Return to Transcripts main page

CNN NEWSROOM

White House Concludes International Summit on Violent Extremism; U.S. Military Announces Possible Future Offensive against ISIS Led by Iraqi Forces; Possible Political Effects of Rudy Giuliani's Controversial Comments on President Obama Assessed; Suspected Las Vegas Gunman Knew Victim of Shooting; Dash Cam and Cell Phone Cameras Effect on Policing Examined; App Helps Blind Use Volunteers to See

Aired February 21, 2015 - 14:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.


FREDRICKA WHITFIELD, CNN ANCHOR: We have so much more ahead in the Newsroom, and it all starts right now.

All right, happening right now in the Newsroom, ISIS bragging again, this time about getting their hands on American-made weapons. What it means for America's plan to stop the terrorists from gaining ground.

Then, quote, "They were after me and I got them," end quote, those chilling remarks allegedly from the man accused of gunning down a Las Vegas mother in a so-called road rage shooting.

Plus, a prominent Republican distancing himself from America's mayor. Will Rudy Giuliani be ostracized from his party for saying President Obama doesn't love America? We ask our panel of political insiders.

Hello again and thanks so much for joining me. I'm Fredricka Whitfield.

A newly released video appears to show American-made weapons falling into the hands of ISIS fighters. CNN hasn't verified when the video was shot, but it apparently shows militants attacking an Iraqi military post in Anwar province. It shows them seizing more than 30 weapons including heavy machine guns. Also new this week, U.S. and Iraqi army are planning a big offensive to take back Iraqi's second largest city from ISIS. It was just last June when Iraqi forces dropped their weapons and abandoned their posts as ISIS militants arrived in Mosul.

CNN's Erin McPike is live for us now at the White House with the very latest. So Erin, what is the Pentagon saying about this military campaign?

ERIN MCPIKE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Fred, first and foremost, U.S. officials say they believe they may be ahead of where they thought they would be at this point in the broader military campaign against ISIS, and they are cautiously optimistic that Iraq security forces will be ready for a spring offensive in Mosul. They have been quietly hoping for this game plan to take effect for the last several months.

Now, let me stress here, though, that this April or May launch date is still tentative and it is completely dependent upon where the Iraqi forces are ready. Now, to that end, if they are not completely ready, it may be that the assessment on the ground is that American troops could need to be forward deployed on the front lines in the role of ground controllers, and that means they would be there to call in air strikes. That is something that Defense Secretary Ash Carter discussed this morning in Afghanistan. Listen here.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ASHTON CARTER, DEFENSE SECRETARY: Of course I'm open. I'm always open to advice from our military commanders about what the best way to achieve success is, and that is a question that'll come down the road. But I think what's important is that the campaign to retake Mosul succeed, and we're committed to the success and not to a particular timetable.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

MCPIKE: And that last point applies to the overall effort to retake Mosul broadly, that they are not married to the April or May timetable, Fred.

WHITFIELD: All right, Erin McPike at the White House, a very snowy White House. Thank you so much.

All right, extremist was the big topic at the White House earlier in the week. Some 60 nations showed up for a three day summit to discuss ways to combat extremist groups. Aaron David Miller, a former State Department official who has advised six secretaries of state, is skeptical whether a U.S. led forum can be successful.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

AARON DAVID MILLER, WOODROW WILSON INTERNATIONAL CENTER: I think the whole notion of a summit made in America that is going to teach the Arabs how to run their political systems or reform them, I think, frankly, is a lost cause. If we're going to be beat I.S., we're going to beat it through a military and political strategy that demonstrates, in effect, that what I.S. is trying to do, create a state and expand it, simply isn't possible.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WHITFIELD: All right, so my next guest was actually at that summit. Bill Braniff is the former director at the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism at the University of Maryland. So, you know, Aaron David Miller, very doubtful. He says an American-made forum can't be effective dealing with Arab nations. But you, on the other hand, say it was a very successful forum. Why? What made it successful?

BILL BRANIFF, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, STUDY OF TERRORISM, UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND: Oh, because I was at the event that focused on domestic policy, and in that regard I think it was a really important event to mark the efforts that have gone on domestically. I think Mr. Miller is correct that the international aspect of the conference is a much greater challenge. But he also knows that events are not where you formulate strategy. That's a process, not an event. In effect that process will continue on Monday and Tuesday at the Global Counterterrorism forum, which is also in D.C. So that process is continuing.

