tv Anderson Cooper 360 CNN June 20, 2011 11:00pm-12:00am PDT
breaking news tonight. late word, new word, that syria is getting help killing its own people. crackdowns like this on protesters are made possible in part by the rising involvement of iran in syria. iran is helping, according to u.s. officials by training killers, sending personnel and keeping weapons flowing into syria and supplying riot gear. one official says the evidence is coming from american electronic eavesdropping. they say iran is supporting other potential leaders in syria in case the dictator, bashar assad is toppled from power. he spoke today in damascus but for those that hoped he would change direction he made it clear he's got nothing to offer except the same reform he's been
making and breaking for years but he blamed the chaos on what he described as a virtual army of rampaging criminals and said there are about 64,000 dangerous fugitives in syria. imagine, he said, what damage could be caused if a few thousands wanted to carry weapons and engage in sabotage. look at that statement. "keeping them honest," syria is a police state and has been for decades. 64,000 anti-government thugs have been wandering the streets for years leading up to this is impossible to believe and, of course, asad offered no evidence. the notion is because thousands of syrians were somehow able to get weapons and launch attacks is not only unproven, totally contradicted by every piece of video we've seen for months. we've seen government tanks. soldiers and security officials shoot at unarmed protesters. look at these protesters trying to cross a street, cornered by gunfire. look, you see flags and fear and you see courage, perhaps, but
not a single firearm. people just try to cross the street. you see people like this gunned down in the middle of the street while fellow protesters duck sniper bullets and desperately try to pull a person to safety. the scene continued on and on until people from the other side of the street emerged from the doorway and helped. [ yelling in foreign language ] these are the people that assad are calling armed thugs. they're not firing back at snipers. they are pulling this person inside of what looks like a rope or cable wire of some kind. no weapons, no arms in sight. we've seen some sling shots and rocks being thrown by protesters. some armed with sticks, even.
a few may have guns but tens of thousands of armed gang members, simply no evidence. we've seen evidence of torture, however and murder from the regime. there's a 13-year-old boy reportedly mutilated and tortured, his body broken and sent back to his family as a warning to others. as for the foreign conspirators, and other enemies, do these look like them? across syria, thousands did turn out today after assad spoke too loudly but peacefully, calls for him to go. and as for weapons, they each had two. shoes, dangerous only in their cultural power in the arab world to inflict shame. i spoke a few moments ago about the crackdown in syria and the support of it by iran. and the hoover institution with national security contributor frances townsend, currently a member of department of homeland security and cia external advisory committee. >> the fact that iran is aiding the regime of assad, not really
a surprise but confirmation of the nature of this regime? >> this is it. this is the radical access in the region. it is iran. it has this access. it's damascus. it's hezbollah in lebanon and hamas. this is the gang. >> and what do we know about the type of iran's influence within syria? >> well, it is gone on for decades. there's a close personal relationship between bashar assad and ahmadinejad been but the two countries, iran has been shipping weapons to syria supporting hezbollah for decades and threatening israel. this is no surprise. this is the patron to whom syria looks to when they need this kind of support and obviously they're getting it. >> and for a regime that claims they're just going after armed thugs, i mean, iran, the lesson from iran is, they go after their own people.
