Return to Transcripts main page

LEGAL VIEW WITH ASHLEIGH BANFIELD

City And State Officials Charged Over Flint Water Crisis; Clinton And Trump Win Big In New York; Case Against Gun Makers Set For April 2018; Man Fights Parkinson's With Music And Magic; Transgender Student Wins Federal Case; North Carolina Governor Says Federal Ruling On Transgendered Student's Case Sets "Bad Precedent." Aired 12:30-1p ET

Aired April 20, 2016 - 12:30   ET

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


(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:30:28] ASHLEIGH BANFIELD, CNN ANCHOR: We're about 20 minutes away from a significant announcement in the Flint water crisis investigation.

A Michigan Attorney General, Bill Schuette along with his team are expected to announce the first criminal charges in this case.

It's supposed to happen at about 1:00 p.m. eastern time. We're going to bring it to you live just as soon as that happens in a half hour.

You might remember that two years ago, that state, Michigan decided to save some money by switching Flint's water supply from Lake Huron which was pretty clean to the Flint river which is exhaustedly filthy.

And soon after the switch, the water started to look and taste awful.

Jean Casarez joining me now along with CNN Legal Analyst and Defense Attorney Danny Cevallos.

So Jean we're learning about some of these charges that are being levied against these people. It's always amazing when you hear about public officials being charged because you always assume they have a degree of immunity but ...

JEAN CASAREZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, with crimes, I mean these are criminal charges, potentially prison time. And, you know, in the civil complaints because there been class action civil complaints. And there been and so many allegations of particular people, state officials, local officials that they -- in the civil complaints said help to contribute to the Flint water and haven't be used for people of Flint Michigan.

We'll three people have been charged. We want to show you exactly who they are and what they're charged with. First of all Mike Glasgow, he is the one city official, the city of Flint.

He in fact at the time was the administrator, utility administrator for the city of Flint. He's been charged of two counts. Tampering with evidence and as a public official, willful neglect of duty.\ Now the two state officials, both with the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality. That is the offices inside the state government that at least in the civil complaints they said that the dirty deeds were done.

First of all, Stephen Busch, Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, six counts, misconducts in office, tampering with evidence, Violation of the Safe Water Drinking Act.

And Mike Prysby, an engineer with the state also six charges, misconduct, tampering with evidence and Violation of the Safe Drinking Water Act.

Now in the civil suit, I've got to tell you, they allege, Ashleigh, that Stephen Busch actually failed to -- and made the decision to not put that anti-corrosive agent into the water.

BANFIELD: Yeah.

CASAREZ: And CNN reporting also said that he even testified and told the EPA that he did that.

Now another defendant says he was told to change some of the facts and figures that he was putting in the report.

BANFIELD: To that point, that in fact is exactly what I wanted to get to. And Danny I'm wondering if this will have a huge baring on the defense of Mike Glasgow, the first person that Jean just listed of, because he was then a supervisor at the Flint Water Plant, you know, doing all the water testing.

And he told CNN just in an interview in March that he was actually given instructions by the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality. And guess that the two people he said were.

Stephen Busch and Mike Prysby, I hope I'm pronouncing that right. He was told according to him, he said, he was told to alter the water quality reports and remove the highest lead levels. He told that to CNN, I can only imagine that is going to show up in court if this ever goes to court. But ultimately, what can these men, these three men face for the various charges they're looking at?

DANNY CEVALLOS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Take a step back. When you look at Glasgow, he's clearly charged differently than the other two defendants. He is charged with the tampering with evidence and the public officer, willful neglect of duty. That's a misdemeanor.

Higher up on that level is the misconduct in the office charge which is a peculiar charge in Michigan. But essentially, you criminalize public official actions in three ways by nonfeasance doing nothing, misfeasance doing something stupidly and malfeasance, doing something wrongful.

And here that lowest level is what they're charging Mike Glasgow with. The other two are charged with the felony, they're more serious.

BANFIELD: That's the highest one.