WHITFIELD: So in your view, you know, help us understand the process, why this is a step in the right direction, perhaps, for the White House to say if we're going to help take the lead militarily in helping to stamp out ISIS, then why not, from an ideological standpoint, also try to take the lead and help, I guess, build a coalition on how to damage, destroy ISIS in this manner?

BRANIFF: Well, so I think the challenge here is that military events on the ground are going to happen in a certain timeline, and a lot of the broader issues, things like -- issues like governance, issues like ideology and how to you marginalize extremist interpretations of Sunni Islam by the mainstream communities in Sunni Muslim majority countries? This happens on a much slower timeline.

So we can lead in the short term. We can't lead in the long term. And so you hear the president talking about encouraging things like governance. And of course that's not going to happen, you know, turn on a dime, but you have to nudge in the right direction and then also deal with the realities, geopolitical realities on the ground with the tools that you have. And in this case the tools we have are largely military tools in the U.S. arsenal.

WHITFIELD: And, you know, I mentioned ISIS because it seems to be the primary target right now, but, you know, the president omitted the word "Islam" in terms of references to terror groups. He talked about extremist group, and even though ISIS has the name "Islamic" in it, how was that received among those invited to the forum, the omission of the word "Islam" and instead a reference to more generic term, how was that interpreted? What was the real intent that people interpreted?

BRANIFF: Well, you know, you have to understand that terrorism is a political form of violence. It's politics by other means. And therefore counterterrorism is inherently political behavior. I don't mean Democrat-Republican politics, but I mean it's about legitimacy, and it's about trying to, in this case, get governments to work together to marginalize a non-state actor.

If you use the term "Islamic extremism" and it's taken out of context or not given the opportunity to explain what specifically you mean, your referring to Al Qaeda or ISIL, you may alienate the very nations and communities that you want working with you to marginalize these extremist groups. And so the administration uses more abstract terms in order to not alienate the allies that it needs for this particular fight.

It's a problem. Our language is a problem, our vocabulary is a problem dealing with highly politicized issues, and the administration is trying to use expedient language.

WHITFIELD: And do you agree with that approach? Do you think that's well-received, particularly among Arab nations? BRANIFF: Sometimes, yes. I mean, there's a certainly a pushback when American political leaders talk about Muslim extremism or Islamic extremism. And the concern, of course, is that are we painting with too broad a brush using those terms. So there is pushback when we use those terms. So for political purposes, I think it's OK to use vocabulary to get the most effective outcome. Analysts, strategists, professionals in the weeds on the issues need to be specific, and they need to use specific terms so we know what we're talking about when we talk about it.

WHITFIELD: All right, Bill Braniff at the University of Maryland, thank you so much, appreciate your time.

BRANIFF: Thank you.

WHITFIELD: All right, coming up, former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani still not backing down on his controversial comments creating quite a mess for Republicans. CNN's Will Ripley joining us live from New York with the latest.

WILL RIPLEY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Rudy Giuliani making front page news yet again. A lot of people are questioning why he's bringing up claims that go back years that the president was influenced by communists.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WHITFIELD: Former mayor Rudy Giuliani of New York standing by his controversial comments that President Barack Obama doesn't love America. Giuliani made the remarks at a private political event this week. He was taking aim at the president's refusal to label the recent terror problem as an Islamic extremism issue. And he's not offering up any apologies, Giuliani, that is.

Let's bring in CNN's Will Ripley of the possible fallout here and why he is standing his ground. Will?

RIPLEY: Well, long time Giuliani watchers here in New York, Fred, say that this really is no surprise. If you at the way that the mayor has conducted himself over the years, offering no apologies, in fact going on air repeatedly and adding to his remarks that not only does he claim that President Obama doesn't love his country, but he also brought up in this front page story claims that date back to when Obama was running for president the first time in 2007, some far right winger's belief that the president was influenced by members of the Communist Party as a young child growing up in Indonesia.

