Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Saturday Morning News

Interview with Lida Rodriguez-Taseff, Nelda Blair

Aired October 18, 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.


HEIDI COLLINS, CNN ANCHOR: This week's legal briefs cover two issues that could affect all of us. There is the security breach at Southwest Airlines and the college student who's reportedly confessed to it. And the battle over the short, difficult life of Terri Schiavo, the comatose woman who was taken off nourishment this week.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MICHAEL SCHIAVO, TERRI'S HUSBAND: I think Terri's wishes should be carried out. This is what she wanted. It's, it's -- this is, this is Terri's wish. It's not anybody else's wish. It's her wish.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COLLINS: Joining us from Philadelphia is civil liberties attorney Lida Rodriguez-Taseff. Good morning to you, Lida.

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

COLLINS: And from Houston, former prosecutor Nelda Blair. Hi, Nelda.

Thanks to the both of you for with us today.

NELDA BLAIR, FORMER PROSECUTOR: Thank you.

COLLINS: I want to quickly give a little synopsis here just in case people aren't familiar with Southwest Airlines. A 20-year-old North Carolina college student has admitted to placing box cutters and some other suspicious materials in the bathrooms of two different Southwest Airlines planes.

What -- how is this going to play out? I mean, what's going to happen to him? Why is he not under arrest? Nelda?

BLAIR: Well, actually, he probably will be under arrest. You know, just now determined who actually did this. But this has got to be dealt with in a very harsh manner. As we said a few weeks ago in another situation, we are in the midst of a war on terror in our country. This guy took aboard the airplane the same type of box cutters that were used in the September 11 attacks. That absolutely cannot be tolerated. He's got to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

COLLINS: But is that illegal, then? BLAIR: Well...

RODRIGUEZ-TASEFF: Can I say something? Because I love the fact that we are sitting here once again shooting the messenger. Nobody's talking about these security breaches and going, Wait a second, how did this happen? Nelda's absolutely right. These are box cutters of the same type that were used in the September 11 attacks. Why aren't we talking about the fact that these got in there, that this young man informed everybody that he was going to test the system by doing this?

(CROSSTALK)

RODRIGUEZ-TASEFF: It's another case of shooting the messenger.

COLLINS: ... the challenges and the failures of the TSA an awful lot, and I think that's certainly at the forefront of this issue. The fact of the matter is, if he broke the law, this was clearly not the way to go about it.

BLAIR: Absolutely not. And the fact that he informed them has nothing to do with whether or not he's guilty of breaking the law. So you inform the authorities you're going to kill someone. You're still guilty of breaking the law.

And yes, Lida, we are looking at whether or not our security measures are upholding as they should. We are constantly doing that. But you know, if we're going to keep our freedoms to travel and keep the type of lifestyle that we have in the United States, yes, there are going to be security breaches. But it is not a 20-year-old college student or anyone else's right to test the system in any manner...

(CROSSTALK)

BLAIR: ... or any other law.

COLLINS: Let me ask you this, Lida, because of some of the things that we're pointing out here. We do need to point out that the FBI also says and has really taken time to point out that they do not think that this man is a threat.

RODRIGUEZ-TASEFF: Absolutely. And that's the whole point. We get back to the legal case to be had here. If he is arrested and charged, then the issue is, in fact, shooting the messenger. There was obviously no intent here to harm anyone. There is no what we call mens rea, there was no intent to use these things to do any harm to anyone.

Therefore, the case is flimsy at best. He was testing...

(CROSSTALK)

RODRIGUEZ-TASEFF: ... the system. And you know what? The reality is, in these times when we're fighting this supposed war on terror, it is incumbent upon the citizenry to point out to the government when they're failing at doing their job. And that's what this is really about. If there's a prosecution here, it's a prosecution because of the statement he made, rather than a prosecution because he intended to harm people.

And that's not war on terror. That's a war on somebody who speaks up.

BLAIR: That's absolutely incorrect. I suppose that you would allow someone in the grocery line behind you to carry a loaded shotgun as long as they're not intending on using it.

RODRIGUEZ-TASEFF: Oh, oh, come on, Nelda, you've got...

BLAIR: It's the same thing, Lida.

COLLINS: (UNINTELLIGIBLE)...

RODRIGUEZ-TASEFF: ... you've got to be kidding. That is not the same thing.

COLLINS: OK, guys, let's move on to the next topic. I think we can all agree, or at least I would think we would agree that this is probably not the best way to point out some of the failings of the TSA...

BLAIR: Absolutely.

COLLINS: ... and going through those checkpoints.

Let's move on to the next topic, if we could. We've been hearing an awful lot lately about Terri Schiavo, doctors removing the feeding tube that has been keeping her alive, a brain-damaged woman. You see her pictures here.

Six-year legal battle that's been going on between her husband and her parents. Now, this feeding tube has been removed. It was removed on Wednesday.

