Return to Transcripts main page

Live From...

Pentagon Briefing; D.A. Vows to Push Forward in Duke Rape Case

Aired April 11, 2006 - 13:00   ET

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

KYRA PHILLIPS, CNN ANCHOR: The crowd is on his side but is the evidence? TThe he Duke rape investigation has shaken a college campus and divided a community. Now the D.A. pledges to push ahead.
Our Jason Carroll joins me now from Durham, North Carolina, where a legal forum was less about law and more about anger. A lot of emotions coming out today, Jason.

JASON CARROLL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: A lot of emotions here at North Carolina Central University, where this forum was held. This is the university where the alleged victim is a student. This is where the district attorney, as you heard, spoke to a number of people in the audience about the particulars of the case.

He didn't give away too much information but two key points. First, he says there is still DNA evidence that he is waiting for. Still DNA test results that have not come in yet. He did not indicate when those test results would come in. And second, he says despite what defense attorneys say, he plans to pursue his case.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MICHAEL NIFONG, DURHAM COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY: It doesn't mean nothing happened. It just means nothing was left behind, which is the case in 75 to 80 percent of all sexual assaults.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CARROLL: And what he's referring to there is the fact that there was no match according to the defense attorneys, no DNA match between the alleged victim in this case and the lacrosse players.

Also during the forum we heard from a number of NCCU students. Many of these students are upset with the way that this story has been covered in the media, also upset with the way the media portrayed the victim.

I want to bring in right now Shawn Cunningham. He's a senior here at NCCU.

Sean, I heard you speak during this forum. Give me a sense of what your thoughts are about the way the story has been covered and based on what you heard from the district attorney.

SHAWN CUNNINGHAM, NORTH CAROLINA CENTRAL UNIVERSITY: Well, the way the story has been covered over the last 30 days or so leaves me with some enragement, a little bit of anger. She's continuously been reduced to a stripper and an exotic dancer. She isn't portrayed as a mother, as a student. She isn't portrayed as a woman. She's portrayed as an exotic dancer. And when you portray someone in that manner, it makes it easier for the public to say, "Well, she shouldn't have been there in the first place. She deserved to be raped. She deserved to be sodomized." That's unjust.

CARROLL: She is a mother of two. She is a student here at this university.

CUNNINGHAM: Exactly.

CARROLL: Tell us about your impressions in terms of what you heard from the district attorney about his case.

CUNNINGHAM: I was actually pleased with the district attorney's thoughts. His comments made a lot of sense. The investigation is continuing, which is something we want. We just want a thorough and meticulous investigation. We want to make sure that when you do arrest, you do have the right individuals and that there's going to be not only an arrest but a conviction and some sentencing.

CARROLL: You know, I remember last week when I was here. And speaking to some students, some of the thought was perhaps when the DNA test results came in, these initial DNA test results, that it would put this sort of issue to rest with some. Now that doesn't seem to be the case. What do you think?

CUNNINGHAM: Of course not. But in any sexual assault one thing you want to realize, like the district attorney stated earlier, 80 percent of those that are sexually assaulted there is no DNA evidence, whether it's by the alleged rapist using condoms, cleaning up after.

You remember, from the time of the assault and the time of actually a search warrant and searching the home, 40 hours elapsed. I've got plenty of time if I've done something to clean up the house.

CARROLL: Final question that has to do with the forum itself. Were you pleased with what -- generally, what you heard from the forum, not pleased? What didn't you hear that you would have liked to have heard?

CUNNINGHAM: What I heard was the fact, one, that the investigation is going to continue. Because again, DNA is not the end all end all, because we didn't have DNA a few years back, and you have to rely on lineups, witness statements and victim statements. So DNA is not the end all and all.

The one thing that I would look for is let's make sure this is -- continues to be a fair and balanced investigation. Let's continue to make sure that there is going to be justice, because as one of the speakers eluded to, these same players are the same type of students that end up being judges, district attorneys, CEOs, and so they have the opportunity to influence policy later.

CARROLL: OK, Shawn Cunningham, senior here at NCCU. Thank you very much for your impressions.

CUNNINGHAM: Appreciate your time.

CARROLL: Really appreciate that.

Also at this point, Kyra, a lot of people questioning what the district attorney will do at this point, what evidence does he have.