And so while Giuliani continues to talk about this, he also addressed the fire storm in a phone call with CNN's Jim Acosta. I'll read to you a quote that he gave Jim, saying that, quote, "My secretary has received some death threats. I don't regret making the statement. I believe it. I don't know if he loves America. I don't feel the same enthusiasm from him for America." What we are seeing is a growing number of Republicans distancing themselves now from Giuliani's comments, not necessarily condemning him, though. Listen to what Senator Rand Paul said today. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. RAND PAUL, (R) KENTUCKY: I think it's a mistake to question people's motives. There's one thing to disagree on policy. I think it's one reason why John Yarmuth and I get along. He's the Democrat congressman from Louisville but we have a good friendship, because I don't question his motives. We don't always agree. We agree on some things, though, and we acknowledge our agreements, but I don't question his motives and I try not to question the president's motives as being a good American or a bad American.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RIPLEY: Fred, the man who was dubbed America's mayor for his leadership during 9/11 now gaining a new reputation for pretty inflammatory rhetoric as evidenced in this case, Fred.

WHITFIELD: All right, thanks so much. We're going to talk more about this, Rudy Giuliani's controversial comment and what it does for the Republican Party as a whole. When we come back, our panel of political analysts and party insiders join us.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

RICHARD QUEST, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: In 1882 on Pearl Street in New York City, Thomas Edison opened the world east first commercial electric grid, lighting up local homes and businesses with cables connected to his power station. Today, while the cars, the fashion, and the skyline all have changed, the way we power our cities substantially hasn't. What if we could bring the whole grid up to date? Let's visit Manheim in Germany.

Every house in Manheim is connected to a smart energy network, making the most of renewable energy. Now, this is not just a set of smart homes. It's a smart city.

THOMAS WOLSKI, POWER PLUS COMMUNICATIONS: What I think is that the power grid can become a brain for the city by all that information that are generated in the grid.

QUEST: At the heart of the network lies a butler, a small box that monitors how much power you're using when boiling the kettle or watching your favorite movie, for instance.

WOLSKI: We were using power line communication technology in order to transfer data from A to B over the power grid itself.

QUEST: The network is designed to use as much renewable energy as possible.

WOLSKI: The availability of renewable energy always leads to a lower price of electricity, and we use that mechanism and forward it to the private customers and we develop this architecture that it can be implemented everywhere.

QUEST: With a smart grid in place, the future of our cities may just be a little brighter.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WHITFIELD: All right, despite a firestorm of criticism, former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani is refusing to apologize for his controversial comments that President Barack Obama doesn't love America. So what do Giuliani's remarks mean for his Republican colleagues?

I'm joined by the political panel, political columnist for the "Washington Post" Dana Milbank is on the phone with us, Ron Brownstein is the editorial director of "The National Journal" and a CNN political analyst. I'm also joined by CNN political commentator Ben Ferguson, and CNN's Stephen Collinson also with us on the phone.

OK, so Dana, let me begin with you, because you write in "The Washington Post" that this isn't just about Giuliani's, quote, your word, "stupid remarks." I want you to also listen to what was Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker had to say after at first remaining very silent, he was on the same stage as Giuliani when it all went down. But this is what he said when in Washington yesterday on CNBC.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GOV. SCOTT WALKER, (R) WISCONSIN: The bottom line is I can only speak for myself, and myself, and I think America's a great exceptional country, and I think people across the spectrum, Republican and Democrat alike, believe that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

WHITFIELD: OK. We know he was on CNBC, but one of our CNN reporters also caught up with him. And he says, you know what, I, too, love America. So Dana, we don't get to see you, but we would love to hear you. Why in your view does that backfire particularly for Scott Walker?

DANA MILBANK, POLITICAL COLUMNIST, "THE WASHINGTON POST" (via telephone): Well, it certainly doesn't seem to be playing very well for him, Fredricka. And, you know, look, I think it's fair to say who really cares what Rudy Giuliani says. He's not running for anything. He's basically a private citizen now who is trying to make waves as a pundit. So I don't think anybody should get too fired up about that. And it's also not fair to ask every Republican in the land what they think of Giuliani's remarks.

