Return to Transcripts main page
Live From...
Juror No. 5 Thrown Off Peterson Case
Aired June 23, 2004 - 14:30 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.
FREDRICKA WHITFIELD, CNN ANCHOR: At look at our top stories now. The U.S. is giving up trying to exempt its peacekeepers from the international criminal court. Diplomats withdraw a strongly opposed United Nations resolution today. The move came after the Security Council rejected a compromised proposal to limit it to one year. The U.S. has not signed the International Court Treaty and it would not apply to any allegations from the Iraq war.
Former U.N. Ambassador John Negroponte is officially the new ambassador to Iraq. Secretary of State Colin Powell swore him in today. Negroponte will start work after the U.S.-led coalition hands over authority to an interim Iraqi government next week.
KYRA PHILLIPS, CNN ANCHOR: Terrorists in Saudi Arabia have one month to turn themselves in or face Saudi government action. Crown Prince Abdullah went on television to deliver the ultimatum on behalf of King Fahd. Abdullah promises that the country will spare the lives of those who surrender.
WHITFIELD: The judge in the Scott Peterson double murder case has met with jurors to discuss possible misconduct by one of them. A juror could be dismissed in which case an alternate would step in. Peterson is on trial for the murder of his wife and unborn son.
PHILLIPS: Airport security. We have all gotten frustrated. Now some U.S. airport officials who are fed up with federal security screeners are fining out what it will take to bring back private contractors. Will it happen? CNN's Sean Callebs is in our Washington bureau with the details -- Sean.
SEAN CALLEBS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Kyra, exactly right. You touched on some of the concerns. Long lines, personnel shortages and a wealth of bureaucracy. All combined some of the nation's 435 airports are saying they would like to make the switch from government passenger screeners to the return of the use of private airport screeners. The Transportation Security Administration is now spelling out new guidelines that will allow airports to make the switch.
Department of Homeland Security Undersecretary Asa Hutchinson unveiled the guidelines at a meeting of the American Association of Airline Executives in Las Vegas. A spokesman says the 23-page book, however, is a, quote, "work in progress."
San Francisco Airport is one of only five airports in the nation operating under a test program using private contract screeners, under TSA supervision. Beginning November 19, all commercial airports can apply to make the switch to private owners. It's called the opt out program. San Francisco authorities contend their operation is working smoothly.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MARC MCCARRON, SAN FRANCISCO INTL. AIRPORT: We don't have the same cumbersome rules the federal employees are bound by as far as where we put them. Hiring and firing process is more efficient for a private contractor than the federal government.
And I just think overall more creativity as how we employ the screeners and provide better security and provide customer service for our travelers.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CALLEBS: The inspector general of Homeland Security says private and federal screeners performed about the same, in his words, "which is to say equally poorly."
Of the 435 commercial airports, 40 to 100 have indicated said they would like to dump government screeners and go back to private operators -- Kyra.
PHILLIPS: All right, Sean. We'll follow it. Thanks so much -- Fred.
WHITFIELD: All right, thanks a lot.
Well straight ahead, one of the world's most famous young actresses announces she has an eating disorder. Next, will going public send the right message to other young girls?
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
WHITFIELD: On to Redwood City, California now where the Scott Peterson case is being played out. And juror No. 5 you see on the screen right there is talking. He was recently dismissed by the judge. Let's listen in on why.
(JOINED IN PROGRESS)
JUSTIN FALCONER, JUROR NO. 5, DISMISSED FROM PETERSON TRIAL: It's a lot of pressure. I mean we knew everybody is watching us. And then it was proven, you know when the other day when I came through the lobby.
But it got -- a lot of things got blown out of proportion. There was a lot of access, you know, to what was actually said and it was a lot made up, I think. And I think it was a lot of false reporting that happened.
(CROSSTALK)
FALCONER: I'm sorry?
QUESTION: Any comments on how the case is going?
FALCONER: It's going. Well I mean it's pretty early on. You know, I don't -- you know -- I don't know. I think you asked if he's guilty? No, he's an innocent man until proven otherwise.