Also during this forum he said what he will also rely on in his case is the evidence and the information that was gathered after this young woman checked herself into a hospital after the alleged assault took place -- Kyra.

PHILLIPS: Jason, let me ask you a quick question. I don't know if Shawn might want to answer this, but this came up a lot as we've been talking about this story and the fact that race has come up, that this alleged victim is black, that the men that allegedly raped her are white.

Is this a college town and a community that has been, for the most part, diverse and everybody has gotten along, no matter what your race, or is this an area that has had a lot of tension among races and this is just another thing to sort of fuel that?

CARROLL: Let's bring Shawn back in here. Shawn, I know you couldn't hear that question. It's from Kyra Phillips, our anchor. She was basically asking about the issue of race and how that plays out.

I know during the forum -- Kyra, I don't know if you had an opportunity to hear it. One of the speakers came up and said if the positions had been reversed, meaning perhaps if it had been a young white woman that had been sexually assaulted by a black man, maybe the process would have been different. What are your -- what are your thoughts on that?

CUNNINGHAM: The process might have been different, based upon the fact that generally, when it's an African-American, you arrest first and then you continue the investigation.

Generally, the victim would be portrayed totally different. If you look at this case in Aruba where the young lady went over, she went to a bar drinking in a strange country. She went home with strange men. They didn't portray her at all as loose or an alcoholic. They portrayed her as this wonderful white woman who is missing. We need to find her.

They didn't portray this young woman who was assaulted in that manner at all. So those are two, definitely, points where it would be done differently.

Also, the hate crime factor hasn't come in at all. Generally, when someone is beaten, assaulted, raped and you're called a nigger, you're called a whore, you're called a slut, those come into hate crime issues, whether it's from a racial perspective or if it's from a gender perspective. And those haven't been looked at by the FBI. Yes, we've had the FBI do the DNA, but what about the federal crimes that have been committed?

CARROLL: Kyra, what of course, Shawn is referring to is the victim in this case, the alleged victim, says that during the course of the sexual assault, some of the members of the lacrosse team shouted racial slurs at her during the course of this assault.

CUNNINGHAM: Exactly.

CARROLL: That's what you're referring to.

CUNNINGHAM: Exactly.

CARROLL: OK.

PHILLIPS: So this has -- it's been tense then for blacks and whites in this community.

CARROLL: In terms of tension I think there has been tension with some people. I think what also exist is this sort of underlying level of distrust. Whether it be at the legal system, whether it be at those who have power, versus those who don't have power. Would you say that's a fair assessment, Shawn?

CUNNINGHAM: Duke is a prestigious university that's a traditional university with an endowment over billions of dollars. North Carolina Central is the HBCU (ph), which is going to be seen in a lesser light than Duke University would be. The credibility is always there.

And so we're always feeling that we're going to get not, of course, a fair shake at the tree. So it's always showing that between Duke and NCCU, even in the Durham community. Duke is the wonderful university; we're the other university in the city. And it's a shame. And unfortunately, that bears on the victim.

CARROLL: OK -- Kyra.

PHILLIPS: Shawn, I appreciate his time. And Jason, of course, I appreciate you very much. And we'll continue to follow the story and stay on top of all of the issues. Thanks, Jason.

We're going to get straight now to Tony Harris, working another -- one of our top stories today. And that's Iran and nuclear weapons -- Tony.

TONY HARRIS, ANCHOR: That's right, Kyra. I just want to let you know and everyone at home watching that we are monitoring the speech being delivered by the Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Iran's former president saying today that Iran has increased the number of functioning centrifuges at its nuclear facilities and has produced enriched uranium for them.

Now as you know, the U.N. Security Council has demanded that Iran cease its enrichment activists. Tehran says that the country has a right to produce nuclear fuel for peaceful purposes. And the United States, of course, believes that Iran plans to build a nuclear weapon. Again, we are monitoring the comments from Iran's president. As a matter of fact, we have a moment. Let's listen in.

MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD, IRANIAN PRESIDENT (through translator): With the blessings of God almighty and with the efforts made by our young scientists and the prayers made by the vigilant Iranian nation, the nuclear fuel cycle at the laboratory level has been completed, and uranium with the desired enrichment for nuclear power plants was achieved on the 20th of Faradin (ph), 1385 Iranian calendar here.

At this holy place and the vicinity of the holy shrine of Imam Rasa (ph), peace be upon him, I wish to...