they go after peaceful protesters, clearly, syria is doing the same thing? >> clearly. the syrians can be inspired by what the iranians did in the summer of 2009. they faced a popular revolution. a middle-class movement. they crushed it and never looked back. >> why do you think assad and you made the speech and you've read it multiple times. he's making the same vague promises about reform that he made in 2000 when he came into power. >> he came out to speak to his people after 50 days and it was a remarkable speech. finally he got a chance to use his medical training. he actually equates the dangers, the syrian to germs. and said what you need to do now is the body needs to build immunity. this is the solution. he offers the people as he hunts them down as he sends helicopter and gun ships after them as he kills them, as he sends thousands across the border to turkey, he then speaks to them of election and speaks to them of reform. and they answered him in the only language that he
understands, with more of the same demonstration. with more of the same unrest. >> and, the idea he's claiming that there are tens of thousands of germs of armed gangs, groups, and this is what we've heard from them for months now, fran. blaming these armed gangs. syria is a police state. the idea that there are tens of thousands of armed thug ganged who aren't affiliated with the government who are against the government, that's just absurd. >> it is absurd. look, anderson. bashar assad lacks absolute credibility, not only around the world and the international community but with his own people. if there was an ounce of honesty or integrity to the speech, it would have begun by saying i'm going to pull back the syrian military forces who are at the moment, slaughtering the syrian people. and i'm going to investigate the sort of abuses that the military is visited upon the syrian people. but he can't do that because, of course, he's ordered those abuses so this is just further
evidence. it sort of delusional if you ask me. he makes the statement but it clearly lacks any truth or sincerity. >> you talked about the arab silence on friday. we heard from the arab league and they said the u.n. shouldn't get involved. outside powers shouldn't go involved in the internal affairs of syria. >> surprise, surprise. this is the consistent position of the arab league. the tyrants don't like to intervene with other tyrants. the exception to the rule was the fact the arab league ganged up on moammar gadhafi and did so because he had really insulted every player in the region with the syrian regime it's very different. and i think bashar must be feeling all right on some level. i'll tell you how. he now knows or suspects there will be no security council resolution against him. he understands fully there is no arab position against him and he understands that it's his killer brigades, his army, against unarmed people.
when he says to the refugees in turkey, come home. there will be no revenge against you, no one really believes him. >> so what happens? he can just continue to do this? >> i think this is for the long haul. this is not the end of the confrontation. the people of syria are done with this man but they can't overthrow him. he wishes to frighten the people into submission and they will not submit so i think this is really a drawn-out confrontation. the syrian economy is in ruins. i think the international community, if there is seriousness, perhaps there should be sanctions that bite. not sanctions against syria, but sanctions against the regime sources of money, oil and natural gas, to really hurt the assets themselves. to hurt the ruling gang. >> fran, it seems like it can go on and on like this for a long time. he can't stop the protest because the people are brave and have tossed aside their fear. and, yet, they're not powerful enough to overthrow at this point? >> that's right. i'll tell you having seen a
series of increasingly harsh sanctions put against syria and individual members of the regime, that doesn't seem to be enough in and of itself to push him -- push the regime over the edge and topple it. so with the arab -- other arab countries being silent, the international community, especially nato being tied down now and libya, one can foresee this going on for a -- continuing for a protracted period of time and what that means, anderson, regretfully, will be more deaths of syrian people. >> more murders. fran, thank you. thank you, professor. >> let us know what you think. follow us on twitter. up next, a congressman's interesting theory about why the president got the country involved in libya. hear for yourself and decide for yourself ahead. plus, why the judge in the casey anthony trial is so upset with both sides he gave them all a time-out essentially, pulling
the plug on proceedings today. what about the so-called surprise witness? new developments there on "crime and punishment" tonight. host: could switchco ally save you 15% or more on car insurance? did the little piggy cry wee wee wee all thy home? piggy: weeeeeee, weeeeeee, weeeeeee, weeeee weeeeeeee. mom: max. ...maxwell! gg mom: you're home
gop sources say house republican leaders will likely hold votes to limit funding for the operation. there is, in fact, bipartisan dissatisfaction with president obama's decision not to seek authorization from congress under the war powers resolution. there was an interesting moment in the debate on the floor of the house in the middle of discussion on the war powers act. the republican from texas took to the floor and accused the obama administration of helping those that want to destroy america. >> i know the president made the mistake one day of saying that he had visited all 57 states. and i'm well aware that there are not 57 states in this country, although there are 57 members of oic, this islamic states in the world. perhaps there was some confusion whether he had been to all 57 islamic states. as opposed to all 50 u.s. states. nonetheless, we have an obligation to the 50 american states not the 57 muslim islamic
states, that our oath we took is in this body in this house. and it's to the people of america. and it's not to the muslim brotherhood who may very well take over egypt and once they do, they are bent upon setting up a around the world including the united states, and this administration will have been complicit in helping people who want to destroy our country. out of the ignorance to think, if you help your enemies they're going to like you better. >> congressman's indication is insinuations when mr. obama mentioned the 57 states he led a pro islam agenda slip. before we go further here's what the congressman was referring to something then candidate obama said in 2008. >> over the last 15 months we traveled to every corner of the united states.
