Return to Transcripts main page

American Morning

Family and Friends of Diane Whipple Reeling From Judge's Decision

Aired June 18, 2002 - 09:08   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.
BILL HEMMER, CNN ANCHOR: Want to go to California right now in San Francisco in a case of justice done or undone. Family and friends of Diane Whipple are reeling today from a decision yesterday from a judge to overturn the dog mauling murder conviction. Marjorie Knoller still faces up to four years for involuntary manslaughter, when she is scheduled to be sentenced about mid July. Whipple's domestic partner asked the judge to throw the book at her.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SHARON SMITH, DIANE WHIPPLE'S PARTNER: And with all due respect, your honor, I disagree that this was not murder. But having taken that away, what justice demands -- truly demands -- 15 years to life, I ask that you can give them nothing less than four years.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HEMMER: And the question now is whether or not prosecutors will try and retry Knoller for murder. Let's go to San Francisco. District Attorney Terence Hallinan is our guest.

Sir, thanks for your time and good morning to you. It's very early there in California.

TERENCE HALLINAN, S.F. DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Sure, good morning.

HEMMER: Your reaction from yesterday, first off, before we get to the whole issue about...

HALLINAN: Well we were, to say the least, surprised. We didn't expect that. We knew we had an uphill struggle to get a murder conviction in a -- it never happened before in California in a case like this. But having secured it, we did not expect it to be taken away some three months after the verdict by the judge on a motion for new trial.

He had decided on the issue three times during the course of the trial and sided with us on every instance. And then we're wondering what happened between the verdict and the motion for a new trial. We're gathering our forces and deciding what to do.

It's very tricky. The -- he reversed it on the facts. He decided that the jury, in effect, was wrong when they decided she had knowledge when she opened the door and let the dogs out. That makes it hard for an appeal.

There's an issue of whether we can get a second trial or we have a double jeopardy issue, because there's a fact that's been decided against us. We are looking at everything we have, and we also have in the closet, so to speak, a perjury charge.

HEMMER: A whole lot on your plate right now. And clearly, based on your answer, a final decision had not been made. And possibly it's a pretty great distance away. Is that a fair assessment?

HALLINAN: Well, he's put the motion to reconsider his ruling, which is what we made, over until the 15th of July, at which time, if he rules against us, he'll sentence her unless we appeal and then he will stay that. There's lots of thinking going on. We haven't given up by any extent of the word.

HEMMER: Mr. Hallinan, I want to play a quick clip from yesterday in court toward the end after the decision came down. The prosecutor, Jim Hanmer, listen to what he said in his address to the judge.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JAMES HANMER, PROSECUTOR: I fear because of what you have done today -- and that's why I'm going to ask you to reconsider it -- that you will have forever robbed Sharon Smith and Diane Whipple and everyone who knew the woman and 12 jurors in Los Angeles and 19 grand jurors in San Francisco and everyone in California a sense of justice.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HEMMER: Mr. Hallinan, do you reflect that emotion, that anger that was so clear and present in the court?

HALLINAN: I was sitting right there in court beside them. And that certainly is the way we all felt. I think that's the way the huge majority of people in this city and this state felt, particularly the way he did it. That is to say, if he had begun the case by ruling that it wasn't a homicide or at the conclusion of our evidence or before submitting it to the jury. But to wait, let it go to a verdict, have the jury make a verdict and then reverse it, that was a shock.

HEMMER: Yeah. What will make your decision going forward during this appeals process? Will you make your decision based on laws, sir? Or will it based on what the family of Diane Whipple and Sharon Smith and their input that they give you? Or will it be possibly a combination of both?

HALLINAN: It will. You're right, it will be a combination of both. We have to look at the law to see whether an appeal is worthwhile or a retrial is even possible. And if it's a retrial decision, we do have to take into consideration the feelings of the family and her domestic partner, who has said, hey, I've had enough. So we will take all those things into consideration.

HEMMER: Quickly here, I only have about 30 seconds left. You said something in your answer there. Is it possible a retrial is not possible despite the fact the judge yesterday said you could have retrial in the second-degree murder charge?

HALLINAN: Yes, he did say that, but he fashioned his reversal in such a way as to make it very difficult. That is, he made a finding that an essential fact was against us. That is to say, that she didn't have the criminal intent that's necessary to establish the case. So that might very well constitute double jeopardy if we retried it again.

HEMMER: Terence Hallinan, District Attorney from San Francisco, thank you, sir, once again. A fascinating turn of events from yesterday. Thanks for talking today.

HALLINAN: Thank you.

HEMMER: All right.

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