And that was never -- from day one when they told us, gave us the instruction, it was our understanding that, you know, he is innocent until, you know, (UNINTELLIGIBLE) proves him guilty. And he hasn't done that.
QUESTION: Do you think one side is doing a better job than the other? People have said say the prosecution (OFF-MIKE)?
FALCONER: Well, it's a very difficult -- it's difficult to follow what he's saying. And I think that, you know -- and I'm speaking for myself. I'm not speaking for anybody else in the jury.
But speaking for myself, it is difficult to follow what he's doing. He's not giving us -- he's bouncing around. And it was difficult for me to follow what was -- what did he want us to think here? What did he want us to think there? And so it's...
QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE) so far?
FALCONER: You know, what's compelling?
QUESTION: Phone conversations videotape?
FALCONER: Well, no, because you know basically so far at least in my opinion, you know, everybody came up and has said you know kind of the same thing which is that you know he treated her really well. He did what he was you know -- yes, he had his side you know with the other woman. But you know he never treated her wrong. He never did anything like that.
And I've gotten that from the family, from everybody who's come up. They've all said he treated her wonderfully. And so -- and I haven't seen him you know -- yes, he lied about a couple of things you know that we saw in there. But I haven't seen anything that you know would make me believe that he committed this crime.
QUESTION: Let me ask you this now . Obviously you no longer have a vote.
FALCONER: No, I don't.
QUESTION: Obviously only the prosecution has put on its witnesses.
FALCONER: Absolutely.
QUESTION: So, I mean, given that pretex, what do you think at this point? You're not supposed to form an opinion. But you obviously formed small opinions that lead to a larger opinion.
FALCONER: Well I if mean you gave me the information that I've gotten so far, and you know and asked me to go in and deliberate it now, there's no way that you could convict him. There's no way.
And there's no way that I would even believe that he was guilty for doing anything. So -- but that's just the information we've gotten so far. I mean we haven't heard you know the defense. We haven't heard the whole prosecution.
So you know they have to have a chance to put all their cards on the table and they haven't done that yet.
QUESTION: On Monday the judge gave you a clean bill of conduct (OFF-MIKE). What if anything happened between him giving you a clean bill health Monday morning and (OFF-MIKE) if anything?
FALCONER: Nothing. I think it was just the media attention. It was -- I mean the thing about it was the media attention affected everybody. And so everybody heard about it. Everybody knew about it in the jury I mean.
And so you know they were kind of -- it wasn't like a secret anymore. Especially when people were following me. An you know like earlier today. So it was a distraction. I mean that's all it was, it was a distraction. How can you, you know -- when we leave the building you know we don't know what's going to happen. And so...
QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE) you haven't done anything wrong between Monday morning or maybe never did anything wrong (OFF-MIKE) Monday morning and now?
FALCONER: No, I don't think so.
QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)
FALCONER: Oh, no, no, I never did anything like that.
QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)
FALCONER: That's just a rumor. Yes, it wasn't -- no, it's nothing like that.
QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)
FALCONER: No, I was in the picture with the news. And I had told him, I guess, I'm ruining the shot for the news tonight. And you're not going to be on the news tonight.
And that's what it was. It was in passing, it was two seconds and then it got all blown out of proportion. And that's when I got called in on Monday morning.
QUESTION: Then the judge cleared you after that?
FALCONER: Yes, he did.
QUESTION: So then what happened between being cleared and standing here today?
FALCONER: The media didn't give up.
Well, like I said, it was such a big thing. And then we had the whole weekend to stew over it. And so by the time Monday came around and then hoping that we put it to rest on Monday, but it never did. It just got bigger and bigger. And so the whole jury knows about it.
QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)
FALCONER: Because of y'all.
QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)
FALCONER: Well it's a distraction. It was a distraction.
QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)
FALCONER: The media and the coverage -- yes, obviously it was me. Because -- I'm -- it's focused on me and it was a distraction. And I think that it was taking away from what the prosecution and the defense are trying to do.
