Skip to main content

tv   Anderson Cooper 360  CNN  June 21, 2012 1:00am-2:00am EDT

1:00 am
police and the bad guys in which either the bad guy was killed and his gun was left at the scene or used during the commission of a crime in which the gun was left behind. >> that makes no sense to me. >> between reasonable men within the law enforcement community, no, there is no reasonable explanation to let these guns walk. >> two of those guns made their way back north to the scene where border agent brian terry was shot dead a year and a half ago. he just finished buying christmas presents for his family. two months later, atf agent sopada was killed in mexico by a batch of ten firearm as sold in a part of fast and furious. but the big headlines today were in washington, d.c. after initially cooperating with the house oversight committee, which is investigating fast and furious. attorney general eric holder refused to turn over more internal justice department
1:01 am
documents. in a letter today, the deputy attorney general james cole notified the committee chairman darrell issa that president obama was withholding them on the basis of executive privilege. basis of executive privilege. the move came after threats to site holder for contempt. and negotiations yesterday between the attorney general and committee members. today's decision to invoke executive privilege led republicans on the committee to say their search for accountability is being stymied. >> if congress has time to look into major league baseball, the bcs and invite stephen colbert to come to a committee hearing, surely to goodness, we have time to get answers only fundamentally flawed lethal investigation like fast and furious. >> late today the committee voted along party lines a citation against holder and democrats accused chairman issa and his republican colleagues of conducting a witch hunt. republicans say the administration is using executive privilege to impede accountability. keeping both sides honest, it's worth points out facts. this is the first time president obama has invoked executive
1:02 am
privilege. back when democrats controlled the house and claiming executive privilege for the sixth time. the sound bites were 180 degrees opposite. back then, as democratic house members debated contempt citation against two george w. advisers, republican members including darrell issa simply got up and walked out. >> we will not stand here and watch this floor be abused for pure political grandstanding at the expense of our national security. we will not stand for this and we will not stay for this. and i would ask my house republican colleagues and those who believe that we should be here protecting the american people not vote on this bill. let's just get up and leave. >> that's the complete opposite of their position today. also now keeping the white house honest, president obama's views on executive privilege do seem to have changed an awful lot,
1:03 am
now that he's chief executive. here's senator obama back in 2007 during the bush showdown. >> there's been a tendency on the part of this administration to try to hide behind executive privilege every time there's something a little shaky that's taking place. and i think the administration would be best served by coming clean on this. i think the american people deserve to know what's going on there. >> here to talk about where all this might lead congressman trey gowdy, whom you heard from just a moment ago. you heard from president obama is, quote, he's either part of it or he's not. if he's not part of it, he has no business experting executive privilege. what do you mean by that statement? are you implying the president is part of covering something
1:04 am
up? >> no, quite the opposite. we had no one testify before either judiciary or oversight who said the president knew about fast and furious at all. he said he didn't know about it and i take him at his word. my point was to point out the absurdity of asserting executive privilege if you had no knowledge of it. he doesn't have to worry about his counsel being subpoenaed before members of congress. he had no conversations. >> that's not actually true, though. vice president cheney used executive privilege for discussions about energy policy. it was even used with hillary clinton in her role in the health care debate under the clinton administration. so it doesn't necessarily mean the president was sitting in meetings. >> well, what does it mean then? it's executive privilege. it has to mean something. it can't cover your entire administration or no one would have to turn over documents. >> one of your democratic colleagues said that attorney
1:05 am
general eric holder protecting documents that he is prohibited by law producing and in compliance by statues passed by congress and signed by the president of the united states. clearly you vetoed to hold him in contempt of congress. you disagree with that? >> no, he's partially correct. the initial request was for wiretap application, which rule 6c of the federal rules of procedure does not allow anyone to give to anyone who's not part of the investigation of the trial. so to the extent that the original request for documents was overly broad and included protected material, then mr. cummings is correct. where he's not correct is after chairman issa narrowed the scope of documents to not include anything that was legally prohibited from being discovered, he's still not complied. what could possibly be protected about the drafting of a false letter to a committee of congress? >> but back in the bush administration when cheney was talking about executive
1:06 am
privilege because of discussions on energy policy and discussions from people outside the white house even, republicans rallied around him and said it's legitimate. it was very much a partisan issue, just as this is now. if it was okay, though, under the bush administration, why isn't it okay now? what's the difference? >> anderson, i've never subscribed to that theory in life, which is why i may not be long for this town. i was a prosecutor back when that's going on. the notion that it's okay for me to do it because you did it has never been appealing to me. if it was wrong to do it now, it was wrong to do it then and i would hope that a court would intervene and say you're wrong to assert executive privilege. the fact that a republican does something doesn't mean i automatically agree with it. in fact, i would be happy to have everyone who's had their fingerprints on wide receiver, fast and furious, any gun walking investigation comment. i don't think you would be able to tell much of a difference in the tone of my questions irrespective of their political