i've now been in 57 states -- i think one left to go. one left to go -- alaska and hawaii i was not allowed to go to even though i wanted to visit but my staff would not justify it. >> that's a very tired candidate obama in the middle of a campaign swing. earlier he misspoke about something else and earlier explaining his misstatements he started rambling until an aide cut i'm off saying mr. obama was tired from nonstop campaigning. the congressman seems to believe the candidate was slipping in references 57 islamic states in the world. you can decide for yourself whether you think that's true. the congressman is not new to exotic theories, you might say. you might remember the "terror baby" conspiracy he announced on the house floor last year. >> i talked to a retired fbi agent who said that one of the things they were looking at were terror cells overseas who had figured out how to gain our system and it appeared they would have young women who
became pregnant, would get them into the united states to have a baby. they wouldn't even have to pay anything for the baby. and then they would return back where they would be raised and coddled as future terrorists and then one day, 20, 30 years down the road they could be sent in to help destroy our way of life because they figured out how stupid we're being in this country. >> "keeping them honest" we confronted the congressman back then about the "terror baby" theory but he offered no proof, no evidence and he could not identify his source. before going on the house floor and spreading this story, did you call the fbi? >> you're going to keep me honest? you tell the world that you got an fbi statement. you bring on a retired fbi, former supervisor and he says -- we were not aware of any credible report that this was going on?
i brought it to the attention of america for this reason. it was -- i'm a former judge -- >> did you bring it to the attention of the fbi? did you call the fbi? >> they brought it to my attention -- she brought it to my attention on an airplane -- having flown together and she brought that to my attention. that's why i was talking to the retired fbi agent about it so having talked to him, no, i didn't talk to them because the point is -- when we did the research we found the hole existed. >> what research? can you tell us? >> you're attacking the messenger. anderson you are better than this. you used to be good. you used to find a problem and go after it. >> i'm asking you for evidence of something you said on the floor of the house. >> i speak with a southern accent and this is a problem. if you spent as much time looking into the problem as you have been coming after me and belittle me this week you can -- >> i'm giving you an opportunity to say what research and evidence you have, you've
offered none other than yelling. >> do you ever look at your website? >> the fbi says this is not happening. you're just spreading scare stories. this is completely about politics. >> it is happening. >> where? give me some evidence? tell me one terror baby that's been born. >> the explosions will not happen for ten or 15, 20 years and then you will be one of those blipped, i'm not comparable to winston churchill but the detractors like you are comparable to his detractors. he tried to tell people things were going on. >> bottom line, no evidence. and the fbi said it wasn't happening. back then he came on which we appreciated. he declined our invitation tonight. so the story we want to look at as strange as the congressman's theory is, there is a discussion about the war powers resolution. i want to bring in dana bash and david gergen. dana, whatever the argument was, there's a real debate over the war power's resolution.