But this was uttered in a dinner essentially for Scott Walker. He was sitting right there near Giuliani when he said it, so it's perfectly fair and logical to be asking him about it. And it's not that he was silent at the time, but, you know, given the opportunity to put some distance between him and Giuliani, he very clearly chose not to. So I think he's justifiably getting a whole lot of backlash.

WHITFIELD: Stephen, you, too, write about this in an op-ed, saying Giuliani is entering the same conservative jungle, so to speak, as Sarah Palin and Donald Trump roam. What do you mean by that?

STEPHEN COLLINSON, CNN POLITICS SENIOR REPORTER: I mean, Giuliani, as we just heard, is not running for office anymore, but he still appears to want to be part of the political game. And one way to do that, I think, is to sort of make these kinds of remarks. And the interesting thing about it is it's not a classic political gaffe that he's been heard at a dinner and then he has to come out to apologize. He's out there defending the remark to the hilt. So it looks like, you know, he really wants to be back in the political game, and one way to do that is to make these remarks.

And there's a constituency in the certain sort of sector of the Republican Party among the grassroots, among the base of the party for this kind of remarks. So, you know, if you listen to talk radio, you hear this kind of thing, you know, all of the time. What's unusual about this is that, you know, he's out there on mainstream media defending himself.

WHITFIELD: And so, Ben, you know, this is not just a Giuliani problem. Even though Dana said not every Republican doesn't necessarily need to be asked about or must comment on what Giuliani said, but, you know, what is the conversation likely today in the inner Republican Party circles about whether he would be invited to anything else, whether there's some worry about the repercussions of what Giuliani has said. This does, you know, have some longevity just within Republican circles.

BEN FERGUSON, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: It depends on who's reporting on it. I mean, I don't think this is a big issue to any of the candidates because the candidates --

WHITFIELD: Why not? What do you mean?

FERGUSON: They didn't say it, and they did not endorse it, and they did not advocate for it. I mean, Rudy Giuliani is a guy that is not running for office. Rudy Giuliani is a guy who's been very open and upset with President Obama on his foreign policy stance on ISIS. He's a guy that went through 9/11, saw it up close and personal, feels the foreign policy of this president is one that's putting American lives or will put other people at risk that he saw.

So I think he's entitled to his opinion, but no one else running for president on the Republican side has come anywhere close to saying anything like this. So I don't think this is really that big of a deal at all. Giuliani wants to stand by it, that's his choice. If I'm a candidate right now, I'm not spending much time worried about Giuliani and this one comment that he made because I'm not going to endorse it or advocate for it. I'm my own man, my own candidate, and I'm going to look at much bigger issues than this.

WHITFIELD: Ron, is it that simple? So no ripple effect?

FERGUSON: I think that if you're a candidate you spend 12 seconds on this, literally 12 seconds. What is my official response? And that's it.

WHITFIELD: All right, Ron Brownstein?

RON BROWNSTEIN, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Yes, the point -- no, I think the point is that -- I agree, you don't have -- everybody does not have to respond to something that Rudy Giuliani said. But what the former mayor said is reflective of a current feeling in a portion of the Republican base that the candidates probably will have to respond to before it is over. I think back to 2008 --

FERGUSON: Very small.

BROWNSTEIN: -- where John McCain put down a speaker at an event who kind of questioned Obama's patriotism. This is -- there is a strain in the Republican base that feels this way, that feels that Obama, you know, questions his loyalty, but also more fundamentally sees him as a symbol of a changing America that portions of the Republican base are uncomfortable with.

So whether or not you agree with Giuliani or whether or not you respond to Giuliani, this kind of sentiment, I think, is something people have to respond to sooner or later. And I think Scott Walker's response, in contrast to say, Rand Paul, did not show kind of a readiness to do that.

WHITFIELD: Yes. You know, you heard from former senior adviser David Axelrod who made the same kind of comment saying there's been a common thread. And he listed a number of incidents from the, you know, "You lie," you know, moment, on to this. And so, you know, Ben, it seems as though the Republican Party or some leadership has to make some kind of comments so there is not this association, because if you look at the string of events that kind of, you know, assessment is being made that there is an underlying problem. There's a simmering problem.

FERGUSON: I think --

WHITFIELD: And perhaps Giuliani's most latest comments helps bring that to the surface.

