have to kind of get into their
heads to understand that.
ABRAMS: Darren, go ahead.
KAVINOKY: Well, his reprehensible behavior, the fact that it is his wife in some ways makes it worse. It`s taking advantage of a position of trust. It
makes it even more outrageous.
LALAMA: Dan, could I just ask a real quick question of you the lawyers. Is it possible -- I don`t know, I`m just throwing this out there -- that
perhaps the judge, and we don`t know his history. It`d be interesting to see what his history is, and we do need to give him the benefit of the
doubt. But is it possible that maybe he was curious about some of the allegations? Don`t scream at me, I`m just wondering. Is it possible he`s
looking at all these things and say, well, I don`t know but I buy it entirely?
ABRAMS: No, and look, we`re going to be talking to his lawyer in the next block who will probably talk about some of that questions about the
credibility. But it seems to me that when there`s an arrest on these charges, and she had, you know, certain injuries, exactly how she got them
would have to be proved in court. These are some of the worst allegations I ever heard of. And you know what, she is now dead.
So, it seems, you know, if you think that again, that they maybe got it wrong twice, right? No, no, no, he didn`t torture her the first time and
no, no, no, even though he was the one alone with her in some farmhouse in the middle of nowhere and he ended up with a gunshot wound to his head and
she`s dead, it wasn`t him, I mean.
DAVIS: Even her father said in an interview that this incident wasn`t the worst from his report. That he must have done even worse things on her.
SEDAGHATFAR: He had a conviction for domestic violence. He`s beating her. Yeah, he had already been in...
ABRAMS: I do not understand how this guy got out, but we`re going to talk to Kevin Ewing`s lawyers in a minute and maybe they`ll be able to explain
it to us.
And later, a judge rips into a domestic abuse survivor, throws her in jail. Tonight, some payback after this.
[19:25:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Outrage and mounting questions after Tierne Ewing was found dead with a gunshot wound to the head. Kevin Ewing had a GPS locator
and an electronic ankle monitor but was able to cut off the bracelet and kidnap his estranged wife, this after being accused of holding her hostage
for 12 days, brutally beating and branding her earlier this summer.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: She was always getting beat. He was taking our cars or whatever.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ABRAMS: Kevin Ewing, accused of kidnapping and torturing his wife for 12 days, posted bond, got out, allegedly abducted her again. Police believe he
shot her to death on Tuesday. I`m back with Anita, Darren, Thema and Pat. And joining us on the phone is Kevin Ewing`s attorneys, Ben Goodwin and
Amanda Coma. Thanks very much for being with us, we appreciate it. Amanda, were you surprised that the judge allowed your client to bond out?
AMANDA COMA, KEVIN EWING`S ATTORNEY: I would first like to thank you for having us on the show, and first and foremost, I owe it to the family. We
would like to apologize and let the families know that we are terribly sorry for the victims and it`s important to respect their grieving at this
time and they have our deepest sympathies. To answer your question, if I was shocked whenever the judge let her bond out -- was that your question?
ABRAMS: I was asking why you thought the judge let him bond out considering the severity of the charges, most importantly, the potential danger that he
posed to her in the future?
COMA: OK, sure. In regard to the bond hearing, I think that my partner Attorney Goodwin should speak more to that since he was actually present at
the hearing and he handled the hearing.
ABRAMS: All right, Ben Goodwin? Ben Goodwin, go ahead.
[19:30:00] BEN GOODWIN, KEVIN EWING`S ATTORNEY: Thanks for having us on. I`m not surprised. A $100,000 is quite a large bond. We can`t make
decisions based upon, you know, a perceived worst outcome. You know, there was $100,000 cash that he had to post. We had electronic home monitoring
that he was subject to. He was subject to pretrial services. His house was swept for firearms. All firearms were removed.
He was checking in twice a day. As you know, the judge has to balance the constitutional rights of the criminally accused with the safety of the
community and you know, we have a presumption of innocence. And I think the judge did a pretty good job of balancing those issues.