HARRIS: OK, Kyra, you heard it from the president, the Iranian president in his own words, saying that uranium enrichment has been achieved, and at that moment you heard the speech being interrupted by chants by those gathered.

Now, I suppose, what we wait for is the reaction from the Security Council and from the United States. But once again, Kyra, in the president's own words, uranium enrichment has been achieved -- Kyra.

PHILLIPS: And of course, the president there, Tony, talking about the fact that they have the right to do this...

HARRIS: Yes.

PHILLIPS: ... to produce nuclear fuel for peaceful purposes, they say. Of course, the concern with the United States is that Iran could plan to build nuclear weapons.

I'm being told now Donald Rumsfeld at the Pentagon briefing addressing the issue of Iran. Let's listen in. We'll monitor both.

QUESTION: ... said that -- confirmed that Iran has successful enriched uranium using 164-some-odd centrifuges.

Can we get your reaction to that announcement from Iran?

DONALD H. RUMSFELD, U.S. SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: I'd rather wait and see what our experts say about it. I have not seen the statement, I have not had a chance to analyze anything that they've said. Nor have I had a chance to talk to the people who have the responsibility in the United States government for making judgments and assessments with respect to things like that.

QUESTION: You mentioned you're not going to talk about planning or possible planning looking down the road if the military option is needed. But do those stories somehow affect, in your mind, the way the diplomacy moves forward, even though these stories are out there. Does that affect the way the diplomacy toward Iran moves forward?

RUMSFELD: I suppose it depends in part on the credence that various people give fantasy. QUESTION: Mr. Secretary, going back to what General Pace said, and if you'll allow me to expand, and maybe General Pace would like to jump in: Regarding the plan itself...

RUMSFELD: Instead of just asking a question, he always has the tendency to tell us who should answer and who might jump in.

(LAUGHTER)

That's fascinating. This is intriguing.

QUESTION: Let me go back to the Ivan Scott classic two-part question...

(LAUGHTER)

One part is, was the plan -- the criticism, of course -- was the plan perhaps valid or the criticism valid in that the amount of forces attributed to the invasion or attack were too light?

And, two, did the plan cover what now seems to be an almost blindside of the level of the terrorist or insurgent violence?

And the other part -- and maybe you (INAUDIBLE) answer this, Mr. Secretary -- pardon me, sir -- there have been four generals...

RUMSFELD: We get all kinds of help up here.

QUESTION: There's four generals in one month who have called for your head, so to speak. Now that you are the -- or have become the catalyst of criticism of the war, do you think perhaps you're hurting the cause by staying on?

GENERAL PETER PACE (USMC), CHAIRMAN, JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF: Should I start?

RUMSFELD: Sure. Why don't you start with the second part?

(LAUGHTER)

PACE: The logic for the size of the force that went in was very solid. And, among other things, it included the believe that Saddam probably believed that we would take six months to build up our forces again, array 500,000 troops on the other side of the border, bomb him for 45 days, and then come in.

What turned out was the reverse. We went in with a lighter force of about 150,000. We did not precede it with a long bombing campaign. We got to Baghdad much faster than anybody thought we ever would.

And as a result of that, Pete Pace believes that we had much less destruction and much less loss of life to get that job done.

So from that standpoint, I was very comfortable with the prewar planning. I am comfortable with the way it was executed. And I would go back, given the same facts and figures, and reach the same conclusion; as did all the Joint Chiefs in agreement with Tom Franks' plan.

As far as Pete Pace is concerned, this country is exceptionally well served by the man standing on my left. Nobody works harder than he does to take care of the PFCs and the lance corporals and lieutenants and the captains. He does his homework. He works weekends. He works nights.

People can question my judgment or his judgment, but they should never question the dedication, the patriotism and the work ethic of Secretary Rumsfeld.

QUESTION: Mr. Secretary, could I actually pursue this just one more step? I wonder what do you think...

RUMSFELD: Don't you want to tell us which one should answer this thing?

QUESTION: No, sir, that'll be up to you.

RUMSFELD: OK.

QUESTION: It's a shame, because it makes it so much easier if he would.

(LAUGHTER)

QUESTION: To what do you attribute the fact that these retired generals are now coming out with this criticism of you? And does it affect your ability to do your job? Is there any danger that you will lose public confidence because of it?