And so I understand completely. I mean if I were in Scott's shoes I wouldn't want a juror that was getting harassed like this constantly. I mean...
QUESTION: So do you think in a way you were unfairly targeted?
FALCONER: I do. I think -- but you guys are doing your jobs and I think if it had have been reported accurately or at least you had gotten the right story it would have been OK. But instead it was blown way out of proportion and people made things up. And it just wasn't accurate at all.
QUESTION: What about the part where you actually spoke to Mark Geragos (OFF-MIKE)?
FALCONER: I didn't. I bumped the podium and I either said excuse me or oops, something like that. It wasn't a conversation at all.
QUESTION: You didn't lean into him (OFF-MIKE)?
FALCONER: No, I never did that.
QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE) other people telling you what we've been reporting?
FALCONER: That got blown out of proportion.
What it is my friends are telling me what they are seeing about me. They are not talking about the case. They are not talking about what the -- I'm sorry -- the testimony is or any details like that.
They're just laughing at me because people are talking some pretty good trash on TV about me. So they're having a pretty good time with that. QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)
FALCONER: Walking through. We walked through here and heard people reporting it.
QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)
FALCONER: You know, it's disappointing. I guess I would have liked to have been there. But I'm not upset that I'm gone at all.
And I understand completely why. I mean it's not -- the amount of attention goat, you don't want that in a high profile case where so much is riding on the line.
QUESTION: Where do you go from here?
FALCONER: Home!
FALCONER: Justin Falconer, F-A-L-C-O-N-E-R.
QUESTION: How did you think the trial was going so far?
FALCONER: It was going.
Falconer, F-A-L-C-O-N-E-R. Justin.
I'm sorry? (UNINTELLIGIBLE)
QUESTION: And how old are you?
FALCONER: I'm 28.
WHITFIELD: Justin Falconer who was juror No. 5 just dismissed from the Scott Peterson trial as a member of the jury pool there. Apparently he says he believes the reason why he was dismissed is because he had become a distraction. Particularly because earlier in the week the judge had asked what his conversation was between he and the brother of Laci Peterson as they were going through the magnetometer.
Ted Rowlands has been covering the case from Redwood City, California. He pep a brief description. He thinks he became a distraction. Do we know anything more about exactly why he dismissed?
TED ROWLANDS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well a source close to the court has told CNN that there's something else going on here besides that -- that incident that was caught on videotape between this juror and Brent Rocha. We understand there is more to this. We don't know exactly what it is and it's not clear if the court informed this jury -- juror exactly why he was dismissed.
Meanwhile, in court now, it has resumed. The first alternate has been moved up into the jury panel and Mark Geragos is asking the judge or asked the judge for a mistrial because of the -- this juror he blamed it on the media saying they have inserted themselves into this case and he wants a mistrial. The judge denied him the mistrial. And they have begun now with the cross examination of a detective with the new impaneled jury, with the first alternate sitting in.
As for this juror, he is, of course, relieved with his duties. And he had no problems talking about the case and talking about what he thought was his demise, if you will, of being removed from the panel.
WHITFIELD: And, Ted, what's the conventional wisdom of where this argument just might go? Because this juror that says he was one who was followed and being harassed by members of the media. But no accusations of whether other jurors are being followed.
ROWLANDS: Yes, and I think that this individual maybe once he was on the radar screen was definitely being looked at by members of the media. Once he had the interaction with Brent Rocha and it was reported, it was -- I think he was in a situation where now he was a bit of a distraction.
However, the judge on Monday ruled that what happened there did not constitute misconduct. He was very firm in the ruling. For that reason and for others that CNN has learned that it is believed that something else has also taken place involving juror No. 5.
WHITFIELD: All right, we'll be looking to hear more details on that. Ted Rowlands, thanks very much from Redwood City, California.