[19:30:00] And I want to say this. If you review the transcript, all these people who are now coming forward and saying, you know, that there was this
long history, that wasn`t presented at the bond hearing.
There were a number of people that were there. There were, you know, as I recall were six to eight potential witnesses. None were called. And the
judge cannot make a decision based on what is not presented to him.
AMANDA COMA, KEVIN EWING`S ATTORNEY: Here is what was presented at the bond hearing. The assistant district attorney on the case presented the
current charges and he presented his prior prosecutions against him, all of which were at least 15 years prior. OK.
And this, the victims and our client have been married for 30 -- for 30 years. So, everything that was presented to the judge was 15 years prior.
Now, more importantly to echo what my partner has just said, there were family members, persons who are claiming that they have been witness to
this abuse for all these years, but as Attorney Goodwin stated, nobody came forth and testified at the bond hearing.
ABRAMS: All right. So, let me get -- let me get this straight. So, it sounds like what you guys are saying is that -- because you have to
understand, for the public at-large, who testified, who didn`t testify at the bond hearing is irrelevant, right?
The bottom line is you`re talking about these incredibly horrific crimes that he`s accused of committing. I understand. But the point is that there
is still a bond hearing based on these horrible accusations, right. And -- wait a second.
And as a result, when you talk about someone being a potential danger to the community, it feels like you guys are a little bit sort of trying to
clean the slate here of what the allegations were in this case, and that`s what`s so scary. Hindsight is 20/20, but this is scary stuff that this guy
was released. I`m sorry. Go ahead.
COMA: Sure. The allegations are serious in this matter, but whenever a judge has to make a decision in regard to bond, he has to look at those
totality of the circumstances. Now he bonded out on July 11th, and the bond hearing was held on July 19th, eight days later.
And during that time, he was compliant with pre-trial services. I`m sure the judge took that into account, whether he did anything wrong during that
time. I`m not trying to down play the severity of the charges in and of itself. But in a bond hearing, everything has to be looked at. And the
judge had a difficult decision to make with lack of evidence, and I believe my part has something...
(CROSSTALK)
ABRAMS: So, let me -- hang on. Let me ask you guys both a question, which is take off your legal hats for a minute. Let me ask you a personal
question which is, now in retrospect 20/20 hindsight, are you sorry...
COMA: Sure.
ABRAMS: ... are you sorry that he was released on bond?
GOODWIN: Dan, it was the wrong decision that was made based upon 20/20 hindsight. I do not apologize for doing my job as a defense attorney. I
have a constitutional role to play to defend all criminally accused people, whether I think they`re guilty, whether I think they`re innocent. That is
my constitutional role.
It is the constitutional role of the commonwealth or the government to put on the best case that they put on. And I`m heart sick over it. I really am.
To think that, you know, I`m a heartless defense attorney or worse heartless defense attorneys that don`t care, nothing could be further from
the truth. This was everyone`s worst case nightmare scenario.
ABRAMS: Well said. And, Amanda, let we ask you, are you surprised? Based on what you knew of him that this has happened?
COMA: To be honest, I was surprised. I wasn`t expecting to wake up in the morning and see on headlines that my client had, you know, abducted his
wife and all of this ensued. You know, I have frequent talks with my client. Frequent communication. And he always came off level-headed.
There was no indication that this was going to happen, that he had any thoughts of even doing this. I checked in with pretrial services. They
confirmed that he never missed an appointment. He`s been going to every single meeting every day.
But, you know, in this situation, I think there is a bigger picture here is that there`s a problem in domestic violence cases where victims and
witnesses don`t always come forth to testify.
Now I`m not putting the blame on anybody. The blame is on, you know, our client that pulled the trigger. That`s who the blame is on in this case.
[19:35:01] But there is an underlying problem and I`m sure this is the case nationally, with domestic violence cases where the victims don`t want to
testify.