what's the latest in terms of the votes in the house and the votes on capitol hill about this? >> well, house gop sources, anderson, tell us they'll try to limit u.s. involvement in the libya mission by using congress's power to limit funding. we're told according to republican leadership sources, something this week -- leadership hadn't settled on a strategy yet. but we're told to look for a voter or a series of votes on thursday. one example, one potential option i'm told, is to say no funding may be used for ground troops in libya. anyone watching who knows about the libyan mission will say, there aren't any ground troops in libyan but republican sources say that would be one way to prevent things to escalate. and provide a way tore lawmakers to channel their frustration with the way the president has handled this, not coming to congress for authorization, for example. they're looking for a middle ground and they're worried about growing support by both parties to completely cut funding and force the u.s. to abandon the mission so they're looking for a way around that to vote for
something. >> david, why is the obama administration so resistant to go to congress and try to get authorization for the action? >> well, i think for a couple of reasons. they honestly don't think they're involved in, quote, hostilities. the rest of the world thinks that when the american drones hit they are hostilities but they don't. if they asked for authorization they think they would be asking for authorization for a nonevent in effect. beyond that, they don't have any votes against them. what i'm surprised about, anderson, i must tell you, is that the war powers act was passed during the middle of the vietnam war in 1973. president nixon was in office and it was a way to curtail the power of the presidency. president nixon and almost every president i can remember since then has argued the war powers act is unconstitutional. president obama says, it applies. we just don't fit it. what? what are you -- why don't you
sort of make the argument about presidential power? i don't think anybody understands it. >> it's interesting dana. you have some of the strongest opposition from the president and some of the strongest support coming from the democrats and the republican, john mccain. >> it's not breaking down along party lines. it's fascinating. both parties in both chambers of congress are split on how to handle this. in the house there seems to be a growing number of democrats and republicans, who are fed up. many are angry that the president didn't come to congress for authorization. they think that he needs under the war powers act but gop leadership sources tell me that that got inflamed big-time over the weekend. there was a "new york times" report that lawyers at the pentagon and justice department argued the president did need congressional approval for libya and the president overruled them and that makes people more angry and eager to have some kind of vote this week. >> and there was a letter and i want to get this right, addressed to house republicans from 39 conservative foreign policy experts, former government officials, karl rove and such.
i want to read, they said the problem is not that the president has done too much but he's done too little to remove gadhafi from power. the united states should be leading the effort not trailing behind our adversaries. david, how do you think this resolves? >> well, anderson, split of the republican party now that very, very unusual. between the war hawks, the neoconservatives if you want to call them that, and many of them signed the letter. the same people that wanted to go to war in iraq and afghanistan are now making the argument we should not pull out precipitously from libya and i agree with them. be that as it may -- and so we have the war hawks continuing. there's a new wing in the republican party, that neoisolationist, mitt romney is leading it. he says not only should we get out of afghanistan as fast as we can, there's a war weariness in the land after ten years and the president is having more and more trouble holding together any kind of coalition to continue on iraq in some fashion
to figure out how to do the troop withdrawal in afghanistan and hold on in libya. he would be far better to knock off gadhafi quickly. i think he has a speech on wednesday, this wednesday, before the house votes, on his afghanistan plans. that will be a big and important speech to watch. >> david gergen, dana bash, thank you. coming up, the gun control. being blamed of a death of a border patrol agent. the atf could be close to stepping down over the scandal. no one has taken responsibility. details next. and the judge in the casey anthony case slamming the brakes on today's proceedings giving attorneys on both sides a scolding. the latest from gary tuchman in orlando and examine the latest evidence from this weekend. you love the aroma of beef tenderloin, don't you? you inspired a very special dog food. [ female announcer ] chef michael's canine creations. chef inspired. dog desired.
aflac! oh, i've just got major medical... major medical. ...but it helps pay the doctors. pays the doctors, boyyy! [ quack ] oh yeah? what about your family? ♪ we added aflac, so we get cash! it's like our safety net... ♪ to help with the mortgage or whatever we need! so my family doesn't feel the pain too. ha! [ male announcer ] help protect your family at aflac.com. [ pigeons ] heyyy! hooo!!! it's a curious thing that happens. it seems that when we get to a place where no one knows us, we become most ourselves. try new things. make new friends. laughing out loud. and dancing in the streets. its time to venture out. who knows just who we might discover... as we come alive under the spell of pure michigan. your trip begins at michigan.org.
and today, we're re-inventing aspirin for pain relief. with new extra-strength bayer advanced aspirin. it has microparticles so it enters the bloodstream faster and rushes relief right to the site of your tough pain. ♪ in fact, it's clinically proven to relieve pain twice as fast. new bayer advanced aspirin. extra strength pain relief, twice as fast.