1:07 am
persuasion. >> what happens next? i mean, this is going to go to a vote in the full house. how do you see this being brought to a resolution? do you think it's going to wind up in the courts? >> i hope not. i hope he gives us the documents. it's not a political exercise to me. i want to know how fast and furious happened. i want to know how a false letter was delivered to a committee of congress. i hope we don't get to that point because i hope the attorney general gives us the documents. if he doesn't, then yeah, we'll vote on it on the floor of the house. there's three different forms of contempt. there's the plenary powers of congress, there's criminal contempt, civil contempt. if it's criminal, it will be referred to the u.s. attorney for the district of columbia. if it's civil, it will go to a federal judge here in the district of columbia. >> appreciate your time today. thank you very much, sir. >> thank you. cnn senior analyst jeffrey toobin joins me now to take us through the legal ins and outs of the executive privilege. you just heard the congressman say i take him at his word.
1:08 am
he said he would vote the same way under the bush administration as he does now. but does it only apply to national security issues or issues that the president was having a conversation about? >> no. the courts said it's about the internal deliberations of the executive branch. as you pointed out, there are supreme court cases involving the vice president. there are many cases involving the president's advisers. you know, sometimes executive privilege is upheld, sometimes it's not. but the president himself doesn't have to be involved and national security doesn't have to be involved. >> certainly some people are going to look at this and say look, the president obviously has something to hide by invoking this executive privilege. you say not necessary? >> not necessary. every president in the modern era since richard nixon, including richard nixon have cited executive privilege. sometimes -- >> explain the idea behind it, the rationale behind it. >> the idea behind it is pretty simple. it's that the executive branch, the white house and the president and his or her
1:09 am
advisors need space to be able to consider all sorts of policy options without the worry that they will be subpoenaed to disclose exactly everything that they considered. now, the countervailing argument or issue is the constitution says the legislative branch, the congress, has a right to investigate, to engage in oversight for the executive branch. so those two ideas are in tension. and there are legitimate good faith fights over what's covered by executive privilege. and those have come up in every recent administration. >> there are those who would say look, if there's nothing to hide, why invoke this, though? it's basically on principle? >> it is on principle. at least that's what the obama administration is asserting. and that's what the bush administration asserted the last time we had this kind of conflict. >> the flip side of this is if you want to hide something, this
1:10 am
is a good way to hide sufficient stuff? >> it is. and certainly the most famous case of all involving executive privilege was united states versus nixon where the supreme court 9-0 in -- held that nixon had to disclose the white house tapes. and those turned out to be extremely incriminating and led directly to his resignation. so ever since nixon, the innovation of executive privilege has had kind of a nasty taint. and it's guilt by association with the most corrupt modern president. >> so basically you think this kind of goes away in the courts? it's lost in the election hoopla? >> i absolutely do. i think this will not have a neat resolution. it's embarrassing for eric holder. i don't think he's going to be found in contempt, that he's going to be led away in handcuffs. this is just going to be another political dispute. and if people remember it at all, they'll remember 23 republicans were for it, 17 democrats were against it. >> let us know what you think,
1:11 am
we're talking about it right now on twitter @andersoncooper. >> the jury in the sandusky sex abuse trial is expected to get the case tomorrow. the defense rested their case earlier today. sandusky did not take the stand after all. clearly his lawyers seem to have made the right call, at least according to a lot of experts who are following this. jason carroll was in the courtroom throughout the trial and he will recap the key testimony and our legal panel weigh in, next. every day, all around the world,
1:12 am
energy is being produced to power our lives. while energy developement comes with some risk, north america's natural gas producers are committed to safely and responsibly providing decades of cleaner burning energy for our country, drilling thousands of feet below fresh water sources within self contained well systems and using state of the art monitoring technologies, rigorous practices help ensure our operations are safe and clean for our communities and the environment we are america's natural gas. and sounds vying for your attention. so we invented a warning you can feel. introducing the all-new cadillac xts. available with a patented safety alert seat. when there's danger you might not see, you're warned by a pulse in the seat. it's technology you won't find
1:13 am
in a mercedes e-class. the all-new cadillac xts has arrived, and it's bringing the future forward. you walk into a conventional mattress store, it's really not about you. they say, "well, if you wanted a firm bed you can lie on one of those. if you want a soft bed you can lie on one of those." what we do is, we provide the exact individualization that your body needs. never tried this before. this is your body there. you can see a little more pressure in the shoulders and in the hips. now you can feel what happens as we raise your sleep number setting and allow the bed to contour to your individual shape. oh wow, that feels really good. it's hugging my body. take it up one notch. oh gosh, yes. when you're playing around with that remote, you get that moment where you go, "oh yeah" oh, yeah! and it's perfect. they had no idea that when they came to a sleep number store, we were going to diagnose their problems and help them sleep better. once you experience it, there's no going back. wow. wow. and right now, during our summer sleep sale, save $500 on our exceptional p6 bed set.
