Return to Transcripts main page
Jane Velez-Mitchell
Was Shooting of Knife-Wielding Man Justified?; Mug Shot Surfaces of Brown Shooting Witness; Michael Brown Shooting; Mother of Two Missing
Aired August 21, 2014 - 19:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: ... worked in my career, based on the type of person Jenna was. She was a young person that had her life ahead of her. And
it`s just a tragic event that it has to happen to someone like her.
JANE VELEZ-MITCHELL, HOST: Breaking news tonight. Shockers of another kind in Ferguson after 12 straight nights of unrest over the shooting death
of an unarmed African American teenager at the hands of a white policeman.
Tonight a mug shot is revealed of Dorian Johnson from 2011. He is the key witness who was with Brown when the police officer shot Brown. We`re going
to debate the significance of this mug shot in a second.
And we`ve got brand-new extraordinary video of a second deadly shooting of a 25-year-old black man by two white police officers. Happened the day
before yesterday, less than four miles from the spot where Michael Brown was killed. Did cops really have to kill this man, who they say was
wielding a knife and had been acting erratically?
We warn you the video is disturbing. So we`re going to hit pause just before the cops fire nine shots at the young man, killing him. Watch.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The police going to pull up. And y`all call the police?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Pull your hand out of your pocket.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Shoot me! Shoot me!
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Drop the knife.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (EXPLETIVE DELETED)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Drop the knife.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He got his gun out.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Nine shots we hear. Call me: 1-877-JVM-SAYS. Was that shooting justified or excessive force? 1-877-586-7297.
Join me on Facebook. Talk to me on Twitter. I want to hear from you.
Let`s debate it with our Lion`s Den panel. And starting with the incredible Sheryl Lee Ralph, who is a very, very wonderful, amazing actress
and producer for the new off-Broadway musical "Mighty Real: A Fabulous Sylvester Musical," out of Philadelphia. But also a voice on the show who
speaks out eloquently.
My question to you, Sheryl Lee Ralph: Did cops have to kill this 25-year- old -- and we`ll show the video again -- who is allegedly wielding a knife and walking towards the officers?
SHERYL LEE RALPH, ACTRESS: You know what?
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Go ahead, Sheryl.
RALPH: If you are armed and you are advancing towards the police, police are trained to kill people. They are not trained to just harm people to
bring them down. So this is always a very difficult situation.
But the thing that I -- that was brought to my mind was that this young man was walking around erratically saying, "Go ahead, shoot me. Go ahead,
shoot me. Just go on. Shoot me." Which says to me that this man -- young man was probably mentally disturbed or mentally disabled, and I just wish
we would take that seriously as well. They`re afraid enough of big black men as it is.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, I think what you`re saying is that it shouldn`t have gotten to this situation, that something should have been done for this
young man who was in the neighborhood, known in the neighborhood as somebody who was disturbed.
Now the officers said they wanted to be transparent. Police released this shocking new cell-phone video of the shooting of this 25-year-old African-
American man to be transparent. But cops also released surveillance video from the moments before they shot him of this very same man, allegedly
taking two energy drinks and a package of pastries he allegedly did not pay for.
Cops say he can came at them with a knife yelling, "Shoot me." And seconds later these two white police officers do shoot him. Again, let`s look at
the cell-phone video, and then we`re going to debate it.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The police going to pull up. And y`all call the police? He`s standing up.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Pull your hand out of your pocket.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He`s got a gun out.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Shoot me! Shoot me!
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Drop the knife.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (EXPLETIVE DELETED)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Drop the knife.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He got his gun out.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
VELEZ-MITCHELL: All right, out to the Lion`s Den. A key question: Was he really posing a threat to the officers? How far away was this apparently
disturbed men when they gunned him down? Let`s take a look at two quick theories, and then we`re going to debate it.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JAKE TAPPER, CNN ANCHOR: But just to give you an idea of distances here, we believe he was shot somewhere around here, and this tape measure is 16
feet long.
Sixteen feet may seem far, but for police even that distance may not be enough. Not enough to feel safe.