Well shifting gears quite a bit now. One of the country's most famous teenage twins may have anorexia. Mary-Kate, the darker haired twin of the Mary-Kate and Ashley Olsen fame, is undergoing treatment for an eating disorder. Rumors intensified about her health after the sisters made the rounds recently promoting their first feature film.
Well to help us understand what triggers eating disorders I want to bring in Dr. Oviedo Bermudez of the Vanderbilt University Medical Center in Tennessee. And good to see you, Dr. Bermudez.
Well first let's talk about what anorexia nervosa is and what the symptoms are beyond just looking skinny.
DR. OVIEDO BERMUDEZ, VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER: Well glad to be here. And I want to tell you that we're really facing an epidemic in this country. And we need to be very aware of the fact this epidemic is not about looks and thinness. I think that's by far the most likely presentation for a patient.
But the reality is that it's an issue about sort of meeting a standard that our culture has set and that for many youngsters it is really difficult to attain. So they find themselves in that no-win situation of looking like like trying to be somebody that they cannot be.
And it's a difficult scenario for them to navigate through, especially during the adolescent years.
WHITFIELD: There are overt not just physical but also behavior disorders that come with anorexia, right? BERMUDEZ: Absolutely. So I think you need to look at eating disorders as two perhaps sides of a coin. One of the behavioral manifestations, the drive for thinness, the repetitive dieting, sort of the changing of relationships with food and the behaviors around food and at the dinner table.
But the other side of the coin is the withdrawal and really the unhappiness that goes along with that. So as you well said it really affects both sides of the individual. What we see, but also and perhaps most importantly, the way that they feel about themselves.
KAGAN: And reportedly Mary-Kate admitted hers or was admitted into a facility. And if that is indeed the case, that would be very pro-active, wouldn't it? Because oftentimes a victim of an eating disorder really has to go through all kinds of psychological hurdles before ever admitting there is a problem and before ever seeking help.
BERMUDEZ: I would tell that you I agree. Not only is it pro- active, I think it's very brave. Because there is a lot of shame in eating disorders. It's something that's very difficult for an individual who is suffering or affected to come to terms with and really admit, especially to admit to others. So I do think it's very brave.
And I do think that it carries with it an important message. And perhaps better said, two important messages. One is everybody is at risk. So if you are a celebrity, and have been in the limelight most of your life or you are a high school student from a small town in Anywhere, USA, this is a possibility.
This is something that we're all at risk for. And I think as parents, as family members, we need to be very aware of the fact that every young person is at risk for an eating disorder.
The second message in there is that you know the reality is that getting treatment is very important. Treatment is effective. I think that early recognition and early intervention are by far the best tools that we have in attacking these problems so that families being aware, being in tune, recognizing the warning signs, and then being able to say, gee, we are concerned and we should get an evaluation and do something about this is extremely important. Getting treatment.
Taking that step is very, very important and she should be commended for it.
WHITFIELD: Dr. Bermudez, what are some of the warning signs? I understand secretive eating might be one of them.
BERMUDEZ: Well certainly repetitive dieting. One of the most significant risk factors for the development of any form of an eating disorder, whether it's anorexia nervosa, bulimia nervosa or binge eating disorder, is pathological repetitive dieting.
And with that goes the behaviors of hiding foods, being secretive, changing taste in food, things that were favorite are now avoided, et cetera. So one has to be in tune to that. But also on the other side of the coin, being tuned to how that young person is functioning emotionally.
WHITFIELD: Quickly, before we run out of time, let me ask you, these are high powered, Hollywood girls under certain pressures. But might ordinary 18-year-olds be able to identify and learn from these young girls who are dealing with other pressures that they think are just as surmountably horrible?
BERMUDEZ: Correct. I think it's important to get accurate information. The National Eating Disorders Association is a very good, solid source of information. And not to live with misconceptions out there because this is not glamorous. Anorexia nervosa is a deadly disease. And like I said, I think we need to be aware of the fact that everyone is at risk.
WHITFIELD: Dr. Oviedo Bermudez from Vanderbilt Center for Eating Disorders out of Nashville. Thanks very much for joining us.