1:14 am
find your sleep number. only at the sleep number store, where queen mattresses start at just $699. agents, say hello to the biggest hailstone in u.s. history. oh, that will leave a dent. which is exactly why we educate people... about comprehensive coverage. yep. the right choice now can pay off later. looks like a bowling ball. yeah. oh! agents, say hello to the second-biggest hailstone in u.s. history. [ announcer ] we are insurance. ♪ we are farmers bum-pa-dum, bum-bum-bum-bum ♪ >> jerry sandusky's lawyers
1:15 am
rested their case without calling jerry sandusky to the stand. they've told reporters to stay tuned. in the end they shut that door, which many legal experts considered it risky, obviously. he's charged with 51 counts in the child sex abuse child. eight accusers described the alleged assaults they endured in sandusky's homes during trips, on the penn state campus and showers. the case has torn a hole through the community. his revered boss was ousted as a result of the scandal, died of cancer in january. his storied career scarred by accusations that he didn't do as much as he could to try to stop the alleged abuse. now, if sandusky, who's 68 years old is convicted, he could spend the rest of his life in prison. the trial has gone very quickly. here's the recap of what we learned. >> reporter: the prosecution launched right in on day one,
1:16 am
calling the first of eight sandusky accusers to the stand. alleged victim number one says he was assaulted in the basement of sandusky's home. the 18-year-old brought to tears. quote, after rubbing and cracking my back and the blowing of the stomach, he put his mouth on my privates. another alleged victim, number five, said sandusky assaulted him in a penn state shower. i kept lurching forward but i didn't have anywhere to go. i felt his arm move forward and he touched my genitalia. >> here he was, relationship with boy after boy after boy which by any conventional evaluation of any normal adult would say, this is just so terribly odd and wrong. >> reporter: on the second day in court, the prosecution turned to another of its key witnesses, former grad assistant mike mcqueary who said in 2001, he saw sandusky sexually assaulting a young boy in a penn state shower. "coach sandusky's arms wrapped around the boy's midsection, just as close as i think you could be." the prosecution went on, showing
1:17 am
letters sandusky wrote to some of the boys. one reading, love never ends opinion it bears all things. the defense countered why all witnesses -- 18 witnesses often sandusky's behalf, many former members of second mile. a charity founded by sandusky. chad rexrose told jurors, i never had a father in my life and he was a father figure. the most anticipated character witness said she never saw inappropriate contact with her husband and young boys. she told the court, three of the accusers had actually visited the sandusky home as adults. one of the oddest moments came from defense attorney joe amendola, comparing the trial to a soap opera. >> it's like "all my children." >> that went viral. people called him insensitive. amendola said he has revealed
1:18 am
sensitivity, by not revealing the accusers' identities. a psychologist testified that he has histrionic personality disorder, which causes people to act inappropriately when not the center of attention. then the defense laid out what one source says is their strongest move. pre presenting jurors with a recording which they say shows investigators leading an accuser. the final witness testifying, i felt like they kept asking me to say something that wasn't true. >> jason carroll joins me now. do we know why sandusky didn't testify today? >> well, it's a good question, anderson. i can tell you this, a source close to the case that i spoke to late yesterday afternoon and late last night tells me the, the idea of testifying or not testifying was still very much in play, still under discussion up until late last night. i'm also told that the final decision came down to two people -- joe amendola and jerry sandusky. you have to wonder if this whole
1:19 am
idea of risk came into the equation. remember, sandusky gave two interviews to the media in the past. those interviews did not go well. and you have to wonder if attorneys were telling him or wondering what kind of risk would present itself if he were to take the stand under cross-examination. >> given that interview with costas, who knows what he would have said on the stand. it would have been incredible to listen to. what's next in terms of closing arguments tomorrow? >> i think what we can expect is look for each side to revisit some of the point that they have been bringing up during the trial. for the prosecution, that means presenting jerry sandusky as a serial predator. asking jurors to remind them to listen to the testimony the accusers gave. to look at the pictures they put up on the stand there of these accusers when they were youngsters. and from the defense's point of view, to point out these accusers are in it for the money and that many of these accusers, they say were coaxed into making these allegations by the investigators.