RUMSFELD: I don't know how many generals there have been in the last five years that have served in the United States armed services: hundreds and hundreds and hundreds. And there are several who have opinions, and there's nothing wrong with people having opinions.

And I think one ought to expect that when you're involved in something that's controversial as certainly this war is, one ought to expect that. It's historic. It's always been the case. And I see nothing really very new or surprising about it.

QUESTION: Does it affect your ability to do your job?

RUMSFELD: No.

QUESTION: Mr. Secretary, you made it clear that the amount of troops in Iraq is a condition-based thing and drawdown will not occur until the commanders in the field say they're ready. You've also made a connection between number of Iraqi security forces trained and ready to go.

Since October, there's been a roughly 30 percent increase in ISF members.

I'm wondering if you think that it's getting to a point where you really can make some decisions about drawdown. RUMSFELD: When we have an announcement, we'll let you know.

(CROSSTALK)

RUMSFELD: Not first, but we're fair, and we'll let everyone know at the same time.

The answer is, it remains the same: that the military commanders are making assessments as to what's taking place on the ground. They continue to pass off responsibility to the Iraqi security forces. They've passed over some 30 bases. They're passing over various responsibilities for real estate and cities and the like.

And as that goes forward, they'll make recommendations to me and I'll make recommendations to the president with the advice and counsel of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the chairman. And at some point, the president will make a judgment and make some announcements and life will go on.

QUESTION: Mr. Secretary, two questions, please.

As far as your resignation and all that is concerned, knowing you personally for the last 25 years, and as far as fighting this terrorism is concerned, you're doing a fine job.

My question here is also in two parts: One, coming back from India after the presidential visit -- I was part of the presidential visit to India. And they had a wonderful visit there, as far as signing between U.S. and India civilian nuclear agreement.

What are your views? Because Secretary Rice was on the Hill in the recent days and so was Dr. Manmohan Singh, prime minister of India, and the parliament in India. And she had been putting the case that this is a good deal.

What are your personal views as far as far as this deal is concerned in the Congress?

RUMSFELD: Well, this is something, of course, that was coordinated throughout the executive branch of the government: the Department of Energy and elsewhere. And the president's position is a U.S. administration position, and we certainly support it. I certainly support it here in the Department of Defense. And the relationship with India is an important one, and it is something that we have worked to develop over the past five-plus years very extensively. And our military-to-military relationship is excellent with them.

QUESTION: Second, as far as troops are concerned, U.S. troops abroad, like in Afghanistan, since I was there, they are also doing a wonderful job.

But at the same time, as far as Pakistan is concerned, those troops are not allowed to reach Osama bin Laden and other major terrorists.

So where do we stand now as far as Osama bin Laden is concerned? U.S. troops are not allowed to enter that area.

RUMSFELD: The arrangements with Pakistan are that we will assist them to the extent they wish in improving their capabilities. And they have been aggressive in attempting to root out terrorists and Taliban and Al Qaida in their country.

They have the northern federally administered tribal areas, which have an unusual constitutional arrangement with respect to the government of Pakistan. But they every month have increased their efforts, and they've taken a lot of losses, as a matter of fact, in going after the terrorists in that part of the world.

We have not yet been successful in locating or capturing Osama bin Laden, but someday we will be.

PACE: You mention Pakistan, and we should not lose sight of the fact that yesterday was the last U.S. military member who went to Pakistan for relief operations left after six months of deployment to that country -- 24 helicopters at the peak, 1,200 U.S. personnel, thousands of lives saved, 40,000 seen in medical facilities, engineering equipment to help clear roads and open up lifelines for the people there.

We should all be very proud of the work that our folks did in coordination with the Pakistan government to help them during that very trying period.

QUESTION: I believe you can see some announcement from Japan about the (INAUDIBLE) relocation, new proposal plan. Did you see it?

RUMSFELD: I've not received specific piece of paper but, needless to say, our folks have been in extensive discussions with the officials from Japan and the Japanese officials have been in extensive discussions within Japan on this subject.

It has been going on now for a number of months. And I feel we're making good progress. And at the appropriate time, the officials in Japan will make any announcements that they feel are appropriate.

QUESTION: The local community, even now, are demanding that (INAUDIBLE)...

RUMSFELD: I've read about that. We are negotiating, not with the press and not with the local community. We're negotiating with the government of Japan. And they are then dealing with the local government. And they will work it out.