ABRAMS: They`re scared.
COMA: Sure, they`re scared and this is what needs to happen.
GOODWIN: And that`s given. We have to address that problem.
ABRAMS: Yes. And I`ve got to wrap it up. Because we actually are going to be talking about that in our next segment on this exact issue. Ben and
Amanda...
(CROSSTALK)
COMA: It`s important, Dan, that I say this last remark. There has to be more than just giving a victim trash ball and having cheerleaders in her
corner and saying you have to do this. These women are battered. They need mental health treatment. They need strength people to come forward.
ABRAMS: Yes, I know. Well, but, you know, as you know, the argument would be that, you know, people who are defending the kinds of people that you
guys are defending don`t help the system. But, you`re doing your jobs. I get it. And I think Ben Goodwin said it very eloquently.
Thanks a lot for coming on. We really appreciate i. We`re going to talk when we come back about a judge who is now under fire for putting a
domestic violence victim in jail.
[19:40:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JERRI COLLINS, SEMINOLE COUNTY JUDGE: You think you have anxiety now? You haven`t even seen anxiety.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: A Florida judge berate a domestic violence survivor for not showing up to testify against her abusive husband.
COLLINS: You disobeyed a court order, knowing that this was not going to turn out well for this case.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Now that judge is standing in front of Florida`s Supreme Court facing her own public reprimand for lashing out at the single
mom and breaking a judicial Code of Conduct requiring patience and courtesy.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ABRAMS: The Florida Supreme Court slamming the behavior of Circuit Judge Jerri Collins calling it, quote "intolerable, aggressive, discourteous."
Here is more of the judge`s interaction with the domestic abuse survivor.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I went to the domestic abuse class. I asked them to drop everything.
COLLINS: Why?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I just -- I`m just trying to move on with my life. I`m homeless now. I`m living at my parents` house. Everything has been shut
off. I had to sell everything I have like I`m just not in a good place right now. I`m sorry.
COLLINS: The court order did not do anything for you. I hereby find you in contempt of court and sentence you to three days in the county jail.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ABRAMS: Joining us now is Mary Ann Gunn, a retired judge. Judge Gunn, good to see you. So, this is really rare for the highest court to use this kind
of language about a judge. Seems fair to me, though, not to you?
MARY ANN GUNN, RETIRED JUDGE: Not to me. And let me tell you, Dan. There are two things that`s going through that judge`s mind. The first one is,
what can she do for that victim if the victim doesn`t show up?
This guy is a repeat offender. He was obviously guilty. He`s getting 13 days in jail. How does the judge hold him accountable if she doesn`t come
to court? She`s got a jury in the box and so many of these cases, where there`s domestic violence, the people, the victims don`t show up. What can
the judge do for her? Nothing.
ABRAMS: So, the remedy is to put her in jail, yell at her?
GUNN: Well, no.
ABRAMS: You know, I mean, it seems ridiculous.
GUNN: She was a little -- she was over the top, there is no question about that. But when you`ve had a domestic violence defendant or someone in your
court or a victim in your court that has serious injuries and has died, I mean, Dan, you want to do something about it. And what can she do for that
victim if she doesn`t show up?
ABRAMS: Right. But when you say what can she do for the victim, so she puts her in jail and, you know, she is a single mom? I mean, you know, the
amazing thing to me is the Florida Supreme Court even said that it`s OK that she put her in jail. They just said we didn`t like the way you talked
to her. And I`m thinking, my goodness, come on. This is, you can`t run a system this way.
GUNN: She brought the complaint.
ABRAMS: Yes.
GUNN: This was set. There was a jury in the box. The judge and everyone was ready to go to help her, to make him accountable. And she doesn`t show.
ABRAMS: But, Judge Gunn, you know.
GUNN: I mean, how many times do you let that happen?