TOM FUENTES, CNN LAW ENFORCEMENT ANALYST: He`s less than half of that. He`s approximately two feet from the foot of the officer.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Mike Brooks, HLN law enforcement analyst, even the experts can`t agree how far this man was away from the officers. Was it necessary
to shoot him?
MIKE BROOKS, HLN LAW ENFORCEMENT ANALYST: I believe it was. And you heard Tom Fuentes there, former FBI assistant director, talking about the
distances, because I don`t think Jake`s distances were exactly correct.
But even if it was 16 feet, that is still within the 21 feet. Because Jane, if we set out something in your studio, and I had a knife and I
charged at you from 21 feet, that is basically, you know, where law enforcement says OK. If you`re within 20, 21 feet and you`re coming at
someone with an edged weapon, with a knife like that, it can happen -- you can close that distance within a second.
Now again, did you also notice that officers did not approach him? He came towards them.
Was this -- was this classic suicide by cop? Possibly.
Some people are always saying, "Well why didn`t they -- why didn`t they Taser him?: Well, No. 1, Tasers are a great less-than-lethal weapon to use
on certain people. Not in this particular case, because if he`s coming at them with a knife, and you shoot a Taser you`ve got two barbs that are
coming out. What if one of the barbs miss? Plus, a Taser is only maximum -- maximum distance is 15 feet.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, we have this freezed [SIC]. I just want to say one thing. Areva Martin. They said he was coming at him with a knife, but the
final freeze frame shows his arms down. He may have a knife, but if you see it right there, his arms are not extended toward the officers.
BROOKS: Doesn`t make a difference.
AREVA MARTIN, RADIO PERSONALITY: Absolutely, Jane. Not only are his arms down, we`re talking about a man with a kitchen steak knife. It`s not a
machete; it`s not some, you know, huge weapon that we`re talking about. And the legal standard is whether these cops felt as if their life is in
imminent danger. That`s going to be the determination and if they felt that was it a reasonable feeling on your part.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: What do you think, Areva -- do you believe it was necessary?
MARTIN: Jane, it was not necessary in the least bit.
BROOKS: Have you ever been stabbed?
MARTIN: It`s a total reaction to a small crime. The man stole two drinks and a pastry, less than $5 worth of products. We saw in the Gabby Gifford
case that man shot 18 people and killed six.
BROOKS: Apples and oranges. Apples and oranges.
MARTIN: ... an African-American, all too often...
(CROSSTALK)
VELEZ-MITCHELL: OK. One at a time.
MARTIN: It`s overblown and it`s exaggerated when it comes to the apprehension of African-American men.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Lisa Lockwood.
LISA LOCKWOOD, INVESTIGATOR/AUTHOR: Had this -- had this man had the knife to himself and wanted suicide by cop, had the knife to himself, that`s a
perfect opportunity to use a Taser. That was not the case. He was the aggressor with a deadly weapon. Yes, a steak knife is a deadly weapon.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Kent Zimmerman.
KENT ZIMMERMAN, ATTORNEY: Correct. And also we live under the rule of law in this country, and the law is very relevant here. Missouri law says
specifically that the police officers, in trying to effectuate an arrest...
RALPH: Ah, Missouri law.
ZIMMERMAN: ... can use deadly force if they believe that they need to in order to prevent either serious bodily injury or death. Not just death but
serious bodily injury.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Let me go to Twitter for a second. Let me go to Twitter, because Twitter is exploding. Twitter says, "Why nine shots? That`s
excessive. They could have shot him in the leg or hand. Shame."
BROOKS: No.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: I wanted you -- Mike Brooks, address that.
BROOKS: Not at all. When you -- when you have the threat coming at you, you are taught to shoot for center of mass. You shoot a leg? That person
is still coming at you. You`re not hitting any organs.
And keep in mind also, Jane, one of the people that called police, the original 911 call was an older woman from the city of St. Louis. Do you
hear her speaking out about any excessive force? She was there at the scene.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: All right. And we`re going to...
(CROSSTALK)
VELEZ-MITCHELL: ... those 911 calls. We`re going to cue them up in a second and play them for you.
First let me go out to Nancy, Pennsylvania. Nancy, Pennsylvania, what do you have to say?
