Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Saturday Morning News
Interview with Nelda Blair and Lida Rodriguez-Tasseff
Aired November 08, 2003 - 08:15 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: From one legal mess to several others, a funny woman and her former publisher battle in court; and an Army mom is caught between home and a hard place.
Here with their perspective on the Rosie O'Donnell case and the AWOL Army mom, as well as that drug raid that we showed you a little bit earlier in the broadcast are Nelda Blair, a former Texas prosecutor.
Good morning to you, Nelda.
NELDA BLAIR, FORMER PROSECUTOR: Good morning.
COLLINS: And Lida Rodriguez-Taseff, a civil liberties attorney in Miami.
Thanks so much for being here to you, as well, Lida.
LIDA RODRIGUEZ-TASEFF, CIVIL RIGHTS ATTORNEY: Good morning.
COLLINS: We want to go ahead and start with the Rosie O'Donnell case. As we know, she has been in court for a while now. She has continually come to the microphones and that's one of the questions I want to ask you, why doesn't she stop talking if it seems to be getting her in more trouble? It's an issue. She is used to being in the press. But after hearing the comments that she made to her employees, including the cancer remarks, what kind of bearing do those types of comments have on her case at this point, Nelda?
BLAIR: They're devastating. They're devastating. You know, the hole that Rosie O'Donnell has dug for herself is getting deeper and deeper and deeper by the day. Whether it's the nasty comments and the meanness that she said to the editorial staff, whether it's the fact that she threatened them to walk out every time she didn't get her way or whether it's the fact that she's saying they've pulled off a coup, trying to take over -- her over in the contract, everything points to the same defense.
She says yes, but I apologized. Yes, but I didn't really mean that. Yes, but I didn't read my contract close enough. And that hole just keeps getting deeper.
If I were Rosie's lawyers, the real problem is what she says outside court. If I were her lawyer, I'd have a muzzle on this woman. She doesn't do anything but hurt herself. And every time she opens her mouth after testimony of the day, it makes her sound like she thinks she's smarter than the publisher, smarter than her lawyers and smarter than this judge, and that's exactly what got her into this lawsuit in the first place.
COLLINS: Lida, let me just ask you, doesn't this just come down to a breach of contract case? I mean these editorial rights were apparently taken away from her and it was in breach of contract. Is that right?
RODRIGUEZ-TASEFF: Yes, I've got to disagree with Nelda on this one. You know, this isn't a personality contract -- contest. This is a boring contract case and it's only made exciting by the fact that Rosie keeps opening her mouth. But the reality is Rosie's lawyers have dealt a deadly blow to the Gruner & Jahr people because they basically proved that the argument that the numbers that the expert was putting forward were meaningless. And the judge dismissed the expert in the middle of the cross-examination.
In addition, they proved that Daniel Brewster, the president and CEO, had sent e-mails asking essentially his people to cook the books so that the number, the $4.2 million in losses that would have allowed either party to walk away, would not be quantified.
So basically what you've got here is a mean old contract case and yes, there's personalities, but this is a judge case and not a jury case.
COLLINS: All right, let's move on, if we could, ladies, to the AWOL mother case, absent without leave, of course, from the military. I want to set this up for you a little bit, though. I'm not sure how much we have been able to make clear to the viewers. So this is about Simone Holcomb. She is a mother in the Army in Colorado. You see her there.
There's a custody dispute. A Colorado court has ruled that either Holcomb or her husband Vaughn must remain in the United States in order for the Holcombs to retain full custody of Vaughn's two children from a previous marriage. There are also five other children to talk about here.
But Colorado law states that, apparently, that if the husband and the mother are both out of the country, then the two children go back with their biological mother.
This is a very interesting topic to talk about. She has a commitment to the armed services, knew that commitment, but now is in a situation that she didn't expect.
Nelda?
BLAIR: Well, you know, it's a very, very passionate case. It really reeks on our emotions because it's a mother trying to take care of seven children and it's the Army. Both sides really play on what we think of about motherhood.
But if we think of this woman, imagine she were a grocery clerk or a banker or a traveling executive and had too many balls in the air and couldn't juggle them all, including her children. Then she would have to drop one. There isn't another job in the world that she could permanently take off and say I can't do my job, I've got this other responsibility, without losing it.
COLLINS: But why doesn't she then just apply for an honorable discharge?
BLAIR: Perhaps she should do that. That's the whole point. What she's trying to say is no, they have to let me serve the military service on my own terms. And there's no job in the world that's going to allow you to do that.
You having...