And we'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(MARKET UPDATE)
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 June 23, 2004 - 14:30 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
FREDRICKA WHITFIELD, CNN ANCHOR: At look at our top stories now. The U.S. is giving up trying to exempt its peacekeepers from the international criminal court. Diplomats withdraw a strongly opposed United Nations resolution today. The move came after the Security Council rejected a compromised proposal to limit it to one year. The U.S. has not signed the International Court Treaty and it would not apply to any allegations from the Iraq war.
Former U.N. Ambassador John Negroponte is officially the new ambassador to Iraq. Secretary of State Colin Powell swore him in today. Negroponte will start work after the U.S.-led coalition hands over authority to an interim Iraqi government next week.
KYRA PHILLIPS, CNN ANCHOR: Terrorists in Saudi Arabia have one month to turn themselves in or face Saudi government action. Crown Prince Abdullah went on television to deliver the ultimatum on behalf of King Fahd. Abdullah promises that the country will spare the lives of those who surrender.
WHITFIELD: The judge in the Scott Peterson double murder case has met with jurors to discuss possible misconduct by one of them. A juror could be dismissed in which case an alternate would step in. Peterson is on trial for the murder of his wife and unborn son.
PHILLIPS: Airport security. We have all gotten frustrated. Now some U.S. airport officials who are fed up with federal security screeners are fining out what it will take to bring back private contractors. Will it happen? CNN's Sean Callebs is in our Washington bureau with the details -- Sean.
SEAN CALLEBS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Kyra, exactly right. You touched on some of the concerns. Long lines, personnel shortages and a wealth of bureaucracy. All combined some of the nation's 435 airports are saying they would like to make the switch from government passenger screeners to the return of the use of private airport screeners. The Transportation Security Administration is now spelling out new guidelines that will allow airports to make the switch.
Department of Homeland Security Undersecretary Asa Hutchinson unveiled the guidelines at a meeting of the American Association of Airline Executives in Las Vegas. A spokesman says the 23-page book, however, is a, quote, "work in progress."
San Francisco Airport is one of only five airports in the nation operating under a test program using private contract screeners, under TSA supervision. Beginning November 19, all commercial airports can apply to make the switch to private owners. It's called the opt out program. San Francisco authorities contend their operation is working smoothly.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
MARC MCCARRON, SAN FRANCISCO INTL. AIRPORT: We don't have the same cumbersome rules the federal employees are bound by as far as where we put them. Hiring and firing process is more efficient for a private contractor than the federal government.
And I just think overall more creativity as how we employ the screeners and provide better security and provide customer service for our travelers.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CALLEBS: The inspector general of Homeland Security says private and federal screeners performed about the same, in his words, "which is to say equally poorly."
Of the 435 commercial airports, 40 to 100 have indicated said they would like to dump government screeners and go back to private operators -- Kyra.
PHILLIPS: All right, Sean. We'll follow it. Thanks so much -- Fred.
WHITFIELD: All right, thanks a lot.
Well straight ahead, one of the world's most famous young actresses announces she has an eating disorder. Next, will going public send the right message to other young girls?
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
WHITFIELD: On to Redwood City, California now where the Scott Peterson case is being played out. And juror No. 5 you see on the screen right there is talking. He was recently dismissed by the judge. Let's listen in on why.
(JOINED IN PROGRESS)
JUSTIN FALCONER, JUROR NO. 5, DISMISSED FROM PETERSON TRIAL: It's a lot of pressure. I mean we knew everybody is watching us. And then it was proven, you know when the other day when I came through the lobby.
But it got -- a lot of things got blown out of proportion. There was a lot of access, you know, to what was actually said and it was a lot made up, I think. And I think it was a lot of false reporting that happened.
(CROSSTALK)
FALCONER: I'm sorry?
QUESTION: Any comments on how the case is going?
FALCONER: It's going. Well I mean it's pretty early on. You know, I don't -- you know -- I don't know. I think you asked if he's guilty? No, he's an innocent man until proven otherwise.