We have an interest. They have an interest. And we've had a long and very successful relationship with Japan. And I have every confidence that the issues that currently being worked on in, kind of, a final form, will sort through very soon and in a manner that's consistent with the interests of both countries.

QUESTION: There is a very big difference between the previous plan because the new proposal has two (INAUDIBLE)... RUMSFELD: I'll bet you those differences to narrow over time.

(LAUGHTER)

QUESTION: Mr. Secretary, with the freedom, or perhaps naivete, as someone filling in over here, let me attempt another question on Iran, if I may.

RUMSFELD: A fool's errand?

(LAUGHTER)

QUESTION: Yes, you've dismissed talk of war plans as fantasyland. Now, the president called them wild speculation.

RUMSFELD: You should be very careful about quoting me.

QUESTION: In quotes, "Fantasyland."

RUMSFELD: And you've already started. I used the word, but I did not use it specifically in the context that you're using it. And I would caution you to read very carefully and concisely what I say and not what you'd like me to say or what you want other people to think I should say. QUOTE: I'll use the president's quote...

When you're in a whole, stop digging.

(LAUGHTER)

QUESTION: OK. "Wild speculation" is what the president called it. But on May 21st, General Franks told us from this podium that you had not yet asked him to draw up plans for an attack on Iraq.

We learn from Bob Woodward's book that, indeed, six months earlier, you had asked him to draw up such plans.

So why should the American people, today, believe you and the president when it comes to reports of plans for an attack on Iran?

RUMSFELD: Isn't that interesting?

PACE: I am wracking my brain on the dates. I'd have to go back and...

QUESTION: May 21st, 2002, Tommy Franks. I have a quote, if you'd like.

RUMSFELD: Well, the first thing I would say is, you're talking about Iraq in that context.

There has always been -- for ages, there have been contingency plans for Iraq. I mean, I don't know how many years there have been contingency plans for Iraq. Certainly, since 1990...

PACE: Ten years we were... RUMSFELD: In that 10 years, I mean, every day, people were firing -- Correction: Every week, Iraqis were firing at U.S. and British aircraft flying in the northern no-fly zone and the southern no-fly zones.

And I wasn't here. I was in private life. But during the decade of the 1990's, I'm sure that there were contingency plans as to what one would do with respect to Iraq.

So it's hard for me to believe that General Franks would say that we didn't have contingency plans. I do not know precisely what the question was that was asked, or precisely how he answered it but, clearly, this country for the better part of 15 years has had various contingency plans. That is what this government does -- this department does -- is plan for various contingencies. It is not unusual, and one would be critical of the department were they not to have done so.

QUESTION: In recent days, in recent weeks or months, have you asked the Joint Staff or the Central Command, possibly through General Pace, to update, refine, modify the contingencies for possible military options against Iran?

RUMSFELD: We have I do not know how many various contingency plans in this department. And the last thing I am going to do is to start telling you or anyone else in the press or the world at what point we refresh a plan or do not refresh a plan and why. It just is not useful.

QUESTION: Are you satisfied with the state of planning for Iran options right now?

RUMSFELD: I am never satisfied. I'm always thinking that maybe there's something we have not thought of or something we could do better for a noncombatant evacuation from a South American country after an earthquake. We have, literally, an enormous number of things that we do.

And I have responded with respect to Iran. We are on a diplomatic track. The president has said exactly what he wants said. And we support the president.

QUESTION: General Pace, in your opening statement, you opened up a little door here about revising history on how we went to war.

You said, when the decision -- when it became apparent that military action might have to be taken in Iraq -- there were like 50 iterations of the plan over two years - you gave the impression that the decision to go to war was actually a foregone conclusion in late '01, early '02. And throughout the year of '02, the American public was not told the truth on this in terms of...

RUMSFELD: He didn't leave the impression of that at all.

PACE: What I said was, when it became apparent that we might have to take military action... QUESTION: Over two years, then, you said plans progressed. That would put you in late '01.

RUMSFELD: But there were plans back in 1990 and '92 and '93 and '95 and '97 and '98. You just are not listening carefully.

(CROSSTALK)

PACE: You go from '03 -- what was it, March of '03? -- and using two years loosely, that takes you back to March of '01. And I just say, "for about two years," and I said, "when it became apparent that we might have to."