CALLER: Hi, Jane. I`d just like to offer a challenge to everybody in Missouri. They`re supposed to be the Show Me State. Show me some peaceful
demonstrations. Show me some people just cooling down until all the facts are in. Maybe have a town meeting. But all this violence.
And your one panelist, I think he`s trying to bring the race card into it. It`s not like these policeman are coming out, they say, "Oh, let`s see if
we can gun down a black American today." I think that`s ridiculous, and I`m tired of hearing it.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, Areva Martin, I want to give you a chance to address that.
MARTIN: Well, you know, Jane, that statement is ridiculous. Because statistics show unequivocally that African-American are disproportionately
targeted by the police. They`re stopped more often than their non-African- American peers. They`re arrested more often than their non-African American peers.
RALPH: Absolutely.
MARTIN: They`re convicted more often than their non-African-American peers.
RALPH: Yes.
MARTIN: And the race relations in this country, as it relates to African- American men and police is well-documented, so to say that police are not out just shooting African American men is just flat-out wrong because they
are.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Sheryl Lee Ralph.
MARTIN: ... under siege in this country by police.
ZIMMERMAN: All police are out to shoot African-Americans, that`s what you`re saying?
MARTIN: No. Of course they`re not.
(CROSSTALK)
RALPH: Stop trying to make it like that. Stop it. Stop it. Stop it. This is some ridiculous conversation. Listen to what is being said. And
most of you who are out there listening know that it is true.
Where were we just a few months ago when we were talking about Trayvon Martin? Come on. You know where we were when we were talking about Eric
Garner. Don`t act like it doesn`t happen more times to young black and brown men in America.
ZIMMERMAN: You can`t indict all the police out there.
RALPH: You know they have to be given -- you know they have to be given manuals about how to approach the police officers.
ZIMMERMAN: They are.
RALPH: Don`t start talking like it doesn`t happen. You know it`s real. You know it`s a fact. So...
(CROSSTALK)
ZIMMERMAN: I never said it doesn`t happen. I don`t think it`s fair to broadly indict all police officers.
RALPH: ... and make it less than what it is.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, let`s talk about the fact that this young man appeared to be suffering from mental illness and that he was known in the
community for being mentally ill. In that kind of situation, is there something else that can be done? You say Taser is not 100 percent. But if
you`re dealing with somebody mentally ill, wouldn`t that be the classic reason to use a Taser, Mike Brooks?
BROOKS: How are officers supposed to know that they`re dealing with a mentally ill suspect (ph)? The people who live in the neighborhood who
called the police, did they tell law enforcement, "Hey, this guy has a mental problem"? No. The officers responding there, they -- you know,
that`s what they were dealing with.
And if you notice also, Jane, before the police even come -- show up at the scene, they`re videotaping it already, because they are watching this guy
acting erratically. If that was the case, they should have let the dispatcher know.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: OK. On the other side, we`ve got more breaking news. A mug shot has just emerged of the young man who was with Michael Brown when
Michael Brown was shot by an officer four miles away from this situation. Of course, the Brown shooting is the one that sparked all the protests.
Stay right there. We`re going to show you the mug shot. We`re going to debate it. We`re going to show you all of the new information coming in
second by second.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Return to your vehicles. Return to your homes.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Bless his soul. Police shot this boy outside my apartment.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Disperse the area immediately.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Y`all got his blood on y`all hands.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: My hands are up. My hands are up.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Raise and point it.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Hands up, hands up.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Get back.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
VELEZ-MITCHELL: More breaking news. This mug shot has just emerged of a key witness in the shooting death of 18-year-old Michael Brown. That`s
Dorian Johnson, who was right there when Officer Darren Wilson shot and killed his friend Michael Brown.
We`ve learned that in 2011 Dorian was arrested for theft and convicted of making a false report to police.
After his friend Michael Brown was killed, Dorian spoke to the media, saying Michael was surrendering peacefully when the cop killed him, but he
did not mention an earlier incident at a convenience store.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DORIAN JOHNSON, WITNESS: We weren`t causing harm to nobody. We had no weapons on us at all. We were just walking, having a conversation.