FERGUSON: It brings it out -- if you care about this comment, you're not going to vote for Republican candidate anyways. Within the Republican field this is going to be a nonissue. Every party has their extreme comments on the left or on the right the same way that you had Democrats saying that the Republicans were in favor of torturing people and in favor of giving guns to kids to commit school shootings, which is extreme comments. And you can't always come out and respond to every extreme comment that someone makes.

Giuliani is a guy that's not going away. If I'm a candidate, I'm going to stand on stage with him at an event six months from now, whereas I would probably run away from Donald Trump or Sarah Palin because they are completely different leagues. Giuliani is way more accomplished. And no one is perfect in what they say in front of a camera. Giuliani maybe wished he would have said differently, but this is a very small sector of the Republican Party on the extreme that agree with this statement.

WHITFIELD: So Dana, how much a distraction is this for the party leading into 2016?

MILBANK: Well, that remains to be seen, but it's not, you know, it's not as if candidates themselves aren't seeking the way. And you have Bobby Jindal going out of the way to release a statement saying I'm not going to go condemn Giuliani and the gist of what he said is correct. So they actually are embracing it to some extent as opposed to just being indifferent towards it.

So, you know, the larger question is not the one remark that Giuliani made, but is -- there's been for the last seven years or so a whole undercurrent in the Republican Party of questioning this president's patriotism, you know, his American-ness, and seeking to make him something other than the rest of us, and this is part and parcel to that. Will that continue in the primaries? You can be sure it's going to from some segments of the Republican candidates.

WHITFIELD: And so, Ben, given that, do you think there will be some sort of edict, some sort of guidance within the party to say you got to stop using language like this because, you know, it's not looking good?

FERGUSON: Look, I don't think they will come up with any of that because most of the candidates aren't going to go close to these comments because, one, they are not running against Barack Obama. They are going to be running against probably Hillary Clinton. This will be a non-issue when it comes closer to the election. And Giuliani is not --

WHITFIELD: Well, no, but I think the question is --

FERGUSON: I don't think this --

WHITFIELD: There's already been reference to that kind of language, whether he's a birther, he's not one of us --

FERGUSON: OK, but you're talking about Donald Trump. You're not talking about Chris Christie. You're not talking about Jeb Bush.

WHITFIELD: We're talking about people who are Republicans, right, who have used this kind of language.

FERGUSON: Let's look at the "I don't want the president to succeed in his policies." I've said that 1,000 times. Why? Because I disagree with the policies.

WHITFIELD: But it wasn't his foreign policies --

FERGUSON: But that does not mean I'm being un-American. You get my point? That doesn't mean I don't think he's un-American or he doesn't love America. I think his worldview is drastically different than the GOP and they are going to run on that, yes, especially foreign policy right now.

WHITFIELD: Stephen?

FERGUSON: And that's -- COLLINSON: Yes, I think where the problem comes here is the

Republican Party has tried very hard to make sure its candidates don't come out with this kind of inflammatory rhetoric to give the media something to talk about, which is not the policies of the Republican Party. In the postmortem of the last presidential election they decided we've got to appeal to the mainstream.

So every time anyone is talking about Rudy Giuliani making some remarks about the president, they are not talking about questions about the president's policies to tackle ISIS. They are not talking about the middle class people that still don't have jobs after the recession. So that's where it's a distraction, and that's where these kinds of remarks can be damaging to the Republican Party.

WHITFIELD: And Ron?

BROWNSTEIN: Well, look, Republicans, as everybody said, Republicans want to talk about President Obama's results, not his motivations. That's a better ground for them to stand on and debate.

The problem, I think, is, as I said, this is emblematic of kind of a broader sense in the party that does limit -- puts constraints and pressures on the Republican candidates. I mean, there's a broad sense in the party that a level of opposition to Obama that makes it very difficult to kind of rationally assess what he has and has not accomplished. And I think it constrains candidates on things like immigration, education. They are being pushed towards kind of a monolithic opposition to everything he's done which may or may not be a good strategy for the general election whoever gets through the primary.

WHITFIELD: All right, Ron, Ben, Stephen, and Dana, thanks to all of you. Appreciate it.

FERGUSON: Thank you.