1:20 am
>> jason, thank you very much. doing a great job of covering this from the beginning. >> let's talk now to criminal defense attorney mark geragos and marcia clark, author of "guilt by degrees." mark, 29 witnesses. the defense rested today. were they able to cast reasonable doubt, do you think? >> i think with the right jurors, and i think they got the right jurors, that this could very well end up in a hung jury. i think the -- >> really? >> i think the character witnesses got on and off the stand. i think they got on and off unscathed in terms of the character evidence. i think dottie was exactly what they needed. i think dottie is the reason he didn't take the stand. she was able to fill in some of the blanks they thought maybe he would have to put up there. but that was a high-risk proposition. and then i think ending with that idea that the investigators wanted to coach the witnesses, i think it was helpful to them. i think you'll end up seeing a hung jury. >> marcia, do you think reasonable doubt is possible?
1:21 am
>> of course it's always possible, anderson. i think the defense hit every spot they had to hit. mark's right, they ended strong by putting on the witness who said i think the investigators were trying to tell me what to say, trying to get me to make a false accusation. that's a strong point for the defense when you have investigators admitting that they talked to the accusers about one another. they talked to one victim and said you're not the only one. but they denied having imparted any details of what one victim said to another. and that ultimately is extremely important. at the end of the day, anderson, the jury was the one who saw all of these witnesses testify, heard the heart wrenching testimony of these victims. i think it's very difficult to believe after all that we've seen and heard that they're going to find reasonable doubt given what we have seen in the entirety of the trial. i think the defense did what they could. i do not think it would be enough. >> mark, how important are closing arguments, both for defense and prosecution? can that really sway things one way or the other?
1:22 am
>> you know what i often say and i bet marsha will agree. i think the case is won or lost in jury selection. i think what happens in closing argument is if you have a juror who's with you, what you're doing is you are arming that juror with an argument so when they go back in that deliberation room, they can articulate to the other jurors their position. you're never going to have on any case, your best jury. you're never going to have 12 jurors who are with you. you're going to have jurors who drive the discussion and what you want to do as an advocate is you want to arm the jurors with the discussion with the arguments that will convince the others that have not staked a position. >> that's right on the money, anderson. i think it's true in all cases but especially one like this. and mark is also 100% right, you want to arm the jurors that may be in your camp. there may be only two or three,
1:23 am
but if they're strong and vocal and they're leaders in the pack, then what you've armed them with is enough to at the very least hang the jury and rise up in an acquittal. do i think it will happen in this case? i do not think it will happen in this case. but that's exactly the mentality, the strategy that you would follow. >> are you surprised at all, mark, how fast that trial went? i don't know why i expected it to go on longer. is that really based on just what kind of evidence they had both the defense and the prosecution? or is, say, more about the judge? >> well, at the risk of -- i want to hide my face when i say this. it wasn't in california. this is a judge who decided he was going to keep a tight leash on this thing. and he -- >> mark, are you giving up practicing law now in california? >> yeah. i'm moving to new york very soon, anderson. >> okay. but that's interesting.
1:24 am
so marcia, do you want to dig a grave along with mark on this? do you think it really is a sign of where this was? >> i do. i think he's right. you know, it seems that outside of california, judges know how to tamp it down and get it done. i think the prosecution was inclined probably to do a little rebuttal. it seems to me from reading the tea leaves that the judge might have talked them out of it. probably wisely so. i'm surprised and a little bit surprised that the prosecution did not call an expert on child abuse accommodation syndrome. one of the experts that could explain the failure to report, delay in reporting, inconsistent statements and so forth. i'm surprised they didn't call a witness like that. but they're inside the courtroom and they know what they are feeling in terms of how the case is coming out and they may have felt they didn't need to. that said, i think outside of california, yes, judges do not how to clamp it down and get it done. >> well, we welcome both of you -- >> marcia is so right.