A police officer squad car pulled up, and when he pulled up, he said, "Get the `F` on the sidewalk." And we told the officer we was not but a minute
away from our destination, and we would shortly be out the street. We was having a conversation.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
VELEZ-MITCHELL: The police incident report claims that right before the shooting, Michael Brown stole a pack of cigars from the store while with
Dorian Johnson. This is the surveillance video from that alleged incident. Cashier attempted to stop Brown from leaving. He forcefully pushed him
back into the display rack. Brown and Johnson exited the store with the cigars. That`s in the incident report.
Now, Dorian Johnson`s attorney told "The New York Times," quote, "Mr. Johnson admitted that he and Mr. Brown had stolen cigars from the store.
So we have been attempting to reach Dorian Johnson`s attorney for comment. He`s invited on our show any time.
Does that, plus the conviction in 2011 for filing a false report. The conviction in 2011, remind me. I think it was filing a false report, but
I`ll double check it. Yes, it was. Does all that discredit him as a witness, Kent Zimmerman, attorney out of Chicago?
ZIMMERMAN: You know, I think the two things that discredit him the most are actually two things he said that contradict the family`s autopsy
results. And those two things are one, he said that the victim was shot in the back, and in fact, the autopsy says he wasn`t shot in the back. And
the other thing was that after he was shot the witness say he lay suffering as he died on the ground. And the autopsy said he didn`t suffer at all
after he was shot fatally.
So those are two things that he said that conflict the autopsy. I think those are likely to hurt his credibility, but that will be for the grand
jury to decide.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, this is a key witness. Areva Martin, this is the friend of the young man who was killed, the killing that is at the center
of all of this uproar, all of these demonstrations, all of the conflicts between protestors and police. And now we`re seeing this. How does that
change the equation?
MARTIN: I don`t think it changes it very much at all, Jane. He is a key witness, but he`s one of many key witnesses. Now, his credibility will be
tested, if he actually is called to testify by either the prosecution or the defense during the trial of this matter.
But when someone is charged and ultimately tried and convicted for a crime, it`s not on the basis typically of one witness`s testimony or statement.
It`s on totality of the evidence. So the ballistics report, you know, the autopsy reports, the other eyewitness statements. All of those are going
to be looked at, judged and that`s what`s going to make either for conviction or not in this case.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Lisa Lockwood. Lisa Lockwood, investigator. Credibility for this witness, yes or no?
LOCKWOOD: The credibility is completely gone, based on the facts that we have discussed earlier. One of the things that I did want to point out is
the fact that Michael had something to lose. Here we have a college student on his way to college who had just been involved in a theft and an
assault of a store manager. And now a police officer was stopping him on the street? So -- well, an actual robbery is if he had used a weapon.
BROOKS: No, only force is needed by -- only force is needed for it to turn into a robbery in the state of Missouri. It went from a shoplifting, and
when he assaulted the clerk, that`s when it turned into a strong-arm robbery.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, Mike, what do you think? Do you think that this hurts the case that -- against this police officer? That this hurts this
young man`s credibility, the friend of the victim? Who was there?
BROOKS: Well, I thought -- I thought what hurt his credibility, we heard two separate statements he gave to the media, and there was some
conflicting information, you know, contradicting information in those two statements.
But what was the statement that he gave law enforcement? When we heard from him in front of the cameras, Jane, twice, he hadn`t even spoken to law
enforcement then. He had not come forward, most likely because he thought he would be charged as -- with robbery, since he was there with Michael
Brown.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well...
BROOKS: Since then we found out -- since then we found out that no charges will be filed. But what did he tell law enforcement? What really happened
there? We don`t know.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, Sheryl Lee Ralph, the young man said that police refused, declined to take his statement.
BROOKS: No.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: He said that he wanted to tell police what happened, and he claimed that the police declined to take his statement.
BROOKS: That is another lie.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Sheryl?
RALPH: Listen, we do not -- we do not know how this is going to go. A lot of us have seen a lot of trials. And since we are not judge nor jury, it
all depends on who are the people that are listening to that case? Who are the people that are going to listen to that man and who is going believe
him or not believe him?