RODRIGUEZ-TASEFF: Oh, come on. Nelda, come on. She's not a grocery clerk. This woman is risking her life for you and me and our freedom. Whatever happened to family values? Whatever happened to a little compassion from the military? This is a two parent family where both members of the family are serving our country. And if the military cannot accommodate this woman in this situation, then the military is really making a very negative statement about people who risk their lives for our freedom.
COLLINS: Lida, the military isn't about making statements. The military is about service to this country.
How do they make a decision like this on one woman that will...
BLAIR: That's right.
COLLINS: ... of course, affect other soldiers?
BLAIR: That's the point I made. You have to look at it dispassionately. And obviously if you're going to talk about family values and this woman's particular seven children, there's no question that emotionally you're going to side with Simone Holcomb. But the problem is we do have, she does have a job to do. We do have requirements that people have to fulfill in order that they are able to make money, to -- whether it's guard the country or guard the bank down the street. She has to live up to her responsibilities on both sides.
COLLINS: Right.
BLAIR: And I don't think that we fought for rights in the military for women only to say oh, well, once we get to this point, though, by the way, we get to make an exception. I don't think that's right.
COLLINS: All right, we need to move on, ladies.
Quickly, I just want to discuss the video that we have been looking at for the last couple of days in South Carolina. The drug raid that you see here, where the principal of this high school in Goose Creek, South Carolina invited law officers to come in and conduct a drug raid. According to the police department, it is the first time that they've ever done this at a school. But, also, there have been, according to the police and the principal, an ongoing observance of drug activities in the hallways of Stratford High School and the principal wanted to do something about it. This is the method he chose.
Lida, what do you think?
RODRIGUEZ-TASEFF: Oh my goodness, well, the Supreme Court has said that students don't leave their rights at the courthouse door. This is absolutely ridiculous, guns drawn. They found no drugs. If they really had suspicion about students, they could have called them into the principal's office and searched their bags. This is outrageous and ridiculous.
COLLINS: All right, Nelda, quickly, we are running out of time, but I want to hear your side.
BLAIR: Well, I somewhat agree with Lida. I can't say I completely agree because, you know, kids have to be taught respect for authority. But when authorities go a little far, as in this case, I really don't know any teenager in my family that wouldn't have been petrified at those policemen drawing guns and putting them down on the floor. There had to be a better way.
COLLINS: All right, appreciate your comments to the both of you today, Lida Rodriguez-Taseff and Nelda Blair.
Thanks once again, guys.
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 November 8, 2003 - 08:15 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
HEIDI COLLINS, CNN ANCHOR: From one legal mess to several others, a funny woman and her former publisher battle in court; and an Army mom is caught between home and a hard place.
Here with their perspective on the Rosie O'Donnell case and the AWOL Army mom, as well as that drug raid that we showed you a little bit earlier in the broadcast are Nelda Blair, a former Texas prosecutor.
Good morning to you, Nelda.
NELDA BLAIR, FORMER PROSECUTOR: Good morning.
COLLINS: And Lida Rodriguez-Taseff, a civil liberties attorney in Miami.
Thanks so much for being here to you, as well, Lida.
LIDA RODRIGUEZ-TASEFF, CIVIL RIGHTS ATTORNEY: Good morning.
COLLINS: We want to go ahead and start with the Rosie O'Donnell case. As we know, she has been in court for a while now. She has continually come to the microphones and that's one of the questions I want to ask you, why doesn't she stop talking if it seems to be getting her in more trouble? It's an issue. She is used to being in the press. But after hearing the comments that she made to her employees, including the cancer remarks, what kind of bearing do those types of comments have on her case at this point, Nelda?
BLAIR: They're devastating. They're devastating. You know, the hole that Rosie O'Donnell has dug for herself is getting deeper and deeper and deeper by the day. Whether it's the nasty comments and the meanness that she said to the editorial staff, whether it's the fact that she threatened them to walk out every time she didn't get her way or whether it's the fact that she's saying they've pulled off a coup, trying to take over -- her over in the contract, everything points to the same defense.
She says yes, but I apologized. Yes, but I didn't really mean that. Yes, but I didn't read my contract close enough. And that hole just keeps getting deeper.
If I were Rosie's lawyers, the real problem is what she says outside court. If I were her lawyer, I'd have a muzzle on this woman. She doesn't do anything but hurt herself. And every time she opens her mouth after testimony of the day, it makes her sound like she thinks she's smarter than the publisher, smarter than her lawyers and smarter than this judge, and that's exactly what got her into this lawsuit in the first place.
COLLINS: Lida, let me just ask you, doesn't this just come down to a breach of contract case? I mean these editorial rights were apparently taken away from her and it was in breach of contract. Is that right?