I mean, you can read as much into that as you want, but I can just tell you, I was simply trying to tell you that the process was an iterative process that involved a lot of trips by Tommy Franks to this. And you should not read any more into it than that, because I didn't mean anything more than we started down a deliberate road to ensure that all parts of the planning were properly vetted.

QUESTION: Well, Mr. Secretary, in November of '01 the president, according to several books that you haven't disputed, said, "Start planning," and you...

RUMSFELD: You think I'm going to stand around reading your books and disputing things in them or validating or not validating? I've got a real daytime job. I mean, you'd do nothing else but that if you did that.

The fact that I haven't disputed something -- I mean, if I disputed all the mythology that comes out of this group and the books of the world, I wouldn't have any time to do anything else.

QUESTION: Yes, but the record's starting to emerge here in terms of the decision-making track, and I just want to you that. November of '01 you were asked by the president to start looking into updating plans.

RUMSFELD: I don't remember that myself, and I'd have to go back and look.

Woodward's book is not the Bible. Some of you may not know that.

PACE: But I do appreciate the opportunity to correct the record, because, in fact, in March of '01, I was still the commander of U.S. Southern Command; had no opportunity at all. So I did misspeak by saying "two years." I was wrong there.

The intent was to tell you that it went on for a period of time.

I didn't become vice chairman until 1 October of 2001, and that's where I got on this train and where my knowledge of planning begins. It was subsequent to that, obviously, that I became knowledgeable of any kind of planning.

I'd have to go look at my calendar, but I'll bet there is not a three-week period -- I'm sure I'm wrong, but I'm going to guess there hasn't been a three-week period in years that I have not been engaged in a meeting with a combatant commander from some part of the world, going over with them the planning process that they have a statutory responsibility to perform, where they take a responsibility for a geographic area, they look at it, they say, "What conceivably could go wrong?" Then we talk about the kinds of things that might go wrong.

Then they come in with a plan of how they're going to address the various things that could conceivably go wrong in their area of responsibility.

Then they take one of them in sequence, and they say, "Here are the assumptions that we're going to operate on. How do you feel about that?"

Then Pete and I and others and the chiefs will talk about the assumptions. And we'll get that right.

Then they'll go back out and they'll start to develop a plan based on those assumptions for that particular niche. Then we work through that.

That may take six months. Back and forth, back and forth.

Then they'll take another piece of their responsibility and do the same thing.

This goes on all the time. This has been going on for decades in this department.

QUESTION: When you talk about all the opportunities people have to criticize -- generals in particular -- had to criticize the war, is it the case that people like General Eaton, who were in office at the time, failed to speak up in that camp? Or were there voices of dissent that raised criticisms, such as they're raising now?

PACE: I do not know whether or not General Eaton ever spoke up or not. I never became aware of any concerns he had until he recently started publishing.

With regard to others who had any kind of concerns at all -- and there were many. I mean, when you sit around a table talking about...

PHILLIPS: Chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, General Peter Pace, and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, giving the Pentagon briefing. We'll continue to follow it. But if you want to see it right now live as it happens, you can go to CNN.com/pipeline and monitor it for the rest of the news conference.

Meanwhile, the news keeps coming. We'll keep bringing it to you. More LIVE FROM after a quick break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

PHILLIPS: Many immigrants who skipped work to rally for easier citizenship didn't slip across the border; they flew across the ocean with all the necessary paperwork. Trouble is, they put down roots instead of going back home.

Here's CNN's Randi Kaye with a story first aired on "ANDERSON COOPER 360."

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

RANDI KAYE, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): For a decade, Brian and Caroline have called America home.

BRIAN, UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRANT: I am American as much as President George Bush. I do everything American. I follow the NASCAR, I follow the American football. I hunt like the Vice President Dick Cheney.

KAYE: They own a home in Yonkers outside New York City, pay taxes, and both have jobs. Brian owns a plumbing business. Caroline works as a secretary.

BRIAN: We want to have a family in this country, but the situation we're in at the minute, we can't go forward. We're stuck.

KAYE: Stuck because Brian and Caroline, who asked us not to use their last name, are living in the United States illegally.

BRIAN: It's like being at the top of a ladder or two rungs from the top, and we can't get to the top.

CAROLINE, UNDOCUMENTED IMMIGRANT: I'd find it very, very hard to leave here. Because just made it our home.

