Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Saturday Morning News

Legal Briefs: Andrew Luster, Martha Stewart, Jose Canseco

Aired June 21, 2003 - 08:11   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.


THOMAS ROBERTS, CNN ANCHOR: Hi, everybody. Welcome back.
Time now to open our "Legal Briefs" for you. On our docket, the bizarre capture of Max Factor heir Andrew Luster, Martha Stewart's legal mess and the new -- brand new legal troubles of former baseball slugger Jose Canseco.

Joining us now, former prosecutor Nelda Blair joins us from Houston, and civil liberties attorney Lida Rodriguez-Taseff joins us from Miami.

Ladies, good morning to you. Thanks for being here.

LIDA RODRIGUEZ-TASEFF, CIVIL LIBERTIES ATTORNEY: Good morning.

ROBERTS: All right. Let's go ahead and talk about the Andrew Luster situation.

Nelda, what do you think about this? He's been captured, now he's back and his attorney is working on an appeal, correct?

NELDA BLAIR, FORMER PROSECUTOR: Well, his attorney is working on an appeal, but I don't see much hope for this guy. He was already found guilty. He left the country. The judge sentenced him in absentia and I think he's going to jail.

ROBERTS: Lida, same thing for you?

RODRIGUEZ-TASEFF: Well, it's entirely possible, but let's address the appeal for a second.

This is a really good argument. The appellate court in California had said that he had abandoned his appeal because he fled a couple of days before his -- he was convicted. So the issue then becomes whether or not he's entitled to have that appeal heard on its merits now that he's been returned.

The issue is now before the supreme court of California, who will determine whether or not he deserves a chance to have the appeal heard on the merits.

And whatever you think of the guy, the reality is we should hear the appeal on the merits. There have been 108 men released from Death Row because they were wrongly convicted. I think the justice system deserves to have this guy have his appeal heard and decided on the merits. BLAIR: Understand one thing. This guy was not convicted because he ran. He was convicted and then ran.

ROBERTS: Nelda, let's get to his attorney. The guy that's putting through the appeal process is Roger Diamond, the same attorney that also asked to be taken off the case after Luster disappeared, correct?

BLAIR: That's correct. And, actually, he can still pursue an appeal. Whether or not his appeal of grounds are good or not, you know, this guy is still -- at least capable of pursuing the appeal.

But he did ask to be taken off and I'm not sure that Luster is wise in keeping him on. I mean, it's his decision, actually.

ROBERTS: All right, ladies. We're going to move on now. We're going to go from Andrew Luster into the Martha Stewart mess.

You know, she was back in court this week. And I guess rain is a good thing, because she was back with an umbrella, a different one this time, to shield her face.

RODRIGUEZ-TASEFF: Yes.

Well, you know, one of the interesting things about this Martha case is that her wardrobe is getting as much attention as the nature of the charges. And you know, I keep seeing all of these stories about she wears too much tan, she wears too much brown. The reality is she's going to trial next January, whatever she chooses to wear. It is the middle of winter, so I guess black will be appropriate.

The issue will become for her whether or not from now till January she can build enough good will with the crusty, very hardened jurors of Manhattan, who will have to address her charges. She really has a lot of work to do from now till then to make sure that that Manhattan jury that ends up hearing her case will be receptive to whatever message her lawyers have to deliver.

ROBERTS: And Nelda, they have set the date for January 12 and they said because they need months and months to prepare for this, the defense attorneys, that is?

BLAIR: Yes, that's right. Well, that's pretty typical. When you're charged with something this serious and this many counts, it takes a lot of time to prepare that. So that's really not that unusual.

It's also not unusual for women, look at Janet Reno, Catherine Harris, to be judged by their appearance in the media.

But in this case, you know, Martha had started out with a lot of good will. She's trying to turn that up, keep that going, because I agree, she's got to have some kind of good faith to the public before she goes into this trial.

ROBERTS: So from a legal perspective, ladies, is it a good thing that she keeps this web site up and keeps her name out there, talking about her innocence through this? Or should she remain quiet and just wait till January 12 to let the courts to decide?