coming up, the judge in the casey anthony trial abruptly ends the day in court before he starts and gives the attorneys a scolding. first, we have our 360 news and business bulletin. anderson, at least 44 people died in a plane crash in russia. russian officials say the twin engine jetliner took off from moscow and crashed into a highway near an airport about 600 miles north. rescue workers and investigators are on the scene. a statement from anthony
weiner's office says his resignation in the wake of his photo scandal will be official tomorrow when his resignation letter will be read in the house of representatives. kenneth nelson, the acting director of the atf is expected to resign in the next day or two amid controversy over "operation fast and furious" according to two senior federal law enforcement sources. controversial mexican gun trafficking operation let weapons slip into the wrong hands and led to the death of a border patrol agent. and a victory for walmart! the supreme court ruled today that plaintiffs in a discrimination case against female employees did not show justification for class action status. people are saying tonight that case was just too big to succeed, anderson. >> interesting. joe, thanks. we have a cautionary tale about siblings rivalry with pets. we found this on youtube. somebody posted a video of a bird and turtle seemed to be getting along hanging out on the counter but apparently -- let's watch what happens.
for whatever reason the bird has an issue with the turtle and, boom, right into the trash can. and so long turtle. a little kick there. let's see it again, shall we? [ laughter ] i love how the bird is like checking out out to make sure he got rid of it. the judge in the casey anthony trial making it clear he's had enough. he gave lawyers on both sides a time-out and scolded them before the jury was seated. we'll show you what ticked him off. and we'll look at the latest evidence that emerged over the weekend. and an online dating service dumping 30,000 new members. don't even try to let them down gently. for that they score a spot on for that they score a spot on the rediculist tonight. and while that leaves a little room for balls and tees, it doesn't leave room for much else.
there's no room left for deadlines or conference calls. not a single pocket to hold the stress of the day, or the to-do list of tomorrow. only 14 clubs pick up the right one and drive it right down the middle of pure michigan. your trip begins at michigan.org. now,listen to a magazine,aper, curl up with a movie, and see a phone call. now, we can take a classroom anywhere, hold an entire bookstore, and touch the stars. because now...there's this. i thought it was over here... ♪
"crime and punishment," the casey anthony trial. the lawyer for the man from the defense that received phone calls from george anthony says casey anthony a defense lawyer also depose his client later this week. in a big surprise thompson's name was added last week. the defense wants to ask him about calls that were made from his cell phone number to casey anthony's father the day before the 2-year-old caylee anthony was reported missing. mr. thompson said he never met him and didn't have the number, and the question in 2008 when caylee disappeared. no word on whether judge perry will allow him to testify. one thing is extremely clear. judge perry was losing patience and today he gave attorneys on both sides gave them a scolding and time-out. day 23 ended before the jury sat down. here's gary tuchman. >> reporter: casey anthony arrived in court for a full day of testimony and hear called by her attorney in an effort to help her case but it was not to be. >> enough is enough.
>> reporter: because the judge is angry. he thinks the attorneys are plays games. >> it is quite evident that there is a friction between attorneys. >> reporter: the judge gave a piece of his mind to all the lawyers today. making it clear both sides need to disclose the opinions of their expert witnesses to avoid ambushes. he specifically told casey anthony's attorneys if they continue to produce surprise testimony, he could be compelled to limit what the witnesses will be allowed to say. >> this court does not make threats. this court simply applies the rules. >> reporter: the defense problems perk lated on saturday when dr. william rodriguez took the stand. >> he said he doubted the duct tape was used to suffocate the little girl.