KAYE: Caroline lives every day in fear of being deported back to Ireland where they both came from on tourist Visas, now long expired.

(On camera): Is it strange for you because you're living the life of an American citizen, yet you're not a citizen?

BRIAN: Exactly. It's just, it's very frustrating for me because, like I am doing everything an American citizen does, but all I need is that small piece of paper, the Green Card.

KAYE: He travels the country to speak out at rallies like this one held today in New York City.

BRIAN: ... what's going to happen. We're going to stand together!

KAYE: What would you say are some of the greatest challenges that you face here, living here illegally?

BRIAN: Well, the number one challenge, as you saw today, is the driving. That's the biggest danger for me at the minute is not having my driver's license.

KAYE: The law requires anyone applying for a new license provide a valid Social Security number. Since he's illegal, Brian doesn't have one. BRIAN: I employ two Irish guys and two American lads. One of them I actually employed just to drive me around and to work.

KAYE: And travel? That's out of the question. Too risky.

CAROLINE: I missed both grandparents' funerals. I couldn't go home for them.

KAYE (voice-over): Before the couple's wedding in New York last October, they hadn't seen family and friends in years. They feel they are being treated like terrorists, not like the hardworking, tax- paying citizens in training they consider themselves to be.

(On camera): Do you see a clear path of citizenship in the future?

BRIAN: Definitely, I do. I think the immigration system is definitely progressing, and I feel very strongly that they have to do something. I think they will.

KAYE: Brian and Caroline hope next year, if immigration reform passes, they will have new Visas, and soon after, they'll have children. American citizens who won't have to wait like their parents did to walk freely and legally on U.S. soil.

Randi Kaye, CNN, New York.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

PHILLIPS: Get a fresh perspective on the day's top stories from Anderson Cooper. Join "AC 360" weeknights at 10:00 Eastern.

(MARKET REPORT)

PHILLIPS: Straight ahead, Katrina relief at any cost. You won't believe what the government paid for blue tarps. That's just a start. LIVE FROM has the story covered just ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

PHILLIPS: His wife and baby daughter are dead but Neil Entwistle says he didn't kill them. No it's up to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Today Entwistle stood silent as his lawyer entered not guilty pleas on his behalf.

Prosecutors say Entwistle shot his 27 year old wife, Rachel, and the couple's nine month old daughter, Lillian, in their suburban Boston home. They say he had huge racked up huge debts and was dissatisfied with his sex life. British national Entwistle fled the U.S., but was picked up in London and sent back to Massachusetts. It could be a year before the case comes to trial. Entwistle will wait in a jail cell in Cambridge.

Case dismissed against a retired teacher roughed up by and New Orleans police officer. The run-in last October between Robert Davis and cops on Bourbon Street was caught on tape. You remember this. Davis was charged with public intoxication, resisting arrest and battery. Davis insisted all along he hadn't had a drink in 25 years. Now he and his lawyers say prosecutors are backing off. Three officers still face charges. Two have been fired.

Haste makes waste and in the weeks after Hurricane Katrina government inspectors have found a lot of hasty decisions leading to a lot of waste of your tax dollars. Details now from CNN's Sean Callebs.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

SEAN CALLEBS, CNN CORRESPONDENT, (voice over): Everyone in New Orleans now knows the definition of a blue roof. But what they probably don't know is FEMA paid contractors some $175 for each square 100 feet to put protective tarps in place. But those contractors subcontracted the work out. Then those contractors did the same thing. So did the next and the next and the next. So in the end, in some cases, crews doing the actual work were paid just $2 per square.

SEN. MARY LANDRIEU, (D) LOUISIANA: There's been extraordinary waste, extraordinary inefficiencies.

CALLEBS: Louisiana Senator Mary Landrieu is on the congressional committee investigating allegations of waste and abuse in government contracts. Leaders say the findings are eye opening.

REP. BOBBY JINDAL, (R) LOUISIANA: What's even more appalling is local roofers are saying for $175 per foot we'd give you a permanent roof.

CALLEBS: FEMA admits there were problems with the way some contracts were handled, but didn't return CNN's call seeking details. Lawmakers say the waste continues. Without taking bids, FEMA awarded contracts worth hundreds of millions of dollars to four national companies to pick up debris. Lawmakers say they were paid as much as $27 a cubic yard to remove the mess. Local parish leaders say the work could have been done for about a fourth of the cost.