We`ve seen a lot of people tell a lot of lies and a lot of cases, and they turn out the ways that we don`t think they`re going to turn out. We will
just have to wait and see.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: OK. Facebook, Rolene (ph) says, "His arrest had nothing to do with the killing of Michael Brown, period."
Chante (ph) says, "Unfortunately, he loses all credibility. This is a very important situation. And if he has fabricated any part of his story, he
should be prosecuted."
So the public out there apparently split.
Henry, Kentucky. You`ve been waiting. Henry, what do you have to say?
CALLER: Yes, Jane. I`ve heard some of these people who`s calling in need to realize that we`re heading right back into the `60s where we were a long
time ago.
To me, why are we paying taxes on these stun guns when we`re not even attempting to use them? I had a grandson just walking to school, and the
police just jacked him up, because he was black.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, Sheryl Lee Ralph...
RALPH: Exactly.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: ... this is to your point that -- that this is far beyond the specifics of any one case, that there`s an attitude, you say, against
the African-American community by the law enforcement. That`s what you`re saying.
RALPH: Let me tell you something. If you have ever needed good police officers and you have gotten their help, then you know the value of good
police officers. And they are invaluable. So this is not against all police officers.
But there are quite a few police officers who look at young black men, young brown men, as troublemakers. And they use them to practice on them.
Sometimes it just happens that they get to be target practice. And it is very, very hurtful.
We know that it is real that young black men have a manual of what it`s like to drive while black. And these are the things that can happen to
you. And especially how to behave when you come in contact with the police. They know to keep their hands at 10 and 2 and don`t move. "Yes,
sir. No, sir."
And for some of them it is just hurtful. For their mothers it is painful. Because when you send your son out, you never know what`s going to happen.
But to those police officers who are doing their job, thank you.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: I -- listen, I think we all -- all know what a difficult job police work is. And it has certainly been a very difficult job out
there on the streets of Ferguson. This has been a very volatile situation.
On the other side of the break we`re going to tell you what happened when some pro-Officer Wilson protesters showed up last night. Were they whisked
away by police or were they allowed to protest? Stay right there.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: About the time I get outside he`s already turned around facing the officer. He`s balled up. He have his arms, like, under his
stomach and he was, like, halfway down, like he was going down. And the officer lets out about three or four shots at him.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
VELEZ-MITCHELL: A dozen nights of confrontation and counting. Although last night things were much calmer, the vast majority of protesters in the
last dozen days have denounced police over the deadly shooting. But last night new groups took to the streets to support the officer who shot
Michael Brown. Watch.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Mike Brown.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Now according to some published reports, things got so tense between the pro officer protesters and the protesters on the other
side that the pro officer protesters were whisked away by police. Both sides want the right to protest peacefully. One side supports Michael
Brown. One side supports Officer Wilson.
But what do you make of that? Areva Martin -- I mean no matter what your position if you have a position and you are protesting peacefully should
you be able to take to the streets and protest without having to be whisked away by cops?
MARTIN: Absolutely. Everyone should have an opportunity to go out and voice their opinion and to protest for either side.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Absolutely.
MARTIN: Now, obviously the cops have a job to do and their job is to keep peace and to maintain that community in the way that, you know, no one gets
hurt, that stores aren`t burned and stores aren`t looted.
And if police believe the best thing to do to diffuse a potentially dangerous situation was to remove that woman, they have done that
throughout these protests.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes.
MARTIN: They`ve had to remove people where there were possible escalations in violence.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: That`s right.
MARTIN: But obviously that lady has every right to protest just as all of the other protesters.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: That`s right.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Yes. But they were whisked away by police.
(CROSSTALK)
MARTIN: -- their constitutional rights.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: They were whisked away by police.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Apparently.
MARTIN: If it was creating a violent situation they have a right to create peace in that environment.
MIKE BROOKS, HLN LAW ENFORCEMENT ANALYST: Absolutely. They probably did it for their own safety, Jane --
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Exactly.
BROOKS: -- because you know, they were so outnumbered. I don`t have a problem with that at all.
ZIMMERMANN: I agree with that.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Yes. I just have a problem with people not being able to get their point of view across. And, you know, my opinion is everybody has
a right to protest --
BROOKS: Sure.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: -- if they are protesting peacefully and one side shouldn`t be intimidated to the point where they can`t express themselves.