1:25 am
>> i appreciate it. disturbing accounts of alleged abuse from sandusky's abusers and eyewitness testimony did not sway everyone in the courtroom. one of jerry and dottie sandusky's long-time friends was a character witness who testified on his behalf. her loyalty is unshakable. you're going to hear from her just ahead. is there any evidence that could be presented that would make you believe what these accusers are saying about jerry sandusky? >> i would have to see him do it myself with my own eyes. i think he's a wonderful person. i just can't believe these things. what's the matter?
1:26 am
uh, trouble with a car insurance claim. ah, claim trouble. [ voice of dennis ] you should just switch to allstate, and get their new claim satisfaction guarantee. hey, he's right, man. [ voice of dennis ] only allstate puts their money where their mouth is. yep. [ voice of dennis ] claim service so good, it's guaranteed. [ normal voice ] so i can always count on them. unlike randy over there. that is one dumb dude. ♪ the new claim satisfaction guarantee, only from allstate. are you in good hands? where tonight we switched their steaks with walmart's choice premium steak. it's a steakover! it's flavorful. it's so juicy. the's fantastic. it's probably the best steak i've had. only one in five is good enough
1:27 am
to be called walmart choice premium. tastes like a five star steak. tonight you were actually eating walmart steak. are you serious? wow. scrumdeliumcious. tomorrow will be the day i will buy walmart steaks. walmart choice premium steak in the black package. it's one hundred percent satisfaction guaranteed. try it and check us out on facebook.
1:28 am
1:29 am
quick clarification of what marcia clark said, she wanted to know why they didn't bring in an expert. pennsylvania is the only state in the country that bars such experts unless they have been directly involved in the case. over the last two days took the
1:30 am
stand to testify on behalf of jerry sandusky. friends of the former assistant football coach. they described him as a caring guy and to the charity that helped disadvantaged kids. the picture they painted didn't look anything like the sexual predator obviously described in court by eight of sandusky's a friend says she's known sandusky for four decades. she was one of the character witnesses. last night, we played part of the interview i did with her. tonight i want to show you the rest of the interview. she's 100% convinced that sandusky is innocent. i asked her to watch an interview with bob costas. that never aired and to tell me what she heard him saying. watch. >> so it's entirely possible you could have helped young boy "a" in some way that was not objectionable while horribly taking advantage of young boy
1:31 am
"b," "c," "d" and "e." >> well, you might think that, i don't know. in terms of my relationship with so many, many young people, i would guess that there are many young people that would come forward, many more young people who would come forward and say that my methods and what i had done for them made a very positive impact on their life. and i didn't go around seeking out every young person for sexual needs that i've helped or many that i didn't have -- i hardly had any contact with who i have helped in many, many ways. >> joyce, some people hearing that find that kind of startling, particularly the last line that sandusky said where he said i didn't go around seeking out every young person for
1:32 am
sexual needs that i helped. there are many i didn't have -- and then he pauses. there are some i hardly had any contact with and helped many, some see that almost as an admission of sexual contact with children. how did you interpret that? >> i heard him say he didn't have sexual contact with kids that he helped. >> well, he said i didn't go out seeking every young person for sexual needs that i helped. there are many that i didn't have -- and then he stopped and said some i hardly had contact with and helped in many, many ways. certainly opened to interpretation. is there any evidence that could be presented that would make you believe what these accusers are saying about jerry sandusky. >> i would have to see him do it myself with my own eyes. i think he's a wonderful person. i just can't believe these things. sorry. >> there's nothing to be sorry about. i think you're a good friend and you're standing by your friend. his wife dottie, who's your good
1:33 am
friend testified. how do you think she did on the stand? >> i think she did an excellent job and i think she validated that she was a light sleeper and she would have heard something going on if it was going on in her home. i mean, she was there all the time. and she's a wonderful, moral person. she would cracked the whip if anything were going on. >> sandusky was overheard by a police officer years ago telling the mother of one of the accuser, quote, i wish i could ask for forgiveness, but i know i won't get it from you. i wish i were dead after she confronted him about taking a shower with her son. does that raise any eyebrows for you? >> no. it made me think he felt bad enough just taking a shower with a kid. >> and yet he continued to take showers with kids. >> i don't know if that was one of the first ones or one of the last ones.