ABRAMS: I know, but domestic violence victims, as you know, can be scared, they can be nervous, they can have breakdowns. They are the victims. They
are the victims and to treat her like she`s the criminal, which is what happened here, is just atrocious.
GUNN: What changes? What changes if she files complaint after complaint after complaint, doesn`t show up, and there are no consequences for that
for her other than the horror she`s been through. But what consequences down the line are there for her? He`ll continue to do that for her.
ABRAMS: Yes.
GUNN: What is her wake-up call?
ABRAMS: Yes. Well, to me, I don`t think we should be talking about wake-up calls for domestic abuse survivors. But look, here are the facts. All
right. That she alleged that her husband choked her, chased her with a knife, she was sentenced to jail -- he was sentenced to jail on the battery
charge.
Prosecutors dropped the knife charge because they couldn`t prove the case without her testimony. Darren, a no-show witness can be a problem, but this
is not the way to deal with it.
Were you surprised the Florida Supreme Court took this? And you know what? They literally made her sit there in public to point their fingers at her
and wag their fingers at her.
KAVINOKY: Yes. You know, I was not terribly surprised about that. I was really offended by what I saw. And I recognize that domestic violence cases
can be particularly troublesome for prosecutors and for the court.
[19:44:57] Oftentimes, there`s buyer`s remorse that happens when somebody wins the race to dial 911 and then maybe it`s the family breadwinner who is
carted off. And now all of a sudden we`ve got a recanting victim who wants to change the story.
And this is something that prosecutors face with a great deal of regularity. No shows.
ABRAMS: All right.
KAVINOKY: I get that. So, I understand the judge`s frustration but we expect more from our judicial officers to behave appropriately.
ABRAMS: Yes.
KAVINOKY: And that`s why this is over the top, re-victimizing her I don`t think serves any purpose.
ABRAMS: Let me get you guys, because the Florida Supreme Court publically scolded Jerri Collins. And it was on camera. They made sure there are
cameras there. Let`s watch.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Ms. Collins, this is indeed a sad day for you, a sad day for the people of Florida, and a sad day for the judiciary upon which
our people depend for justice. I cannot emphasize enough how intolerable your behavior was in this case.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ABRAMS: You know, what`s amazing to me, if there hadn`t been a camera in the courtroom...
(CROSSTALK)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: No one would know.
ABRAMS: Right. I mean, this is, everyone always says, oh, why should we have cameras in court? We don`t need. This is a great example of why we
need cameras in court, not just to see the proceedings, but sometimes to watch our judges.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: And I`m glad there were cameras in the courtroom. And I agree how frustrating when witnesses don`t show up particularly in a
domestic violence case. You need the victim to testify.
But this judge`s anger was totally misplaced, in my opinion. I think it`s great that they assigned her to get anger management and get lessons in
domestic violence so she can better understand what goes on psychologically with battered women.
They are afraid to confront their abusers. They do identify with them. I`m sure you can attest to this, they sometimes even sympathize with their
accusers.
ABRAMS: Yes.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: So, to say that...
ABRAMS: Let me have a quick break here. I`m going to come back to you on this. Because when come back, I want to talk a little bit more, we`re going
to play more of that judge`s reprimand coming right back after this.
[19:50:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ABRAMS: Florida judge just spanked by the Florida Supreme Court, described her conduct towards a do domestic abuse survivor as, quote, "intolerable."
Here is more of the Circuit judge`s exchange with that domestic violence survivor.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We were trying to separate and it`s like just it`s things were...
COLLINS: Why didn`t you show up to court?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I`m just -- my anxiety and I`m just...
COLLINS: You think you can have anxiety now? You haven`t even seen anxiety. We had a jury, six people there ready to try Mr. Renon who has a
prior criminal history of domestic violence. You were required to be here by a court order. You disobeyed a court order knowing that this was not
going to turn out well for this state.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ABRAMS: I mean, I can`t -- I mean, seriously, Thema, when I`m watching that it`s just so hard to watch this judge doing it. The judge now been
reprimanded in front of the Florida Supreme Court.