his testimony was postponed because some of his opinions were not known by the prosecution. but they did know what this expert witness would say. >> how many times you've testified as an expert witness? >> probably around 300 times, maybe somewhat more. i testified probably around 30 times on the average, a year. >> dr. warner spitz has been a forensic pathologist for more than a decade. >> is it your opinion that the tape was not put on the face before decomposition? >> no, it was not. i think that the duct tape was later event, not an earlier event. >> after decomposition? >> after decomposition. >> reporter: a critical question that still remains? why would duct tape be on the
skull if not to harm her. the defense claims she died in an accident in a swimming pool drowning. there's little doubt jurors will want answers to that. but those answers didn't come on this day. testimony was delayed because of the judge's unhappiness with the attorneys. >> i'm going to ask both sides to turn around and look at that clock back there and tell me what time it is. mr. ashton? >> 9:25, sir. >> and mr. baez? >> 9:26. >> the prosecutor said 9:25. the defense said 9:26. >> that shows me you two will never agree to anything and never interpret anything the same way. >> court was abruptly ended and the judge warned to follow the rules on tuesday. >> how has the jury been react -- reacting so far to that? >> at best it's a wash for casey anthony.
at worst it's damaging. damaging because of wo things. one, withering cross-examination and because of what the jury hadn't heard. the defense gave itself an extra burden with dramatic opening statements where the attorney said, caylee anthony drowned in a swimming pool, it was an accident. the reason she didn't say anything or lied about it because she lived in a crazy house with lots of secrets because she's been molested. the jury hadn't heard anything about that. put yourself in the jury's shoes. they hear the most dramatic words of the trial so far, the defense opening statement and they've heard nothing about it. from trials i've covered over the years, good defense attorneys if they have solid evidence, they bring it up first because then they get the jury on their side. so far they may have that evidence, we don't know for sure, we can't say they do or don't, but so far they haven't presented the evidence. one thing that's very important, the defense will say, we don't have to prove anything. the prosecution has to prove she's guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. it's human nature. the jury wants to know if the facts are true.
>> and the question is, will casey anthony testify in our own defense? >> we're told that decision has not been made yet so there's a lot of suspense about that. >> gary, appreciate that. the defense put a forensic pathologist on the stand on saturday to accuse the prosecution's theory that duct tape was used to kill caylee anthony. our question was -- did his testimony damage the states's case? i spoke to dr. michael hunter a forensic pathologist and chief medical examiner in panama city, florida. dr. hunter, a defense witness, a forensic pathologist has undermined a part of the prosecution's case. she died from the duct tape saying he believed the duct tape was applied long after the body had decomposed because there was no dna material found on the duct tape itself. does he have a point? >> anderson, i don't think so. i think the best you can do is say that the duct tape wasn't placed after the remains became skeletal.
i think the duct tape could have been placed prior to death after death, even long after death. but certainly not to the stage where the remains are skeletal. things like that. so the lack of dna, it really does not cause a problem for me in this issue. >> because, why? you could make an argument that water or the elements kind of washed away dna that might have been on there? >> dna is something that is in and of itself, relatively fragile. nuclear dna. it will fragment with the decomposition process so the inability to get a good says men of dna from that type of material doesn't surprise me in the least. >> does it surprise you that there is dna from one of the lab technicians found? >> you know, anderson, no. the defense's strategy is to poke holes in a lot of the testimony that's already come forward from the prosecution side. dna is -- the dna testing has done in these laboratories so extraordinarily sensitive that
just by being in the vicinity of where the testing is, you may actually contaminate a specimen. and these labs take, like, huge precautions to try to make sure that doesn't happen. but it does. and so it doesn't surprise me there either. >> i don't quite understand it. if, according to this pathologist, if the duct tape was placed after the body was decomposing why would anyone do that? >> you know, i think we got into this a little bit before. i can see because of the position where the tape is around the remains and in the area of the face, that reasonable explanation is that that is the actual mechanism of a homicide. obstruction of the airway of the nose and the mouth. but you may use duct tape for a variety of reasons post-mortem for a deceased individuals. it aids in moving a deceased individual from one place to another and like i said before, there may be fluid which comes from those areas very early on following death.