WHITFIELD: All right, still ahead, after a deadly shooting, police say a teenager bragged about it to his friends. But there are many more layers to this story. Our Ana Cabrera will show us next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WHITFIELD: Surprising details keep emerging as police investigate last week's Las Vegas so-called road rage shooting. Investigators now say the alleged shooter bragged about the shooting to friends. But as CNN's Ana Cabrera reports, and perhaps the most surprising twist of all, the suspect and the victim lived just a block away and knew each other.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

ROBERT MEYER, TAMMY MEYER'S HUSBAND: We know this boy. I couldn't tell you this before.

ANA CABRERA, CNN CORRESPONDENT: A surprising twist in a weeklong road rage murder mystery. The prime suspect apparently knew the victim. MEYER: She fed him. She gave him money.

CABRERA: Las Vegas police say 44-year-old Tammy Meyer was shot and killed outside her home by a teenager who lived just one block away.

MEYER: There's the animal, a block away. Are you happy!

CABRERA: Bursting with pain and grief, Robert Meyer was there as police made the arrest Thursday afternoon. Adding to his heartbreak, Meyer says his wife knew her alleged shooter and had tried the 19- year-old accused of taking her life.

MEYER: My wife spent countless hours at the park consoling this boy. And he's probably watching this right now, and I know he's got to feel bad because she was really good to him.

CABRERA: From a smiling high-schooler to a young man flaunting drugs and money on social media, Erich Nowsch is now behind bars, charged with murder and attempted murder. According to the arrest report, detectives say Nowsch confided in two friends that he was involved in the shooting and even showed them the weapon, a .45 caliber handgun. The deadly shooting happened shortly after an apparent road rage incident a week earlier when Tammy Meyer was headed back from a driving lesson with her daughter.

Police say Meyer came home, dropped off her daughter, and picked up her 22-year-old son who was armed. Police believe they left seeking to confront a reckless driver. But Meyer husband argues his wife was afraid and fled the house, trying to hide the car from her known assailant. Instead, she came upon the driver and shots were fired.

JAIRO JIMENEZ, NEIGHBOR: It's kind of scary, you know, because that thing can happen to anyone.

CABRERA: It hits close to home, right?

JIMENEZ: Exactly. I mean, it was, like, you know, three houses down, just right here, you know?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The suspect involved in the killing of Mrs. Meyer is in custody and off the streets of Las Vegas.

CABRERA: Police are still looking for one other person who may have been involved but say it was Nowsch who fired the fatal shot. As the investigation continues, Meyer family mourns and neighbors are left shaken.

JIMENEZ: I never thought in my life something like that can happen here.

CABRERA: Wondering why and how such a senseless crime could occur so close to home.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

CABRERA: In the arrest report, Nowsch apparently told his friends that he was a passenger in the car during the shooting, so presumably the other person police are still looking for is the driver. But, again, they believe Nowsch fired the fatal shots. Nowsch has his first court appearance on Monday. Fred?

WHITFIELD: All right, thank you so much, Ana Cabrera.

And we'll have much more in Newsroom right after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WHITFIELD: Now a story about police video and trying to cover up a violent arrest. A Missouri man was kicked and Tased during a traffic stop. Only some of it was caught on police dash cams. That's because midway through the arrest one of the officers turned off the camera. CNN's Will Ripley has more.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Stop! I can't move!

RIPLEY: Dash-cam videos shows police in Missouri kicking and Tasing a man during this traffic stop until one of the cop decides it's time to stop recording.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Everybody hold up. If you guys are worried about cameras, just wait.

RIPLEY: The video ends. Drug and weapons charges against the suspect later dropped. The decorated St. Louis metropolitan police officer who stopped the video violated department policy but is still on the force.

ANDREW CELLI, FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS ATTORNEY: They're going to be subject to scrutiny. That's part of the job.

RIPLEY: Attorney Andrew Celli says distrust of police is leading many citizens to take their own videos of police activity. He says it's perfectly legal as long as you don't interfere. That does not stop this police officer in Oregon from demanding to check Carrie Medina's phone as she records an apparent arrest.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes. It's not a choice.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It's not a choice?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's not a choice.

CELLI: It's absolutely a choice. The police do not have the right randomly to take people's cellphones away.