And then there's the issue of trailers. More than 20,000 still sitting idly in Arkansas and other locations and FEMA ended up paying about $76,000 for each travel trailer that's being used for a year and a half. Some congressional leaders say residents would have been better off just receiving the cash.

JINDAL: Even if you said, we'll just give you half if you don't take the trailer, I guarantee you the vast majority of the people would say, we'll take half and we'll be better off than if you'd given us an $80,000 trailer for 18 months.

CALLEBS: Congressional members wanted more answers from FEMA, but all representatives of the emergency management agency left the meeting before it was over, unconscionable says Senator Vitter.

SEN. DAVID VITTER, (R) LOUISIANA: And to me that says almost everything you need to know about the attitude problem that we've experienced from, unfortunately, the very beginning. CALLEBS: Congressional leaders are saying they want FEMA to change in the way it works. They say they Know the U.S. will get hit hard again by a punishing hurricane, but, they say, taxpayers should get hammered again by government waste.

Sean Callebs, CNN, New Orleans.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

PHILLIPS: Straight to Tony Harris. He's working on a developing story. Something about an Amber Alert, Tony?

HARRIS: That's right. An Amber Alert issued just a short time ago. Authorities in Independence, Kansas, are looking for a 16-year- old Kelsey Stelting. Police believed she was kidnapped at gun point at 6:30 this morning from her home. Police say she was forced into a van and it is the white van that police are looking for that she was forced into that white van.

It was last seen heading south on U.S. Highway 75. Police say the kidnapper is believed to be a stranger to the girl and say the make and model of the van isn't quite known yet at this time. Stelting, as you can see here blonde, blue eyes, about 5'4. She weighs 110 pounds. Let me give you a phone number if you have seen this white van. You can call this number and pass the information along to authorities. 620-332-1700. That number is 620-332-1700. Once again, authorities are looking for 16 year old Kelsey Stelting of Independence, Kansas.

We'll continue to follow this story and give you additional updates as we get more information, Kyra.

PHILLIPS: Tony, thank you very much.

Myspace.com is making space for a new kind ad campaign. Beginning this week, the Web site is running public service spots promoting on-line safety. It has also hired a security czar. Myspace has come under scrutiny for the very features that make it popular: searchable profiles of members, many of them teens, including photos and personal details. Parents and police fear it's the perfect tool for sexual predators to find and meet potential victims.

The D.A. and the DNA. Coming up, the latest twist in the Duke rape investigation. Prosecutors push on, but is the evidence on their side? We're going to tell you more at the top of the hour right here on LIVE FROM.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

PHILLIPS: Well, it can drive you to desperation. The rising cost of gas, up another 17 cents in the past two weeks. The Lundberg Survey finds the national average price of self-serve regular now $2.67 a gallon. How is that compared to a year ago? Here's the facts.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) TONY HARRIS, CNN ANCHOR (voice-over): A poll released in the first week of April 2005 found gas prices were causing financial hardship for a majority of Americans. At that time, gas prices had soared about 19 cents in three weeks, with the average price for a gallon at $2.32. The highest average price in the nation one year ago was in Bakersfield, California, at $2.62 a gallon, still lower than our current average. That hike was blamed on lingering high crude oil prices, growing demand and higher refining costs.

Two weeks later, the Lundberg Survey found gas prices had declined by nearly by 4.5 cents, thanks to drop in crude oil prices and slightly lower demand. By the end of April 2005, the average had fallen to $2.27 per gallon. Many motorists are likely hoping history repeats itself at the pumps.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

PHILLIPS: Well, the Feds have their eyes on your eyes and don't like what they see. The Centers for Disease control and Prevention is investigating more than a hundred reports of a fungal eye infection that may -- repeat, may -- be linked to a popular contact lens solution, Bausch and Lobb's "Renu with Moisture Loc." A direct connection hasn't been shown, and a number of those reporting the infection did not use the Bausch & Lomb product. Nevertheless, the company is voluntarily suspending shipments until more is known. Without treatment, fungal infection can scar the cornea and cause temporary blindness. If you wear contacts and have eye redness, pain or other symptoms, take out your lenses and get in touch with your eye doctor immediately.

So what do President Calvin Coolidge, Orson Welles and Fats Domino have in common? Here's a little hint. They're all going to the library together. Grateful Dead drummer Mickey Hart joins us live with the answer.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

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