RODRIGUEZ-TASEFF: I think quiet is better.

BLAIR: I don't think so. Actually, she's going to have this -- obviously, it's a jury that's going to make the decision, it's not the media, it's not the public, it's not you and I. But the more people that hear good things about her and hear positive things about hear, hear other people say positive things about her, the more likely she is to get a sympathetic jury.

ROBERTS: Want to switch gears now and move on real quick to Jose Canseco, former baseball player, that was taken -- arrested yesterday down in Florida.

Apparently, he's using steroids and they found traces of steroids in his urine. This is part of his probation, to be tested for drugs. He was in a scuffle in Miami a couple of years back.

Does this mean automatic jail time for him, Nelda?

BLAIR: Well, he doesn't get it. It doesn't mean automatic jail time, but I'll tell you what, it's his second probation violation. It is likely that he'll get jail time.

He's not supposed to be on steroids during probation and he's sure not supposed to be caught being on steroids. He can't seem to keep himself out of trouble.

ROBERTS: Lida, I understand that this was his first time to be drug tested since he was out on probation. In situations like that, is it random or do they give you, I guess, a testing schedule and they say, "You're going to need to come in on this given Friday?"

RODRIGUEZ-TASEFF: Well, what are the odds? He knows pretty much when he's going to be tested and, you know, to be -- to have it found in his urine so quickly after he began being randomly tested is a problem. His lawyer says it's a misunderstanding.

Of course, this is the guy who, just a couple of days ago, had people in his house, paying $2,500 to spend a day with Jose. So you know, it's obvious that he's not really looking at the bigger picture...

ROBERTS: Right.

RODRIGUEZ-TASEFF: ... and he's going to have a problem here.

ROBERTS: Well, Lida Rodriguez-Taseff and Nelda Blair, ladies, we always appreciate your time. Great insight this morning and I'm sure we'll be talking again soon. Take care.

RODRIGUEZ-TASEFF: Take care.

BLAIR: Thank you. 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 21, 2003 - 08:11   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
THOMAS ROBERTS, CNN ANCHOR: Hi, everybody. Welcome back.
Time now to open our "Legal Briefs" for you. On our docket, the bizarre capture of Max Factor heir Andrew Luster, Martha Stewart's legal mess and the new -- brand new legal troubles of former baseball slugger Jose Canseco.

Joining us now, former prosecutor Nelda Blair joins us from Houston, and civil liberties attorney Lida Rodriguez-Taseff joins us from Miami.

Ladies, good morning to you. Thanks for being here.

LIDA RODRIGUEZ-TASEFF, CIVIL LIBERTIES ATTORNEY: Good morning.

ROBERTS: All right. Let's go ahead and talk about the Andrew Luster situation.

Nelda, what do you think about this? He's been captured, now he's back and his attorney is working on an appeal, correct?

NELDA BLAIR, FORMER PROSECUTOR: Well, his attorney is working on an appeal, but I don't see much hope for this guy. He was already found guilty. He left the country. The judge sentenced him in absentia and I think he's going to jail.

ROBERTS: Lida, same thing for you?

RODRIGUEZ-TASEFF: Well, it's entirely possible, but let's address the appeal for a second.

This is a really good argument. The appellate court in California had said that he had abandoned his appeal because he fled a couple of days before his -- he was convicted. So the issue then becomes whether or not he's entitled to have that appeal heard on its merits now that he's been returned.

The issue is now before the supreme court of California, who will determine whether or not he deserves a chance to have the appeal heard on the merits.

And whatever you think of the guy, the reality is we should hear the appeal on the merits. There have been 108 men released from Death Row because they were wrongly convicted. I think the justice system deserves to have this guy have his appeal heard and decided on the merits. BLAIR: Understand one thing. This guy was not convicted because he ran. He was convicted and then ran.