And that was never -- from day one when they told us, gave us the instruction, it was our understanding that, you know, he is innocent until, you know, (UNINTELLIGIBLE) proves him guilty. And he hasn't done that.
QUESTION: Do you think one side is doing a better job than the other? People have said say the prosecution (OFF-MIKE)?
FALCONER: Well, it's a very difficult -- it's difficult to follow what he's saying. And I think that, you know -- and I'm speaking for myself. I'm not speaking for anybody else in the jury.
But speaking for myself, it is difficult to follow what he's doing. He's not giving us -- he's bouncing around. And it was difficult for me to follow what was -- what did he want us to think here? What did he want us to think there? And so it's...
QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE) so far?
FALCONER: You know, what's compelling?
QUESTION: Phone conversations videotape?
FALCONER: Well, no, because you know basically so far at least in my opinion, you know, everybody came up and has said you know kind of the same thing which is that you know he treated her really well. He did what he was you know -- yes, he had his side you know with the other woman. But you know he never treated her wrong. He never did anything like that.
And I've gotten that from the family, from everybody who's come up. They've all said he treated her wonderfully. And so -- and I haven't seen him you know -- yes, he lied about a couple of things you know that we saw in there. But I haven't seen anything that you know would make me believe that he committed this crime.
QUESTION: Let me ask you this now . Obviously you no longer have a vote.
FALCONER: No, I don't.
QUESTION: Obviously only the prosecution has put on its witnesses.
FALCONER: Absolutely.
QUESTION: So, I mean, given that pretex, what do you think at this point? You're not supposed to form an opinion. But you obviously formed small opinions that lead to a larger opinion.
FALCONER: Well I if mean you gave me the information that I've gotten so far, and you know and asked me to go in and deliberate it now, there's no way that you could convict him. There's no way.
And there's no way that I would even believe that he was guilty for doing anything. So -- but that's just the information we've gotten so far. I mean we haven't heard you know the defense. We haven't heard the whole prosecution.
So you know they have to have a chance to put all their cards on the table and they haven't done that yet.
QUESTION: On Monday the judge gave you a clean bill of conduct (OFF-MIKE). What if anything happened between him giving you a clean bill health Monday morning and (OFF-MIKE) if anything?
FALCONER: Nothing. I think it was just the media attention. It was -- I mean the thing about it was the media attention affected everybody. And so everybody heard about it. Everybody knew about it in the jury I mean.
And so you know they were kind of -- it wasn't like a secret anymore. Especially when people were following me. An you know like earlier today. So it was a distraction. I mean that's all it was, it was a distraction. How can you, you know -- when we leave the building you know we don't know what's going to happen. And so...
QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE) you haven't done anything wrong between Monday morning or maybe never did anything wrong (OFF-MIKE) Monday morning and now?
FALCONER: No, I don't think so.
QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)
FALCONER: Oh, no, no, I never did anything like that.
QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)
FALCONER: That's just a rumor. Yes, it wasn't -- no, it's nothing like that.
QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)
FALCONER: No, I was in the picture with the news. And I had told him, I guess, I'm ruining the shot for the news tonight. And you're not going to be on the news tonight.
And that's what it was. It was in passing, it was two seconds and then it got all blown out of proportion. And that's when I got called in on Monday morning.
QUESTION: Then the judge cleared you after that?
FALCONER: Yes, he did.
QUESTION: So then what happened between being cleared and standing here today?
FALCONER: The media didn't give up.
Well, like I said, it was such a big thing. And then we had the whole weekend to stew over it. And so by the time Monday came around and then hoping that we put it to rest on Monday, but it never did. It just got bigger and bigger. And so the whole jury knows about it.
QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)
FALCONER: Because of y'all.
QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)
FALCONER: Well it's a distraction. It was a distraction.
QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)
FALCONER: The media and the coverage -- yes, obviously it was me. Because -- I'm -- it's focused on me and it was a distraction. And I think that it was taking away from what the prosecution and the defense are trying to do.