The question to me is, if the parents are willing, as they have said, to take care of Terri Schiavo, even though the husband has been doing this for years, he has now decided that he can no longer do this, why not allow this woman to live? Lida?

RODRIGUEZ-TASEFF: Well, the legal argument is this. The husband has the right to make the medical decisions for his wife. The husband says that she made it very clear that she did not want to live under these conditions, and...

COLLINS: How did she make that clear?

RODRIGUEZ-TASEFF: Well, she was 26 years old when this happened. He claims that prior to this very freak sort of heart attack, or heart stopping, which was unexpected, that she had made statements to him about the kind of life she wanted to lead and about the fact that she didn't want to live under these conditions. And there has not been anything over the years that has controverted this. This is s a very... COLLINS: There's also been no documentation of that. Isn't that at the heart of this matter?

RODRIGUEZ-TASEFF: Absolutely. And this is exactly the point that people should focus on. You don't have to be 80 or 70 or 60 to go through one of these life-endangering crises. And therefore, everybody needs to focus on getting a Living Will.

The focus should not be on changing the law to deny family members the right to make decisions for their loved ones. The focus should be on educating people so that they do do these Living Wills, so that they can clearly state in writing what their wishes are.

And that is exactly the problem here. The family says that that was not her wish. The husband has made it very clear that she told him that it was her wish. Who are we to know? If there's something in writing, it's the best evidence that you in fact made a decision about how (UNINTELLIGIBLE)...

BLAIR: That's what makes this particular case so heart- wrenching, because there isn't anything in writing. And we're left with parents and the husband to try to determine what this woman would have wanted. And there is no question that these parents -- I mean, they're parents. If they have any indication in their hearts that possibly she might be able to be brought back someday, then they're going to want to keep her alive.

But it is -- but legally, and Lida is right about this, it is her husband's right to make that decision when there is nothing in writing. That's Florida's law. And although this has been through several courts, the bottom line is, her parents don't have the legal right to have that decision.

He's got to decide what's not only in her best interests but what may have been her best wishes. And I'm sure it's heart-wrenching for him as well. He's certainly not a monster. She's been on life support for over 10 years that he's had to struggle with this (UNINTELLIGIBLE).

COLLINS: Well, clearly, as you both point out, a heart-wrenching story that we've been following for quite some time. Our condolences go out to everyone involved, certainly, in that case.

Ladies, that is all the time that we have this morning. Certainly appreciate your time. Lida Rodriguez-Taseff and Nelda Blair this morning, thank you.

BLAIR: Thank you.

RODRIGUEZ-TASEFF: 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 October 18, 2003 - 08:11   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
HEIDI COLLINS, CNN ANCHOR: This week's legal briefs cover two issues that could affect all of us. There is the security breach at Southwest Airlines and the college student who's reportedly confessed to it. And the battle over the short, difficult life of Terri Schiavo, the comatose woman who was taken off nourishment this week.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MICHAEL SCHIAVO, TERRI'S HUSBAND: I think Terri's wishes should be carried out. This is what she wanted. It's, it's -- this is, this is Terri's wish. It's not anybody else's wish. It's her wish.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COLLINS: Joining us from Philadelphia is civil liberties attorney Lida Rodriguez-Taseff. Good morning to you, Lida.

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

COLLINS: And from Houston, former prosecutor Nelda Blair. Hi, Nelda.

Thanks to the both of you for with us today.

NELDA BLAIR, FORMER PROSECUTOR: Thank you.

COLLINS: I want to quickly give a little synopsis here just in case people aren't familiar with Southwest Airlines. A 20-year-old North Carolina college student has admitted to placing box cutters and some other suspicious materials in the bathrooms of two different Southwest Airlines planes.

What -- how is this going to play out? I mean, what's going to happen to him? Why is he not under arrest? Nelda?

BLAIR: Well, actually, he probably will be under arrest. You know, just now determined who actually did this. But this has got to be dealt with in a very harsh manner. As we said a few weeks ago in another situation, we are in the midst of a war on terror in our country. This guy took aboard the airplane the same type of box cutters that were used in the September 11 attacks. That absolutely cannot be tolerated. He's got to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

COLLINS: But is that illegal, then? BLAIR: Well...

RODRIGUEZ-TASEFF: Can I say something? Because I love the fact that we are sitting here once again shooting the messenger. Nobody's talking about these security breaches and going, Wait a second, how did this happen? Nelda's absolutely right. These are box cutters of the same type that were used in the September 11 attacks. Why aren't we talking about the fact that these got in there, that this young man informed everybody that he was going to test the system by doing this?

(CROSSTALK)

RODRIGUEZ-TASEFF: It's another case of shooting the messenger.

COLLINS: ... the challenges and the failures of the TSA an awful lot, and I think that's certainly at the forefront of this issue. The fact of the matter is, if he broke the law, this was clearly not the way to go about it.

BLAIR: Absolutely not. And the fact that he informed them has nothing to do with whether or not he's guilty of breaking the law. So you inform the authorities you're going to kill someone. You're still guilty of breaking the law.