RIPLEY: It's about to happen anyway.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I don't want to show you, but --

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Thank you. RIPLEY: This federal lawsuit claims Medina's rights were violated and

she suffered physical and psychological injuries when police seized her phone, twisted her arm, and detained her two years ago. The city of Gresham turned down CNN's interview request but did send a statement claiming the chief reminded officers videotaping by the public is part of police work today.

These days anyone with a smart phone can take video and even stream it online. A growing number of people are turning phones on police when things get ugly.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Get your phone out.

RIPLEY: This video taken by a 14-year-old in the backseat is evidence in an Indiana family's excessive force lawsuit. A seat belt violation last fall led to this.

(SCREAMING)

RIPLEY: All unfolding with children in the backseat.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Why?

RIPLEY: This cellphone video led to a $1.5 million settlement for Marlene Pinnock, beaten by the side of a highway last summer by a California highway patrol officer. He resigned.

MARLENE PINNOCK, WON SUIT AGAINST CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL: Thank you for the footage, for the video.

RIPLEY: Pinnock survived. Eric Garner did not. Video shows the unarmed man being placed in a chokehold by a New York City police officers. A grand jury decided not to indict the officer for Garner's death. But videos like this are proving to be powerful tools for citizens capturing alleged bad behavior by the police.

Will Ripley, CNN, New York.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

WHITFIELD: All right, when we come back, we ask legal experts to weigh in on such police recordings.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WHITFIELD: All right, from the Rodney King arrest years ago in Los Angeles to last year's death of Eric Garner in New York, police are finding themselves being recorded by citizens, especially when it appears the officers may be using excessive force. So it's your right to record, but some officers have been snatching people's phones in the process. You saw the piece earlier before the break.

Let's bring in our legal panel, criminal defense attorney Darren Kavinoky, and HLN legal analyst Joey Jackson. Good to see both of you.

JOEY JACKSON, HLN LEGAL ANALYST: Good to see you, Fred.

WHITFIELD: All right, Joey, to you first. So if it's not unlawful for anyone to record in public places, then why is it so many police officers feel they have the right to take your phone and camera?

JACKSON: It's a very good question and one best directed towards the respective commissioners who govern the police. Now, certainly, Fredricka, you have a First Amendment right in order to make recordings and be out there and understand that, look, I think it could be a dual benefit. It certainly protects police from any false claims and it certainly protects citizens from any claims that are actually factual.

And so I think there just needs to be a better understanding between the dynamics. We are in an age of technology. And based on technology, people have smart phones and they record. Imagine a world in which there was no recordings or, because look at the piece you gave us before the break. Amazing.

WHITFIELD: Yes.

JACKSON: What cell phones have been able to capture.

And finally, Michael Brown, imagine all of the answers that would have been, you know, satisfied in the event there was a recording to otherwise indicate exactly what happened on that fateful day.

WHITFIELD: So then, Darren, you put yourself in that situation where we saw in Will Ripley's piece, and you've got a woman is recording what she sees, and a police officer says I need your phone. She says no --

DARREN KAVINOKY, ATTORNEY, THE KAVINOKY LAW FIRM: Yes, give me the phone.

WHITFIELD: He ends of taking it anyway, yes. I think in so many circumstances, a citizen feels like I have to probably give up my phone, even if it turns out, First Amendment right, like you said, Joey, I have to give up the phone because next thing you know the police officers says I'm defying his or her order. I am resisting, you know, their commands. So what do you do in a situation like that?

KAVINOKY: Right. Well, your point is excellent. And of course, law enforcement officer know this and they routinely leverage that kind of power. I think it's important for viewers to the extent that they want to capture this video, they need to be aware of the laws in their own jurisdiction.

There are some states that outlaw this kind of filming, but they are antiquated laws that are based on old notions of wiretapping and eavesdropping and they were promulgated before the ubiquity of the smartphone. So they are routinely challenged.

JACKSON: They routinely prevail.

KAVINOKY: And routinely upheld, yes, of course. JACKSON: Yes.

KAVINOKY: I think it's important, though, that law enforcement agencies get with the times and stop resisting any kind of efforts of citizens to be able to capture this video. It makes me sit back and wonder, well, what the hell are you covering up? It's always the cover-up that's worse than the crime. And to the extent that law enforcement needs to recapture public trust, and they do, then there needs to be transparency and that means willingness to be recorded as long as it's not interfering with official duties.