ROBERTS: Nelda, let's get to his attorney. The guy that's putting through the appeal process is Roger Diamond, the same attorney that also asked to be taken off the case after Luster disappeared, correct?

BLAIR: That's correct. And, actually, he can still pursue an appeal. Whether or not his appeal of grounds are good or not, you know, this guy is still -- at least capable of pursuing the appeal.

But he did ask to be taken off and I'm not sure that Luster is wise in keeping him on. I mean, it's his decision, actually.

ROBERTS: All right, ladies. We're going to move on now. We're going to go from Andrew Luster into the Martha Stewart mess.

You know, she was back in court this week. And I guess rain is a good thing, because she was back with an umbrella, a different one this time, to shield her face.

RODRIGUEZ-TASEFF: Yes.

Well, you know, one of the interesting things about this Martha case is that her wardrobe is getting as much attention as the nature of the charges. And you know, I keep seeing all of these stories about she wears too much tan, she wears too much brown. The reality is she's going to trial next January, whatever she chooses to wear. It is the middle of winter, so I guess black will be appropriate.

The issue will become for her whether or not from now till January she can build enough good will with the crusty, very hardened jurors of Manhattan, who will have to address her charges. She really has a lot of work to do from now till then to make sure that that Manhattan jury that ends up hearing her case will be receptive to whatever message her lawyers have to deliver.

ROBERTS: And Nelda, they have set the date for January 12 and they said because they need months and months to prepare for this, the defense attorneys, that is?

BLAIR: Yes, that's right. Well, that's pretty typical. When you're charged with something this serious and this many counts, it takes a lot of time to prepare that. So that's really not that unusual.

It's also not unusual for women, look at Janet Reno, Catherine Harris, to be judged by their appearance in the media.

But in this case, you know, Martha had started out with a lot of good will. She's trying to turn that up, keep that going, because I agree, she's got to have some kind of good faith to the public before she goes into this trial.

ROBERTS: So from a legal perspective, ladies, is it a good thing that she keeps this web site up and keeps her name out there, talking about her innocence through this? Or should she remain quiet and just wait till January 12 to let the courts to decide?

RODRIGUEZ-TASEFF: I think quiet is better.

BLAIR: I don't think so. Actually, she's going to have this -- obviously, it's a jury that's going to make the decision, it's not the media, it's not the public, it's not you and I. But the more people that hear good things about her and hear positive things about hear, hear other people say positive things about her, the more likely she is to get a sympathetic jury.

ROBERTS: Want to switch gears now and move on real quick to Jose Canseco, former baseball player, that was taken -- arrested yesterday down in Florida.

Apparently, he's using steroids and they found traces of steroids in his urine. This is part of his probation, to be tested for drugs. He was in a scuffle in Miami a couple of years back.

Does this mean automatic jail time for him, Nelda?

BLAIR: Well, he doesn't get it. It doesn't mean automatic jail time, but I'll tell you what, it's his second probation violation. It is likely that he'll get jail time.

He's not supposed to be on steroids during probation and he's sure not supposed to be caught being on steroids. He can't seem to keep himself out of trouble.

ROBERTS: Lida, I understand that this was his first time to be drug tested since he was out on probation. In situations like that, is it random or do they give you, I guess, a testing schedule and they say, "You're going to need to come in on this given Friday?"

RODRIGUEZ-TASEFF: Well, what are the odds? He knows pretty much when he's going to be tested and, you know, to be -- to have it found in his urine so quickly after he began being randomly tested is a problem. His lawyer says it's a misunderstanding.

Of course, this is the guy who, just a couple of days ago, had people in his house, paying $2,500 to spend a day with Jose. So you know, it's obvious that he's not really looking at the bigger picture...

ROBERTS: Right.

RODRIGUEZ-TASEFF: ... and he's going to have a problem here.

ROBERTS: Well, Lida Rodriguez-Taseff and Nelda Blair, ladies, we always appreciate your time. Great insight this morning and I'm sure we'll be talking again soon. Take care.

RODRIGUEZ-TASEFF: Take care.

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