And so I understand completely. I mean if I were in Scott's shoes I wouldn't want a juror that was getting harassed like this constantly. I mean...
QUESTION: So do you think in a way you were unfairly targeted?
FALCONER: I do. I think -- but you guys are doing your jobs and I think if it had have been reported accurately or at least you had gotten the right story it would have been OK. But instead it was blown way out of proportion and people made things up. And it just wasn't accurate at all.
QUESTION: What about the part where you actually spoke to Mark Geragos (OFF-MIKE)?
FALCONER: I didn't. I bumped the podium and I either said excuse me or oops, something like that. It wasn't a conversation at all.
QUESTION: You didn't lean into him (OFF-MIKE)?
FALCONER: No, I never did that.
QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE) other people telling you what we've been reporting?
FALCONER: That got blown out of proportion.
What it is my friends are telling me what they are seeing about me. They are not talking about the case. They are not talking about what the -- I'm sorry -- the testimony is or any details like that.
They're just laughing at me because people are talking some pretty good trash on TV about me. So they're having a pretty good time with that. QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)
FALCONER: Walking through. We walked through here and heard people reporting it.
QUESTION: (OFF-MIKE)
FALCONER: You know, it's disappointing. I guess I would have liked to have been there. But I'm not upset that I'm gone at all.
And I understand completely why. I mean it's not -- the amount of attention goat, you don't want that in a high profile case where so much is riding on the line.
QUESTION: Where do you go from here?
FALCONER: Home!
FALCONER: Justin Falconer, F-A-L-C-O-N-E-R.
QUESTION: How did you think the trial was going so far?
FALCONER: It was going.
Falconer, F-A-L-C-O-N-E-R. Justin.
I'm sorry? (UNINTELLIGIBLE)
QUESTION: And how old are you?
FALCONER: I'm 28.
WHITFIELD: Justin Falconer who was juror No. 5 just dismissed from the Scott Peterson trial as a member of the jury pool there. Apparently he says he believes the reason why he was dismissed is because he had become a distraction. Particularly because earlier in the week the judge had asked what his conversation was between he and the brother of Laci Peterson as they were going through the magnetometer.
Ted Rowlands has been covering the case from Redwood City, California. He pep a brief description. He thinks he became a distraction. Do we know anything more about exactly why he dismissed?
TED ROWLANDS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well a source close to the court has told CNN that there's something else going on here besides that -- that incident that was caught on videotape between this juror and Brent Rocha. We understand there is more to this. We don't know exactly what it is and it's not clear if the court informed this jury -- juror exactly why he was dismissed.
Meanwhile, in court now, it has resumed. The first alternate has been moved up into the jury panel and Mark Geragos is asking the judge or asked the judge for a mistrial because of the -- this juror he blamed it on the media saying they have inserted themselves into this case and he wants a mistrial. The judge denied him the mistrial. And they have begun now with the cross examination of a detective with the new impaneled jury, with the first alternate sitting in.
As for this juror, he is, of course, relieved with his duties. And he had no problems talking about the case and talking about what he thought was his demise, if you will, of being removed from the panel.
WHITFIELD: And, Ted, what's the conventional wisdom of where this argument just might go? Because this juror that says he was one who was followed and being harassed by members of the media. But no accusations of whether other jurors are being followed.
ROWLANDS: Yes, and I think that this individual maybe once he was on the radar screen was definitely being looked at by members of the media. Once he had the interaction with Brent Rocha and it was reported, it was -- I think he was in a situation where now he was a bit of a distraction.
However, the judge on Monday ruled that what happened there did not constitute misconduct. He was very firm in the ruling. For that reason and for others that CNN has learned that it is believed that something else has also taken place involving juror No. 5.
WHITFIELD: All right, we'll be looking to hear more details on that. Ted Rowlands, thanks very much from Redwood City, California.
Well shifting gears quite a bit now. One of the country's most famous teenage twins may have anorexia. Mary-Kate, the darker haired twin of the Mary-Kate and Ashley Olsen fame, is undergoing treatment for an eating disorder. Rumors intensified about her health after the sisters made the rounds recently promoting their first feature film.