And yes, Lida, we are looking at whether or not our security measures are upholding as they should. We are constantly doing that. But you know, if we're going to keep our freedoms to travel and keep the type of lifestyle that we have in the United States, yes, there are going to be security breaches. But it is not a 20-year-old college student or anyone else's right to test the system in any manner...

(CROSSTALK)

BLAIR: ... or any other law.

COLLINS: Let me ask you this, Lida, because of some of the things that we're pointing out here. We do need to point out that the FBI also says and has really taken time to point out that they do not think that this man is a threat.

RODRIGUEZ-TASEFF: Absolutely. And that's the whole point. We get back to the legal case to be had here. If he is arrested and charged, then the issue is, in fact, shooting the messenger. There was obviously no intent here to harm anyone. There is no what we call mens rea, there was no intent to use these things to do any harm to anyone.

Therefore, the case is flimsy at best. He was testing...

(CROSSTALK)

RODRIGUEZ-TASEFF: ... the system. And you know what? The reality is, in these times when we're fighting this supposed war on terror, it is incumbent upon the citizenry to point out to the government when they're failing at doing their job. And that's what this is really about. If there's a prosecution here, it's a prosecution because of the statement he made, rather than a prosecution because he intended to harm people.

And that's not war on terror. That's a war on somebody who speaks up.

BLAIR: That's absolutely incorrect. I suppose that you would allow someone in the grocery line behind you to carry a loaded shotgun as long as they're not intending on using it.

RODRIGUEZ-TASEFF: Oh, oh, come on, Nelda, you've got...

BLAIR: It's the same thing, Lida.

COLLINS: (UNINTELLIGIBLE)...

RODRIGUEZ-TASEFF: ... you've got to be kidding. That is not the same thing.

COLLINS: OK, guys, let's move on to the next topic. I think we can all agree, or at least I would think we would agree that this is probably not the best way to point out some of the failings of the TSA...

BLAIR: Absolutely.

COLLINS: ... and going through those checkpoints.

Let's move on to the next topic, if we could. We've been hearing an awful lot lately about Terri Schiavo, doctors removing the feeding tube that has been keeping her alive, a brain-damaged woman. You see her pictures here.

Six-year legal battle that's been going on between her husband and her parents. Now, this feeding tube has been removed. It was removed on Wednesday.

The question to me is, if the parents are willing, as they have said, to take care of Terri Schiavo, even though the husband has been doing this for years, he has now decided that he can no longer do this, why not allow this woman to live? Lida?

RODRIGUEZ-TASEFF: Well, the legal argument is this. The husband has the right to make the medical decisions for his wife. The husband says that she made it very clear that she did not want to live under these conditions, and...

COLLINS: How did she make that clear?

RODRIGUEZ-TASEFF: Well, she was 26 years old when this happened. He claims that prior to this very freak sort of heart attack, or heart stopping, which was unexpected, that she had made statements to him about the kind of life she wanted to lead and about the fact that she didn't want to live under these conditions. And there has not been anything over the years that has controverted this. This is s a very... COLLINS: There's also been no documentation of that. Isn't that at the heart of this matter?

RODRIGUEZ-TASEFF: Absolutely. And this is exactly the point that people should focus on. You don't have to be 80 or 70 or 60 to go through one of these life-endangering crises. And therefore, everybody needs to focus on getting a Living Will.

The focus should not be on changing the law to deny family members the right to make decisions for their loved ones. The focus should be on educating people so that they do do these Living Wills, so that they can clearly state in writing what their wishes are.

And that is exactly the problem here. The family says that that was not her wish. The husband has made it very clear that she told him that it was her wish. Who are we to know? If there's something in writing, it's the best evidence that you in fact made a decision about how (UNINTELLIGIBLE)...

BLAIR: That's what makes this particular case so heart- wrenching, because there isn't anything in writing. And we're left with parents and the husband to try to determine what this woman would have wanted. And there is no question that these parents -- I mean, they're parents. If they have any indication in their hearts that possibly she might be able to be brought back someday, then they're going to want to keep her alive.

But it is -- but legally, and Lida is right about this, it is her husband's right to make that decision when there is nothing in writing. That's Florida's law. And although this has been through several courts, the bottom line is, her parents don't have the legal right to have that decision.

He's got to decide what's not only in her best interests but what may have been her best wishes. And I'm sure it's heart-wrenching for him as well. He's certainly not a monster. She's been on life support for over 10 years that he's had to struggle with this (UNINTELLIGIBLE).

COLLINS: Well, clearly, as you both point out, a heart-wrenching story that we've been following for quite some time. Our condolences go out to everyone involved, certainly, in that case.

Ladies, that is all the time that we have this morning. Certainly appreciate your time. Lida Rodriguez-Taseff and Nelda Blair this morning, thank you.

BLAIR: Thank you.

RODRIGUEZ-TASEFF: 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