But, Thema, we`ve been talking about how you can get domestic violence survivors to feel more comfortable coming forward.
THEMA DAVIS, PSYCHOLOGIST: Yes.
ABRAMS: And just saying to them, hey, you got to do this. It`s the right thing to do, and it`s going to happen again. Psychologically isn`t going to
be enough.
DAVIS: Absolutely. I think the big piece is justice and safety. When people watch other cases and look to see when other people came forward,
were they helped, were other people protected. Were other women safer because they came forward and they don`t see a lot of example of that?
Even in our prior case it was a situation where the woman ended up killed and your wrist actually gets higher the more you speak up. And so, I think
it`s going to be important that we do have training for judges and attorneys that when they`re even questioning the victim, that can be
another violation.
ABRAMS: Yes.
DAVIS: The way the questions are even posed in a way that says I don`t believe you, you`re not valuable.
ABRAMS: Judge Gunn, come on, you must be watching that judge cringing the way I am. Come on.
GUNN: You, guys, let me look at it. The guy spent 16 days in jail. What -- why, what is the deterrent for him? What about the next person that he
tortures? What about this particular victim? He`s a repeat offender. I understand the judge lost it. I get it.
ABRAMS: Hang on, Darren, go ahead.
KAVINOKY: In a way aren`t those separate issues because now what`s happening is that we are re-victimizing a domestic violence victim. And the
thing that`s so awful about it is the betrayal. That this is the system that this woman is looking to as her last line of protection and yet,
somehow she`s now being re-victimized.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: In California there`s a law that says you can`t go to jail for not testifying in a domestic violence case.
ABRAMS: Yes. This is a horrible case. And look, I think the Florida Supreme Court did the right thing. It sounds like the judge recognizes that
as well.
Next up, my take on all the Colin Kaepernick outrage. I hope he was prepared for the scrutiny of his decision and of his play on the field.
[19:55:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ABRAMS: My take quarterback Colin Kaepernick and his refusal to stand during the national anthem it`s made -- made for media controversy. You got
race, patriotism, black lives matter thrown on. You`ll be guaranteed a passionate national debate particularly at the end of August during the
slow in news period.
We can all agree that the anthem has particular significance and meaning. It`s why Kaepernick is taking a symbolic seat and why so many others are
reacting so strongly. I once got excoriated at a jet`s scam who were whispering to the guy next to me during the national anthem. I thought
terrible of that.
But he`s the right to do it. And anyone else has the right to criticize him and hold it against him. Now he`s under the microscope. Putting aside the
message for a minute. The timing from this messenger now being evaluated.
Why he did not focused on issues of police brutality et cetera, even on social media before this summer they ask. After all, it`s Jay Glazer at
foxsports.com said "No political views. He just hasn`t been affected. He`s regressing. He`s a player. I`d be shocked if he`s on this roster by the end
of the year. He may not be on it in the next two weeks."
But Kaepernick for it this way, "If they took football away my endorsements from me, I know I stood up for what`s right. Maybe accept it, they may have
been going away anyway. So, love him or hate him, unlike many others, he refused to back down when confronted for taking an unpopular position.
But he had to know, when you take on a passionate, political, controversial issue and to some so many it`s a personal one, you`re going to get
scrutinized like never before. So, now he should be prepared to defend not just to his answer seat, as the case may be, but a heck of a lot more.
You guys, we have a big debate about this a minute ago. We got like 10 seconds. You`re mad at him and you think -- or not.
(CROSSTALK)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: He has the right to have a seat.
ABRAMS: All right.
KAVINOKY: He`s got the right.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: He has the right. I just don`t agree with him doing it.
[20:00:02] ABRAMS: This has been great being here. Thanks a lot for having me. Nancy Grace up next.
END