And I`m not taking sides here. I just think I`m really more about the First Amendment right to express your opinion and nobody should be deprived
of it.
MARTIN: Absolutely.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: And here is another thing --
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Until it becomes violent. And when it becomes violent, it is the police officer`s job to make a decision at that point to
keep people safe.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: That`s the problem.
BROOKS: Right.
ZIMMERMANN: For the public good.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: There is another issue here that has infuriated me from the beginning. And that is the overmilitarization -- and we have some
video of that to show you of the police on the street with essentially weapons of war.
And we are going to show you some of that imagery right now which has really left everybody, including the governor of Missouri said he was
flabbergasted by some of the tanks and some of the other things that he was looking at and wondering what -- is this a foreign war zone? No. This is
Ferguson, Missouri.
And all of this equipment, extremely expensive equipment -- but you know what the local police could not afford? A little body cam. A little cam
that would probably cost a couple thousand dollars to buy and install on Officer Wilson`s badge or body that would have told us exactly what
happened, what went down between Michael Brown and Officer Wilson, so we wouldn`t have clashes on the street with people arguing and voicing their
opinions based on conflicting witness accounts.
So this is what I started.
(CROSSTALK)
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Ok. Yes. Right here -- #badge cams now -- #BadgeCamsNow. With your help last night I started this Twitter campaign. And it
exploded. By the time I was off the air last night, this phrase #BadgeCamsNow had hit number 2 on Twitter -- it was trending number 2
nationwide on Twitter.
And what I called for was in place of the militarization of police with all this costly weaponry and tanks, what we really need -- and I`m asking the
President and the attorney general on down. And I want you to join me by going to Jane Velez-Mitchell Facebook or @JVM Twitter and getting involved
with the #BadgeCamsNow.
It would cost a fraction of what it cost probably for one tank or two tanks to put these badge cams on officers all around the country. So what I`m
calling for and I want to hear Mike Brooks, law enforcement analyst for HLN respond. Every officer in uniform on patrol in the United States, every
squad car on patrol in the United States with these cameras to avoid this kind of ugly scenario.
BROOKS: Jane, I am 110 percent with you.
MARTIN: Yes.
BROOKS: I think it is fantastic for officers to have these body cams. They have cams on some of the tasers. Put them all on every officer. The
company -- actually taser makes -- I have one in my office. It is an axon flex camera you can either put on your glasses, you can put on the chest of
an officer. And I`m also for dash cams.
I tell you every department who has ever deployed these cameras, the amount of complaints go way, way down. And the amount of violence that is used to
even subdue a subject goes down. Because they know hey if I`m going fight the police I can`t say, "Hey, he brutalized me," because it is all on
camera.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: We are staying on top of the story.
(CROSSTALK)
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Thank you. Fantastic panel. Got to leave it right there because on the other side of the break we`re going to try to help a
devastated father find his missing daughter. We are going to talk to him on the other side. The father of this missing woman, where is this mother
of two?
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
KATHY SCALES, MOTHER OF KRISTY KELLEY: Someone knows where she`s at possibly. If off in a ditch or anything, please take that extra moment and
just look on the side of the road. Please, please, I`m begging you from one mother to another mother. Please do this for me.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
K. SCALES: I am nervous wreck. This is my daughter. I will do whatever I have to.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Hundreds have joined in the search.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Authorities believe it`s Kelley`s jeep going by moments before she went missing.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We are putting out these fliers that have her name, pictures and other stuff related to her.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Employees are being asked to stay safe, to leave work together.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: A brave and difficult fight of holding on to hope.
TODD SCALES, FATHER OF KRISTY KELLEY: We want her back so bad.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We are not giving up. We won`t give up Kristy.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Tonight a deepening mystery leaves a family in agony, an entire community on edge. Where is beautiful mother of two Kristy Kelley?
She vanished without a trace Friday night, after a night out drinking with friends.
Her father joins me in a moment.
Kristy`s disappearance -- is it connected to a rash of other missing women in the area. Kristy, last seen at a VFW bar in Boonville, Indiana at about
1:30 a.m. Friday; at some point she left without anyone noticing. Kristy`s phone was later found in the bar bathroom but her SUV has not been located.
