Return to Transcripts main page

Live From...

Einhorn Found Guilty of Murder

Aired October 17, 2002 - 14:27   ET

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

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


CAROL LIN, CNN ANCHOR: There are two high profile court cases today to talk about.
At this hour, two Florida teens convicted of killing their father are requesting a retrial.

And just hours ago, a jury found former hippie guru Ira Einhorn guilty of murdering his girlfriend of 25 -- actually, murdering his girlfriend 25 years ago.

Joining us now is CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin.

Jeff, good to see you.

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Hi, Carol.

LIN: Let's talk about Ira Einhorn. Were you surprised?

TOOBIN: Not a bit. I mean, this was a retrial actually. I mean, this legal saga has been going on for a long, long time.

He jumped bail right after the murders and was on the lamb for more than 20 years. During that time, in 1993, he was tried in absentia without being present. He was convicted of this murder. Then, in an effort to extradite him from France, where he was staying, the Pennsylvania legislature passed a whole law that said he could brought back.

He was brought back, retried. He testified that his defense -- that what really happened was his girlfriend was murdered by the CIA, which was out to get him because he knew about their thought control experiments. With a defense like that, it's not surprising at all that he was convicted.

LIN: And why -- why would the man hide the body in a trunk in the apartment in which they used to live?

TOOBIN: Well, you know, when I was prosecutor I always used to wonder that. You know, the defense attorneys would always say, Well, you know, if he was smart he would have done x.

Well, you know, a lot of criminals aren't smart. He hid the body where he killed her, apparently. So, I can't answer why he didn't do a better job as a murderer. And just appears that he finally got caught.

LIN: Yes, usually caught by their own mistakes, their own stupidity or hubris.

All right, let's talk about these two kids down in Florida. The fascinating case that was tried actually twice, right? The -- who was the man who actually -- he was actually a friend of one of the boys.

TOOBIN: Ricky Chavis.

LIN: Right.

TOOBIN: Ricky Chavis was the convicted child molester who was a so-called friend of the boys.

He was tried the week before the boys on the exact same crime, killing the father. Remember the verdict was sealed in that case while the boys went on trial. They were convicted. They are now asking for a new trial.

LIN: That's right. And on what grounds are they asking for this new trial?

TOOBIN: Well, two grounds. The first ground they're asking for is that some jurors have apparently come forward and said they didn't realize the implications of their decision. They didn't think the verdict was correct, in supporting of the evidence. They want to interview all the jurors and have the verdict set aside on that ground.

The other ground is the one we were always talking about which was, How can a prosecutor prosecute the same murder under two, separate contradictory, theories? One theory, that Ricky Chavis did it, the other theory that the boys did it.

I think this judge has already rejected that theory, so -- he's rejected that defense saying the prosecution can't do that. So it's unlikely he'll grant a new trial. But I think as the appeals process begins, that certainly likely to be at the center of the boys' case.

LIN: So if there is a retrial, Jeffrey, does it change the nature of the charges and the possible sentencing then?

TOOBIN: It's very hard for me to know how they would do that, because after all, both trials have already taken place. I -- you know, this is such a puzzle, Carol. And I -- you know, I've looked, I could find no parallel case where prosecutors predicted contradictory theories literally within days of one another.

You know, I understood that to be a violation of prosecutorial ethics. You're not supposed to, you know, bring a case that you don't believe in and you can't believe in contradictory theories. But it's hard to know how an appeals court could remedy this. I guess they could order a new trial, force the prosecution to pick one -- one theory and one theory only. But it does present a real quandary for how we are to deal with the problem.

LIN: Well, we'll watch it unfold. Thank you very much, Jeffrey Toobin. Good to see you.

TOOBIN: Good to see you, Carol.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com







Aired October 17, 2002 - 14:27   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
CAROL LIN, CNN ANCHOR: There are two high profile court cases today to talk about.
At this hour, two Florida teens convicted of killing their father are requesting a retrial.

And just hours ago, a jury found former hippie guru Ira Einhorn guilty of murdering his girlfriend of 25 -- actually, murdering his girlfriend 25 years ago.

Joining us now is CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin.

Jeff, good to see you.

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Hi, Carol.

LIN: Let's talk about Ira Einhorn. Were you surprised?

TOOBIN: Not a bit. I mean, this was a retrial actually. I mean, this legal saga has been going on for a long, long time.

He jumped bail right after the murders and was on the lamb for more than 20 years. During that time, in 1993, he was tried in absentia without being present. He was convicted of this murder. Then, in an effort to extradite him from France, where he was staying, the Pennsylvania legislature passed a whole law that said he could brought back.

He was brought back, retried. He testified that his defense -- that what really happened was his girlfriend was murdered by the CIA, which was out to get him because he knew about their thought control experiments. With a defense like that, it's not surprising at all that he was convicted.

LIN: And why -- why would the man hide the body in a trunk in the apartment in which they used to live?

TOOBIN: Well, you know, when I was prosecutor I always used to wonder that. You know, the defense attorneys would always say, Well, you know, if he was smart he would have done x.

Well, you know, a lot of criminals aren't smart. He hid the body where he killed her, apparently. So, I can't answer why he didn't do a better job as a murderer. And just appears that he finally got caught.

LIN: Yes, usually caught by their own mistakes, their own stupidity or hubris.

All right, let's talk about these two kids down in Florida. The fascinating case that was tried actually twice, right? The -- who was the man who actually -- he was actually a friend of one of the boys.

TOOBIN: Ricky Chavis.

LIN: Right.

TOOBIN: Ricky Chavis was the convicted child molester who was a so-called friend of the boys.

He was tried the week before the boys on the exact same crime, killing the father. Remember the verdict was sealed in that case while the boys went on trial. They were convicted. They are now asking for a new trial.

LIN: That's right. And on what grounds are they asking for this new trial?

TOOBIN: Well, two grounds. The first ground they're asking for is that some jurors have apparently come forward and said they didn't realize the implications of their decision. They didn't think the verdict was correct, in supporting of the evidence. They want to interview all the jurors and have the verdict set aside on that ground.

The other ground is the one we were always talking about which was, How can a prosecutor prosecute the same murder under two, separate contradictory, theories? One theory, that Ricky Chavis did it, the other theory that the boys did it.

I think this judge has already rejected that theory, so -- he's rejected that defense saying the prosecution can't do that. So it's unlikely he'll grant a new trial. But I think as the appeals process begins, that certainly likely to be at the center of the boys' case.

LIN: So if there is a retrial, Jeffrey, does it change the nature of the charges and the possible sentencing then?

TOOBIN: It's very hard for me to know how they would do that, because after all, both trials have already taken place. I -- you know, this is such a puzzle, Carol. And I -- you know, I've looked, I could find no parallel case where prosecutors predicted contradictory theories literally within days of one another.

You know, I understood that to be a violation of prosecutorial ethics. You're not supposed to, you know, bring a case that you don't believe in and you can't believe in contradictory theories. But it's hard to know how an appeals court could remedy this. I guess they could order a new trial, force the prosecution to pick one -- one theory and one theory only. But it does present a real quandary for how we are to deal with the problem.

LIN: Well, we'll watch it unfold. Thank you very much, Jeffrey Toobin. Good to see you.

TOOBIN: Good to see you, Carol.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com