1:34 am
>> but if he did continue to take showers with kids, do you think he really felt bad about it? >> i don't know. i would say he felt bad in that one case. >> well, joyce, i appreciate you coming on and talking to us. thank you very much, joyce. >> thank you, anderson. see you later. bye. >> one of jerry sandusky's strong defenders. a lot more happening around the country and the world. isha? anderson, no sign of progress in syria where syrian troops kept up the shelling today and at least 42 civilians were killed. new reporting as well about just how many people have fled syria. "the new york times" citing jordanian authorities who estimate there are now more than 100,000 syrians living in jordan. egypt next, former dictator hosni mubarak tonight is off life support. that's according to his lawyer. a state news agency saying
1:35 am
mubarak is not clinically dead but is in critical condition and in failing health. greece has a new prime minister sworn in today. after successfully forming a new government, something the economically devastated country has done without for the last 223 days. the u.s. economy not getting much of a boost from the federal reserve today. chairman ben bernanke announcing the extension of "operation twist" which aims at keep borrowing costs low, but has only had a modest effect so far. and have you had up to here at the airport? tired of long lines and intrusive patdowns? well, this woman was. not only did the camera catch the patdown, well, it also caught the passenger shall we say patting back? carol price, that's her name, is a retired tsa agepointp she says she was only demonstrating what happened to her. the law, though, says otherwise and she's being charged with misdemeanor battery. and anderson, she's heading to court next month.
1:36 am
>> wow. she's been charged with misdemeanor battery for that? >> yep. they're saying she did not ask before she put her hands on the supervisor and that's what she's facing. >> wow. and she's a former tsa person? that's really interesting. >> she is. and she's claiming that -- she says it's a vendetta. but yeah, i think you can say it's a bad day at the airport. >> i guess we've all had those. isha, thanks. two healthy people who donated their kidneys died after surgeries after a device that has had warnings since 2006. the question is is the fda doing enough? keeping them honest next. ♪
1:37 am
[ slap! slap! ] [ male announcer ] your favorite foods fighting you? fight back fast with tums. calcium rich tums goes to work in seconds. nothing works faster. ♪ tum tum tum tum tums so how much do we owe you? that'll be $973.42. ya know, your rates and fees aren't exactly competitive. who do you think i am, quicken loans?
1:38 am
[ spokesman ] when you refinance your mortgage with quicken loans, you'll find that our rates and fees are extremely competitive. because the last thing you want is to spend too much on your mortgage. one more way quicken loans is engineered to amaze. ♪ one more way quicken loans is engineered to amaze. one is for a clean, wedomestic energy future that puts us in control. our abundant natural gas is already saving us money, producing cleaner electricity, putting us to work here in america and supporting wind and solar. though all energy development comes with some risk, we're committed to safely and responsibly producing natural gas. it's not a dream. america's natural gas... putting us in control of our energy future, now.
1:39 am
do you guys ride? well... no. sometimes, yeah. yes. well, if you know anybody else who also rides, send them here -- we got great coverage. it's not like bikers love their bikes more than life itself. i doubt anyone will even notice. leading the pack in motorcycle insurance. now, that's progressive. call or click today. aarrggh!
1:40 am
1:41 am
welcome back on the program. every year about 6,000 helped the americans choose to donate one of their kidneys to save a life. it's a remarkable thing to do. typically, everything goes fine. the operation is considered safe. very few donors actually die. but sirns 2001, five donors have died. their death is tied to a device that was warned to be unsafe back in 2006. so keeping them honest, did the food and drug administration, the agency that monitors the devices, did they do enough to sound the warnings and to protect these patients? and is it doing enough right now to stop more deaths in the future? here's cnn medical correspondent elizabeth cohen. >> reporter: when manuel developed a deadly kidney disease, his sister didn't hesitate to give him one of her kidneys. in january, 2011, she went in
1:42 am
for what's considered to be a very low-risk surgery. >> she was overwhelmed that she was able to save her brother's life. >> reporter: the surgery was a success. she was wheeled out to the recovery room where her daughter melinda williams, was waiting. but then, not even 30 minutes later, she took a mysterious turn for the worse. >> she raised up, she took a deep breath and her eyes got real huge and then she fell back down and then just started breathing really, really bad. >> reporter: surgeons at university of texas medical center rushed her back into the operating room. once inside, they realized something horrible had happened. in order to remove her kidney, doctors had to cut an artery. they put clips on it to make sure it didn't open back up, but the clips slipped off and blood gushed out. >> what was the next thing you heard? >> we couldn't save her. he did everything we possibly could, but there's nothing we
1:43 am
could do. >> reporter: the mother of four bled to death at age 41. >> it just literally -- i couldn't hold it in no more. it just felt like my world fell apart. my heart was torn in pieces. >> reporter: what melinda williams didn't know -- her mother's death wasn't just some freak accident. it was 100% preventible. >> to learn that yet another donor has died has been simply devastating. >> reporter: dr. amy friedman, a transplant surgeon in syracuse, new york, has spent the last eight years trying to persuade the food and drug administration to do more to warn that clips can kill kidney donors. and yes, dr. friedman said another donor was the fifth kidney donor to die because of these clips. and at least 12 others suffered injuries. the clips are safe to use in many types of surgery, but not in laproscopic kidney donor surgeries.