Why would Kristy leave and not say a word to her friend, the female bartender who stepped away briefly with the male manager to wrap up
business for the night. Police think this surveillance footage may show Kristy driving her SUV from the bar in the direction of home less than two
miles away but we don`t know if she was actually driving.
Here is what the sheriff told ABC.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SHERIFF BRETT KRUSE, WARRICK COUNTY, INDIANA: There`s been no activity on her bank accounts. No evidence pointing towards any type of a struggle.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Out to Kristy`s father, Todd Scales. First of all Todd, I`m so sorry you`re going through this nightmare. We want to find your
daughter. Something happened between that VFW bar and your nearby home where she lived. What could have happened in that two-mile stretch?
Describe that two-mile stretch.
T. SCALES (via telephone): Actually it probably wouldn`t even be two miles. It`s right in town. Basically she would have continued on Main
Street and turned left about four blocks and she would have been home.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Kristy`s disappearance has several eerie similarities to a case of another missing mom, Joelle Lockwood, 30-year-old mother of two.
She vanished July 9 in Evansville, Indiana, reportedly last seen walking alone.
Kristy disappeared five weeks later and less than 20 miles. Joelle and Kristy are about the same age. Both have two children. Both were wearing
the similar tank top and denim shorts and police say both women had been drinking. Police say think don`t believe the cases are connected.
We`re going to get back to the father in a second, but Lisa Lockwood, investigator, do you think they could be connected?
LOCKWOOD: I do in the fact that one of the similarities is that they are two young ladies, they were both seen leaving a liquor established,
intoxicated. In the first case with Lockwood, my hunch is that it was possibly a victim of opportunity. And once this individual had gotten away
with it he was out on the prowl that particular night.
It`s not surprising Kristy left her telephone behind. If she had been drinking a lot of ladies will go in the ladies` room, leave it on the
toilet roll around the sink and wash their hand and that is a possible reason it wasn`t there. I`m not certain -- I don`t believe that she left
on her own volition.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: So who is driving the car then Lisa? The SUV?
LOCKWOOD: As I said, when she left, I believe that this individual waited for her. And got out there with her and possibly abducted her.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well Todd, I have to go back to you for a second. I understand police haven`t said anything to you. Her ex-husband is in the
clear. He has the kids. He`s not involved according to what you have said that police have told you. She has a man that she was sort of dating. He
also apparently not involved.
So could this be a -- I hate to say it. I know you don`t want to think about this. But have authorities talked to you about the possibility this
might have been an abduction?
SCALES: I believe they are looking into, you know, anything and everything at this point. We honestly don`t know. I don`t believe the two cases are
connected, to be quite honest with you.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: I want to go to Marc Klaas, who`s the president and founder of KlaasKids. I understand your organization is helping Mr.
Scales, who we`re talking with, with the search for his daughter.
MARC KLAAS, KLAASKIDS FOUNDATION: Well actually Jane first of all I too want to extend my sympathy to Mr. Scales for the situation he`s going
through. You can get through this. Just stay strong.
We have reached out to the search center actually. We`ve reached out to the people in Studio B who are running the search and offered assistance
with providing better maps to them for the search. And as I understand it those maps have been downloaded from the U.S.G.S. Web site and they will be
utilized in future searches.
I believe that the possibility exists that these cases could be connected. And I would think that it would behoove everybody to have the search
incident commanders, if there are search incident commanders for both searches, at least be coordinating and in contact with each other so that
our eyes and ears would be able to search for both of these women.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: We have to leave it right there. Mr. Scales, our hearts go out to you. We want to find your daughter. We`re going to stay on top
of the story.
Up next we have a real surprise for you. And one that well, you are just going to have to wait around and see.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Tonight little Rico a huge victory for dogs like you and their human companions like me. Now the (inaudible) anti-dog rules that
outlaw pups like you from restaurants` outdoor seating areas in California have been overturned. We`ve got breaking news -- put that breaking news
banner up there. That means that dogs won`t be stranded, tied up outside on the street while their human owners go into the restaurant to eat.