you could simply apply the material over those areas just to stem the flow. so i can see reasons why you would have that post-mortem. >> the pathologist described caylee's autopsy as shoddy. that was the word he used, "shoddy" because the medical examiner failed to open up caylee's skull. do you agree? >> i don't think you can look at the autopsy in its entirety and use that type of strong language "shoddy." would i uncap the top of the skull, examine the inner portion? i think, yes. i think it's somewhat of a mistake not to do that. keep in mind the doctor in this case, worked hand in hand with the forensic doctors to examine the skeletal remains. that's a very high standard of examination. but one thing you don't want to do is not complete tan examination. not allow the defense to say, okay, if you didn't do this, what else did you not do in this particular case? >> the defense witness also testified there wasn't enough evidence to determine caylee's manner of death directly
contradicting the medical examiner who said she died by homicide. >> go back to the prosecution's witness. dr. g. she took all the information that she had available to her, the scene, the circumstances surrounding the death, the body itself, and she used those as building blocks to form an opinion as far as manner of death -- homicide. i absolutely agree with her on that account. i think you can come to that reasonable conclusion to what the standard requires, beyond a reasonable doubt, homicide. what's much more difficult, i think, is to determine exactly what was the cause of caylee's death. that, to me, it's a lot harder to get to that point of beyond a reasonable doubt with the asphyxiation question. >> thank you so much. from a perspective of today's developments in the trial i talked to depaul university law professor andrea lyons, author
of "angel of death row" and veteran prosecutor, paul henderson. andrea, judge perry seemed to reach a breaking point today. is his frustration with the prosecution and defense understandable? >> well, i think it's understandable. and there's a lot of pressure on a judge in a trial, especially a trial under this much scrutiny, with this many complex issues and complex scientific issues. you know, it's hard to maintain your cool, however well-intentioned judge perry may be to try to stay neutral and not get upset. it's hard not to. >> you say in kind of tension between lawyers pretty normal for a high-stake case like this? >> it absolutely is. when you're in trial and the evidence is coming in piece by piece as a prosecutor and a defense attorney, you know the weight of every single piece of evidence that comes in. the weight of the testimony that's coming in. and it's an intense situation. you're paying attention and listening to arguments waiting
to object and jump up. and you've got to keep in mind the jury is there. there's a lot of pressure, especially on a case like this where outside of the courtroom, you've got people lining up and sleeping just to get into the courtroom. >> andrea, what does that say about the defense that they named this guy, thompson, before they i guess, had been unable to reach him because he refused to talk to their investigator when he showed up. but now he's come forward and said, i have no connection with george anthony whatsoever? >> that's what he is saying now. as far as i understand it and, of course, as you know i've been out of the case for a year but as i understand it there's a large number of a significant number of phone calls between mr. anthony and this gentleman. so -- >> but he's saying that he didn't have that phone number until after the date of those calls. >> right. that's what he's saying. perhaps that's correct. i really have no way of knowing.
i just don't know. >> paul, clearly the defense is trying to raise as many possibilities to bring about some sort of reasonable doubt in the mind of some of these people on the jury? and so if there are phone calls with somebody who in the past has been convicted of kidnapping as a defense attorney, wouldn't you want to kind of bring that in and, maybe, raise the possibility that this person might be involved somehow? >> yeah, if i were a defense attorney i would bring in everybody. if i had a dancing monkey i'd bring it in. as a prosecutor, looking at the case, my argument to the jury would be -- what does that have to do with anything? unless the defense can make a tie to that child or to the evidence that's associated with that child's death, you know, it's not relevant. it's not going to matter and it ends up being a red herring. >> do you think the defense bringing up the allegation that george anthony had sexually abused casey, do they have to follow that up? >> there's a price you pay for either side, prosecution or defense, if you make a promise in your opening statement or
voir dire or some other place and you don't keep the promise you pay a price. the other side will talk about you said you were going to prove certain things and you didn't. i've done that to prosecutors and i'm betting paul has done it to defense lawyers. that would be fair game. that being said, of course, the burden of proof is on the prosecution. >> if the defense raises something that he didn't close the loop on or evidence that was expected that didn't come in. you want to stay away from the bright line of shifting the burden of proof. >> in a case where you have duelling medical experts were for instance, we had the defense witness -- >> blasting the defense saying work was shoddy. we talked to a forensic pathologist who said he didn't think it was shoddy. how does the jury decide? is it just a case of which medical expert they decide to trust more? >> well, that's -- to some degree that's the case. but, no, dr. spitz is one of the
five medical examiners who literally wrote the book that everybody relies on. he's a very, very respectable man. and i think his word will carry some weight with the jury. but what they're going to do, i think, or at least i think the defense hopes they would do, is look at what dr. spitz has to say and the problems with the tape we talked about before, the lack of dna, et cetera, et cetera, and say maybe it makes more sense. in fact, the remains were moved and if that's the case, of course, the suppositions of the prosecution regarding the tape as being a murder weapon are in serious trouble. >> we'll leave it there. paul henderson and andrea lyon, thanks so much. >> thank you. >> good to talk to you. ahead, breaking news. should gay teachers mention their sexuality in classrooms even if being openly gay could cost them their jobs? nationwide insurance. talk to me.