1:44 am
beginning in 2006, the fda worked with the manufacture of these clips to send up to six warning letters alerting hospitals that the clips were contraindicated and unsafe for use in that procedure. but dr. friedman says the letters were hardly persuasive and easily forgotten. the letter florinda's hospital received came five years before her surgery at a time when the hospital wasn't even using the clip. it was one of dozens of letters about various devices and other safety issues the hospital gets every year. and the letter about the surgical clips never once mentioned that patients had died. >> reporter: would this letter have had more impact if they had mentioned that people actually died? >> absolutely. it's shocking that it doesn't say that even a single donor died. it's meaningless without saying that. >> reporter: by 2007, documents obtained by dr. friedman through the freedom of information act showed the fda called these letters effective and adequate to prevent a reoccurrence of the problem.
1:45 am
effective and adequate, even though only about half the hospitals acknowledged getting the notification, according to a 2007 audit by the fda. half the hospitals. >> right. >> reporter: is that enough? >> clearly it is not enough and clearly it still left gaps. >> reporter: florinda and at least one kidney donor died after the letters were issued. dr. friedman says she wants the fda to require a warning right on the package and doing so earlier could have saved lives. there's no warning on these clips. there's no warning in the package that the clips come in. there's no warning on the box. believe it or not, the only warning about how not to use these clips doesn't come with the clips at all. it actually comes separately with an entirely different medical device, an applicator that's used to put the clips on. and the warning is far from obvious. it's one line in pages of instructions.
1:46 am
if you were designing this, what would you put? >> i think it would be great to say don't use on a kidney donor. that would be terrific. >> reporter: the manufacturer of the clips points out that although no specific warning is on the clip packaging, it does feature a warning symbol and a referral to the applicator's instructions for use. keeping them honest, we wanted to ask the fda to justify why they said the letter writing campaign was effective, but only about half the hospitals said they got the warning. we also wanted to ask why they never required a warning label right on the packaging of the clip. but the fda wouldn't talk to us on camera. in a statement to cnn, the fda said most transplant surgeons heed the warning, but some continue to improperly use these clips.
1:47 am
while the fda can warn against the unsafe use of the medical device, doctors are not prohibited from using cleared or approved devices for an >> i told them i wanted my sister back.
1:48 am
i want my sister. they should have known better. >> can these still be used in kidney transplants despite what the manufacturer and fda say? >> anderson, doctors tell us that it is possible. right after florinda died, the fda issued a safety notification. but those notifications aren't ongoing. there's nothing specific on the label. doctors could miss that one sentence in the instructions. so doctors hope the transplant surgeons have gotten the message, but it's possible they haven't. >> wow. elizabeth, thanks very much. we'll keep on it. wild werlth across the country from extreme heat in the east to flash floods in minnesota.ea the latest on all of it when we continue. androgel 1.62% is from the makers of the number one prescribed testosterone replacement therapy. it raises your testosterone levels, and... is concentrated, so you could use less gel.
1:49 am
and with androgel 1.62%, you can save on your monthly prescription. [ male announcer ] dosing and application sites between these products differ. women and children should avoid contact with application sites. discontinue androgel and call your doctor if you see unexpected signs of early puberty in a child, or, signs in a woman which may include changes in body hair or a large increase in acne, possibly due to accidental exposure. men with breast cancer or who have or might have prostate cancer, and women who are, or may become pregnant or are breast feeding should not use androgel. serious side effects include worsening of an enlarged prostate, possible increased risk of prostate cancer, lower sperm count, swelling of ankles, feet, or body, enlarged or painful breasts, problems breathing during sleep, and blood clots in the legs. tell your doctor about your medical conditions and medications, especially insulin, corticosteroids, or medicines to decrease blood clotting. talk to your doctor today about androgel 1.62% so you can use less gel. log on now to and you could pay as little as ten dollars a month for androgel 1.62%.