Now, the California House and Senate approved the bill that allows restaurants to decide, hey, we`d like to allow dogs into the outdoor
seating areas. We`ve got breaking news from the woman, Judy Mancuso, the president of Social Compassion in Legislation, the organization, the non-
profit that sponsored this bill. You are the woman who pushed this into law. What is your breaking news? What`s your breaking news -- Judy?
JUDY MANCUSO, PRESIDENT, SOCIAL COMPASSION LEGISLATION: The governor signed the bill one hour ago. It`s so exciting. Yes.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: What is this going to mean to dogs. You see these dogs tied up outside restaurants. You know, this is part of sort of
demonization of animals in our society where animals -- I`ve never gotten sick from an animal. I sleep with dogs in my bed every night. I`ve gotten
sick from people but not from dogs. But we`ve got to keep them tied up outside. They can`t even go into the outdoor seating areas.
You`ve changed that for California. What are the implications?
MANCUSO: Well, now they can in California. So what it means is that restaurant owners that have the proper outdoor area can now allow their
restaurant patrons bring their pets with them, their pet dogs. And so this elevates the dog quite a bit as part of our family, and they can join us at
the cafe while we eat.
So if restaurants have the proper area and they want to allow this they will be able to starting January 1st, 2015 in the state of California.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, Rico, you and I are taking a trip to L.A. We`re going to sit in an outdoor cafe and you`re going to be on my lap because
you haven`t been able to do that until now. You have some new rights, Mister. This means your pets, viewers at home, won`t be left tied up to a
pole while you eat anymore, at least not in California.
Listen, I want to say that we`ve got some pictures of your pets, photos that our viewers have sent us on Facebook. If you want to be able to eat
with your pets outdoor at a restaurant, go to SocialCompassionInLegislation.org and join this movement. Because Judy,
you promised me you`re going to bring this to New York where I live, because I want to be able to take my dogs and sit at an outdoor cafe. Are
you going to make this a coast-to-coast and hit every state in the union?
MANCUSO: Absolutely, Jane. You`re helping me. We`re coming to New York next and we`re going to get this passed in New York. With your help I know
that we`ll get it done.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: You know what, Judy, you`re an old friend of mine. We were talking about this about eight years ago. I said I was so frustrated.
You know people, we want people to adopt all the homeless dogs. But then we tell them you can`t take them anywhere. You can`t go to lunch with a
friend. You can`t go here and you can`t go there. So it discourages people from adopting pets.
Now that you`ve got this movement I think it`s really going to encourage people to adopt pets because they can say well, I can go to have lunch with
my friends and bring my dog.
MANCUSO: Absolutely. How nice to have that choice. And it`s so good. The California Restaurant Association was a big supporter of this bill,
entrepreneurs of restaurants, CEOs and assembly member Mariko Yamada (ph) carried it, was the author for us. And I want to thank her so much for
carrying the bill and the California Restaurant Association. It passed unanimously in the Senate. And it passed in the assembly with only one no
vote. And that person just was an overall dog hater, but anyway.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: And look, these dogs are wagging their tails. And this is all part of a greater movement. You know, there are so many elderly people
who are depressed, they`re in nursing homes without pets, people in apartments where they can`t have pets and they become depressed. And then
all the taxpayers have to pay because they need health care because they`re so depressed.
I mean we`ve got -- this is the beginning of a huge change. 30 seconds, Judy, tell us what it means.
MANCUSO: What it means is that we have elevated the dog to a family member. This seals the deal that when we bring our family to a restaurant,
it could include our dog.
VELEZ-MITCHELL: You know, in Europe in certain places in Europe we`ve all heard about France -- you can bring the dogs right into the restaurant.
And they sit right there on a seat and they participate in the dinner.
Now, this is a first step. I`m not saying we want all of that. But we certainly want society to stop demonizing animals, to stop saying, well,
this animal poses a threat.
You know what? You and I have been hanging out a long time. You`ve never gotten me sick. And hopefully I`ve never gotten you sick.
So I think Judy Mancuso, congratulations. And we`re going to take it coast-to-coast -- New York, Texas, ok? We`re all going to stand up for the
animals.
Nancy Grace is next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
END