should i bundle all my policies with nationwide insurance ? watch this. on one hand, you have your home insurance with one company. and on another hand, you have your auto with another. and on another hand, you have your life with another. huh... but when you bundle them all together with nationwide insurance... ... they all work together perfectly-- and you could save 25%. wow... it's all in the wrists. ♪ nationwide is on your side
there was a 93% increase in cyber attacks. in financial transactions... on devices... in social interactions... and applications in the cloud. some companies are worried. some, not so much. thanks to a network that secures it all and knows what to keep in, and what to keep out. outsmart the threats. see how at cisco.com cisco.
>> i would see these people targeting me and my story was similar to some of your stories. how you felt targeted. because of who you were. >> the high school history teacher believes making connections with his students is key to his success in the classroom. that's why he's opened about being gay. >> this is north carolina. >> right. >> not necessarily known for being the most liberal part of the country. what was the reaction to you once you got in the build something. >> i mean, it was a little bit of a surprise at first but overall it's been very positive. >> whatbility those families that don't want you talking to their child about your sexuality? >> i remember on the first day of high school i came in and the first class i sat down in the teacher introduced themselves and talked about their family. that's just basic information about someone. so to talk about my partner it's not that i'm talking about sexuality i'm talking about my
life. >> why do you think people care about the sexual orientation of a fact until member? >> there's some people uncomfortable with gay people, whether it's due to religion or how they were brought up. but i think it's important to send a message to my students that being honest is important. >> the decision to come out may not be so clear cut for other educators. >> we have found that a lot of our schools across the country are are hostile environments. >> what would would it show itself? >> typically through language. there are still places in our country where an individual could lose their job based on their identity. >> in north carolina, lease no laws to explicitly protect gay educators. this high school educator is not as opened as green. >> parents and guardians can feel less secure with you being their child's teacher if your
sexuality is not what they feel is traditional. there is an expectation that is unspoken. that we, as teachers, have something of a responsibility to maintain a sense of societal normalcy. >> you're the teacher of the year. >> i am the teacher of the year, that is true. but i think the parents don't want the announcement to be lesbian teacher of the year. the truth is, i'm a teacher who happens to be a lesbian and the same way i happen to be kind of short and have hazel eyes. that's part of who i am. >> i know you have a few openly-gay teachers at your school. do you see an impact that sexual orientation has in the classroom? >> the only kids care about is if the teacher cares about them. they don't care what your sexual orientation is, your race, gender. all they want to know is you give them your very best.
the teachers that i have who are openly gay that's inconsequential. what matters to me and what matters to the students is that they perform. if they don't perform they will unemployed homosexual teachers. >> thank you. >> my pleasure. >> we'll be right back. in here, the planned combination of at&t and t-mobile would deliver our next generation mobile broadband experience to 55 million more americans, many in small towns and rural communities, giving them a new choice. we'll deliver better service, with thousands of new cell sites... for greater access to all the things you want, whenever you want them. it's the at&t network... and what's possible in here is almost impossible to say. but when she got asthma, all i could do was worry ! specialists, lots of doctors, lots of advice... and my hands were full. i couldn't sort through it all. with unitedhealthcare, it's different. we have access to great specialists, and our pediatrician gets all the information.