Well to help us understand what triggers eating disorders I want to bring in Dr. Oviedo Bermudez of the Vanderbilt University Medical Center in Tennessee. And good to see you, Dr. Bermudez.
Well first let's talk about what anorexia nervosa is and what the symptoms are beyond just looking skinny.
DR. OVIEDO BERMUDEZ, VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER: Well glad to be here. And I want to tell you that we're really facing an epidemic in this country. And we need to be very aware of the fact this epidemic is not about looks and thinness. I think that's by far the most likely presentation for a patient.
But the reality is that it's an issue about sort of meeting a standard that our culture has set and that for many youngsters it is really difficult to attain. So they find themselves in that no-win situation of looking like like trying to be somebody that they cannot be.
And it's a difficult scenario for them to navigate through, especially during the adolescent years.
WHITFIELD: There are overt not just physical but also behavior disorders that come with anorexia, right? BERMUDEZ: Absolutely. So I think you need to look at eating disorders as two perhaps sides of a coin. One of the behavioral manifestations, the drive for thinness, the repetitive dieting, sort of the changing of relationships with food and the behaviors around food and at the dinner table.
But the other side of the coin is the withdrawal and really the unhappiness that goes along with that. So as you well said it really affects both sides of the individual. What we see, but also and perhaps most importantly, the way that they feel about themselves.
KAGAN: And reportedly Mary-Kate admitted hers or was admitted into a facility. And if that is indeed the case, that would be very pro-active, wouldn't it? Because oftentimes a victim of an eating disorder really has to go through all kinds of psychological hurdles before ever admitting there is a problem and before ever seeking help.
BERMUDEZ: I would tell that you I agree. Not only is it pro- active, I think it's very brave. Because there is a lot of shame in eating disorders. It's something that's very difficult for an individual who is suffering or affected to come to terms with and really admit, especially to admit to others. So I do think it's very brave.
And I do think that it carries with it an important message. And perhaps better said, two important messages. One is everybody is at risk. So if you are a celebrity, and have been in the limelight most of your life or you are a high school student from a small town in Anywhere, USA, this is a possibility.
This is something that we're all at risk for. And I think as parents, as family members, we need to be very aware of the fact that every young person is at risk for an eating disorder.
The second message in there is that you know the reality is that getting treatment is very important. Treatment is effective. I think that early recognition and early intervention are by far the best tools that we have in attacking these problems so that families being aware, being in tune, recognizing the warning signs, and then being able to say, gee, we are concerned and we should get an evaluation and do something about this is extremely important. Getting treatment.
Taking that step is very, very important and she should be commended for it.
WHITFIELD: Dr. Bermudez, what are some of the warning signs? I understand secretive eating might be one of them.
BERMUDEZ: Well certainly repetitive dieting. One of the most significant risk factors for the development of any form of an eating disorder, whether it's anorexia nervosa, bulimia nervosa or binge eating disorder, is pathological repetitive dieting.
And with that goes the behaviors of hiding foods, being secretive, changing taste in food, things that were favorite are now avoided, et cetera. So one has to be in tune to that. But also on the other side of the coin, being tuned to how that young person is functioning emotionally.
WHITFIELD: Quickly, before we run out of time, let me ask you, these are high powered, Hollywood girls under certain pressures. But might ordinary 18-year-olds be able to identify and learn from these young girls who are dealing with other pressures that they think are just as surmountably horrible?
BERMUDEZ: Correct. I think it's important to get accurate information. The National Eating Disorders Association is a very good, solid source of information. And not to live with misconceptions out there because this is not glamorous. Anorexia nervosa is a deadly disease. And like I said, I think we need to be aware of the fact that everyone is at risk.
WHITFIELD: Dr. Oviedo Bermudez from Vanderbilt Center for Eating Disorders out of Nashville. Thanks very much for joining us.
And we'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
(MARKET UPDATE)
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