1:50 am
what are you waiting for? this is big news. but they can also hold you back. unless you ask, "what's next?" introducing the all-new rx f sport. this is the pursuit of perfection.
1:51 am
i wish my patients could see what i see. ♪ that over time, having high cholesterol plus diabetes... or family history of early heart disease... can put them at increased risk for plaque buildup. and they'd see that it's more important to get their cholesterol where their doctor wants. and why for these patients, when diet and exercise alone aren't enough, i prescribe crestor. adding crestor lowers bad cholesterol by up to 52%. and is also proven to slow plaque buildup. [ female announcer ] crestor is not right for everyone. like people with liver disease... or women who are nursing, pregnant, or may become pregnant. tell your doctor about other medicines you're taking. call your doctor right away if you have muscle pain or weakness, feel unusually tired, have loss of appetite, upper belly pain, dark urine or yellowing of skin or eyes. these could be signs of rare but serious side effects. is your cholesterol where your doctor wants? ask your doctor if crestor is right for you.
1:52 am
[ female announcer ] if you can't afford your medication, astra zeneca may be able to help. first a "360" bulletin. word tonight that central police chief bill lee has been fired. chief lee offered his resignation back in april, but city managers voted not to accept it. in duluth, minnesota, flash flooding has destroyed roads, forced evacuations and left homes under water. the national weather service said up to nine inches of rain fell between last night and this morning. a fire has damaged a warehouse at a pier in san francisco that's supposed to host an event for the america's cup yacht race. the cause of the fire isn't
1:53 am
known. and big bird may soon be big on the big screen. 20th century fox has picked up the rights to make a sesame street movie. two other sesame street movies have hit the screen. "the adventures of elmo in grouchland" and "follow that bird" in 1985. my own personal favorite of "sesame street" aired in 2007 when we all got to see our own anderson cooper in a trash can. time now for "the
1:54 am
homicide of young people in america has an impact on all of us. how can we save these young people's lives? as a police chief, i have an opportunity to affect what happens in a major city. if you want to make a difference, you have to have the right education. university of phoenix opened the door. my name is james craig, i am committed to making a difference, and i am a phoenix. visit to find the program that's right for you. enroll now. [ male announcer ] some dealer mechanics are determined to find something to repair.
1:55 am
♪ but unlike those guys, we don't fix vehicles. we help keep them running right. at jiffy lube®, our highly trained technicians use the advanced technology of pennzoil® motor oil to help you leave dealer worries behind. jiffy lube®. leave worry behind. drive in and ask for pennzoil® today.
1:56 am
ridiulist." tonight we're adding an election year dog tail. a guy in virginia recently received a voter registration
1:57 am
packet in the mail addressed to his dog. here is his dog. cute little guy. his name is mozart. mo for short. mo's owner said he was surprised to see his taking such an active role in democracy. >> i opened it up and looked at it. i just laughed. i thought it was a joke at first. turns out it's real. >> apparently it came to a nonprofit group trying to register more voters. not only is he a dog, he's unfortunately been dead for quite a while. what amazed morris is if mozart was human, he would have been eligible to vote this year. >> he would have been 18, 19 years old this year. and he passed away two years ago and i still have no earthly idea how they got his information. >> not to get too gary larson on you now, but why shouldn't dogs be allowed to vote? for one thing, they tend to be excellent judges of character. frankly a solid dog constituency could be just what the state of
1:58 am
virginia needs to knock out a certain candidate. >> vote hank. >> he's got ads, stickers, signs, even a facebook page. >> he's running as an independent. so, he had to have a red and blue tie. >> see, here's the thing, if you give dog the vote and let cats run for office, they're going to have to be active citizens, as well. a few years back, a cat got a summons for jury duty. he did not get picked for the actual jury. must have been some kind of conflict of interest. maybe it was a petty larceny trial. who knows. but when it comes to how cats and dogs figure into the justice system, i think the most cogent commententary came from the guy asking to be let out of jury duty. apparently you morons didn't understand me the first time, i would rather count the wrinkles on my dog's [ bleep ], rather than sit on a jury.
1:59 am
>> america has a drug problem. and at the 11th hour, president obama jumps head over heels into the fast and furious controversy. hours later the attorney general one step closer to being held in contempt of congress. they say they were just protecting their daughter. so why are they being charged with murder today? let's go out front. we want more ben and we want him now. but tonight, the truth. there's not enough ben for america. more ben is bad. i'm talking, of course, about


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on