WHITFIELD: And it's certainly bad, you know, Darren and Joey, when you talk about, you know, a private citizen recording something and their phone is seized. But I think it's worse when you have a dash cam video and it's there for that very purpose of recording to make sure that everything was done according to, you know, within rule and law. But then a police officer asked that that recording device be turned off? I mean, Joey, if that's a problem that everyone has to deal with too, why should anyone in any jurisdiction believe by having a body camera, an officer having a body camera, that they will not control the message there too?

JACKSON: It's a very good point, Fredricka. And, you know, interestingly enough, studies have found that what goes down as a result of having these body cams, complaints go down because police are on their best behavior. Brutality instances go down because police are on the best behavior. And safety goes up because citizens certainly are on their best behavior when they are put on notice. Hey by the way, whatever you say, I'm recording it right here. And so I think there's really a dual benefit, police recording citizens and citizens having a right to record police.

At the end of the day, though, it's about having a better understanding, community-police relations, communities need police, police certainly need communities. And when we bridge the gap, we'll go a long way to future benefits.

WHITFIELD: Darren?

KAVINOKY: Well, there's one --

WHITFIELD: It looks like you're at the edge of your seat.

JACKSON: Yes, thanks, Fred. Human beings are notoriously lousy witnesses. And when you have the objectivity of a camera it eliminates this notion. Even as a criminal defense lawyer, if my client's activities have been captured on tape, it allows me to have a very frank conversation with the client, like, hey, are we really going to trial? Look what the prosecution has. And so it really is a matter of what's good for the goose is good for the gander. It's good all the way around.

And by the way, this is the trend. There is no putting that toothpaste back in the tube. Cameras are here. There need to be appropriate policies to deal with it. And, frankly, everybody, as Joey pointed out, is better off because of them. WHITFIELD: All right, Darren, Joey, thank you both, gentlemen.

Always good to see you, appreciate it.

JACKSON: Technology, the wave of the future, Fredricka. See you soon.

(LAUGHTER)

WHITFIELD: And the future is here and it is now.

KAVINOKY: It is happening.

WHITFIELD: Right now. Thanks so much, guys.

JACKSON: Thank you.

KAVINOKY: Thanks.

WHITFIELD: And we'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WHITFIELD: Giving sight to the blind is just another way smart phones are helping people live fuller lives. Here's CNN's Samuel Burke.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

NEFERTITI MATOS, BLIND USER, BE MY EYES: Please identify some of the items in this vending machine.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I see chips.

SAMUEL BURKE, CNN BUSINESS CORRESPONDENT: Nefertiti Matos is blind. And she's using "Be My Eyes," a free iPhone app that connects her to sighted volunteers via a video call.

MATOS: The first time I used it was in the office. I just went to this vending machine with no braille symbols, no tactile anything. And with Be My Eyes I was able to identify there's a lot of junk food in there. But knowing I now could go up there and purchase something, it's very freeing.

BURKE: When you're not using the app, when you have to ask somebody out in the street, is that something that's tiresome for the visually impaired?

MATOS: It can be. It also makes me feel like I leave an impression of dependency. And so I feel like technology of this kind really furthers us along in giving the proper impression, which is that we can do anything, really, with the right tools and training.

BURKE: Be My Eyes empower the blind users as well as volunteers like Melissa Gould.

The first time you got a blind person calling, what was that moment like? MELISSA GOULD, VOLUNTEER, BE MY EYES: It was sort of surreal. I just

answered the call, and it was a woman holding her phone at her problem, which was on the floor. She had dropped her necklace, and I just kept saying, OK, go a little right, and then I could see her hand, and she took it. And it was a beautiful moment. I felt happy that I could help someone. What I really feel about this is that it's a good deed waiting to happen.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Open Be My Eyes.

BURKE: Blind users say the only change the app really needs is more sighted volunteers.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I've been known to wait up to about five minute, and by that time, I'm, like, OK.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Could you please tell me what train station this is.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's 23 Street Station.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Perfect. Thank you very much.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

WHITFIELD: Wow. Extraordinary.