RODRIGUEZ-TASEFF: Yes, I've got to disagree with Nelda on this one. You know, this isn't a personality contract -- contest. This is a boring contract case and it's only made exciting by the fact that Rosie keeps opening her mouth. But the reality is Rosie's lawyers have dealt a deadly blow to the Gruner & Jahr people because they basically proved that the argument that the numbers that the expert was putting forward were meaningless. And the judge dismissed the expert in the middle of the cross-examination.
In addition, they proved that Daniel Brewster, the president and CEO, had sent e-mails asking essentially his people to cook the books so that the number, the $4.2 million in losses that would have allowed either party to walk away, would not be quantified.
So basically what you've got here is a mean old contract case and yes, there's personalities, but this is a judge case and not a jury case.
COLLINS: All right, let's move on, if we could, ladies, to the AWOL mother case, absent without leave, of course, from the military. I want to set this up for you a little bit, though. I'm not sure how much we have been able to make clear to the viewers. So this is about Simone Holcomb. She is a mother in the Army in Colorado. You see her there.
There's a custody dispute. A Colorado court has ruled that either Holcomb or her husband Vaughn must remain in the United States in order for the Holcombs to retain full custody of Vaughn's two children from a previous marriage. There are also five other children to talk about here.
But Colorado law states that, apparently, that if the husband and the mother are both out of the country, then the two children go back with their biological mother.
This is a very interesting topic to talk about. She has a commitment to the armed services, knew that commitment, but now is in a situation that she didn't expect.
Nelda?
BLAIR: Well, you know, it's a very, very passionate case. It really reeks on our emotions because it's a mother trying to take care of seven children and it's the Army. Both sides really play on what we think of about motherhood.
But if we think of this woman, imagine she were a grocery clerk or a banker or a traveling executive and had too many balls in the air and couldn't juggle them all, including her children. Then she would have to drop one. There isn't another job in the world that she could permanently take off and say I can't do my job, I've got this other responsibility, without losing it.
COLLINS: But why doesn't she then just apply for an honorable discharge?
BLAIR: Perhaps she should do that. That's the whole point. What she's trying to say is no, they have to let me serve the military service on my own terms. And there's no job in the world that's going to allow you to do that.
You having...
RODRIGUEZ-TASEFF: Oh, come on. Nelda, come on. She's not a grocery clerk. This woman is risking her life for you and me and our freedom. Whatever happened to family values? Whatever happened to a little compassion from the military? This is a two parent family where both members of the family are serving our country. And if the military cannot accommodate this woman in this situation, then the military is really making a very negative statement about people who risk their lives for our freedom.
COLLINS: Lida, the military isn't about making statements. The military is about service to this country.
How do they make a decision like this on one woman that will...
BLAIR: That's right.
COLLINS: ... of course, affect other soldiers?
BLAIR: That's the point I made. You have to look at it dispassionately. And obviously if you're going to talk about family values and this woman's particular seven children, there's no question that emotionally you're going to side with Simone Holcomb. But the problem is we do have, she does have a job to do. We do have requirements that people have to fulfill in order that they are able to make money, to -- whether it's guard the country or guard the bank down the street. She has to live up to her responsibilities on both sides.
COLLINS: Right.
BLAIR: And I don't think that we fought for rights in the military for women only to say oh, well, once we get to this point, though, by the way, we get to make an exception. I don't think that's right.
COLLINS: All right, we need to move on, ladies.
Quickly, I just want to discuss the video that we have been looking at for the last couple of days in South Carolina. The drug raid that you see here, where the principal of this high school in Goose Creek, South Carolina invited law officers to come in and conduct a drug raid. According to the police department, it is the first time that they've ever done this at a school. But, also, there have been, according to the police and the principal, an ongoing observance of drug activities in the hallways of Stratford High School and the principal wanted to do something about it. This is the method he chose.
Lida, what do you think?
RODRIGUEZ-TASEFF: Oh my goodness, well, the Supreme Court has said that students don't leave their rights at the courthouse door. This is absolutely ridiculous, guns drawn. They found no drugs. If they really had suspicion about students, they could have called them into the principal's office and searched their bags. This is outrageous and ridiculous.
COLLINS: All right, Nelda, quickly, we are running out of time, but I want to hear your side.
BLAIR: Well, I somewhat agree with Lida. I can't say I completely agree because, you know, kids have to be taught respect for authority. But when authorities go a little far, as in this case, I really don't know any teenager in my family that wouldn't have been petrified at those policemen drawing guns and putting them down on the floor. There had to be a better way.
COLLINS: All right, appreciate your comments to the both of you today, Lida Rodriguez-Taseff and Nelda Blair.
Thanks once again, guys.
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