CEVALLOS: Yes, that's up to four years and also, the tampering with evidence and misconduct in office, is up to five years.

BANFIELD: What about the Violation of the Safe Drinking Water Act, is that serious?

CEVALLOS: You know, those are charged as misdemeanors. So any crime that's serious but in the grand spectrum of all of these other felonies, it's lesser on the spectrum of serious crimes, but it just looking at the charges alone.

It would appear that Mike Glasgow is being treated very differently than the other two defendants which probably goes in no small part to the facts that you have talked about today.

BANFIELD: Saying that those guys told me to do. And I can only imagine they will do a lot of this point at one another ...

CEVALLOS: Absolutely.

BANFIELD: ... in the case, again, if it gets to any kind of courtroom.

[12:35:02] Thank you to the two of you. Appreciate it. Danny Cevallos, Jean Casarez, thank you for that.

We're going to bring you the news conference when it happens and we expect about 30 -- 25 minutes from now, top of the hour. So make sure you stay tuned for that.

Coming up next, that tragic shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School, front and center on the campaign trail last night and many days before.

But last night, an extraordinarily emotional moment for Hillary Clinton as victims families pursue a lawsuit against gun manufacturers.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BANFIELD: Big wins last night in New York for Donald Trump and for Hillary Clinton with both candidates gaining a lot of momentum as front runners of their parties.

[12:40:02] The numbers alone are proving that their messages are resonating with voters.

Wrapping up the New York victory speech last night, you may have noticed this really poignant moment where Secretary Clinton introduced a very special guest in the crowd. And all of the sudden, it was full emotion.

Have a look.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) HILLARY CLINTON, (D) PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: There is a remarkable young woman here tonight. Her name is Erica, Erica Smigielski. She lives the truth of what I've been saying everyday. Erica's mother, Dawn, was the principal of Sandy Hook Elementary School. And she died trying to protect her children, her students.

Erica was devastated as any family member is. And she couldn't imagine life without her mom. But then, she got thinking. She got back up. She'd never been involved in politics before. But she has made it her mission to advocate for common sense gun safety reform.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: After December 14th, 2012, Secretary Hillary Clinton says, that Erica turned her sorrow into a strategy and her mourning into a movement. It's also true for the families of the five other adults. And the 20 children who were murdered that day, shot to death at their school with the Bushmaster A.R. 15.

By the time it was all said and done and the shooting stopped, that shooter had unloaded 154 rounds from the semiautomatic rifle.

The principal, Erica's mother, Dawn Hochsprung was in a meeting but had stepped out into the danger when that shooting began to find out what was happening. She was at the peak of her career. And the families cannot get their loved ones back but they are still seeking justice in the lawsuit they brought against the gun manufacturers, the people who built the A.R. 15.

And the Connecticut judge has ruled just yesterday that a lawsuit on their behalf can in fact move forward right into the discovery process. Even a trial date has been set, April 3rd. 2018, two years from now. This is huge, first time that we've had a case like this go into discovery.

Jessica Schneider joins me live now, along with CNN Legal Analyst Paul Callan, a criminal defense attorney and former prosecutor.

Jessica, I know you're covering the story. I think a lot of people would wonder, why this case? Why is it able to get pass that very strong federal protection, the protection of lawful commerce in arms act which effectively has been covered for these gun manufacturers to say, "You can't sue us, for what the guns do, the guns did it, not us.'

JESSICA SCHNEIDER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Right, very strong protection for the gun manufacturers.

But the parents are trying to get around this. They're saying that the gun manufacturers should be held accountable for what they're calling in strong words unethical, oppressive, and immoral marketing tactics.

They say that the gun manufacturers have specifically targeted young men who play video games like "Call of Duty" and they've also targeted civilians who they say are just not fit to be operating these military style rifles and firearms. In particular, the lawsuit itself puts a very fine point on it. If we can take a look at a full screen, it says "The Bushmaster defendants' militaristic marketing it reinforces the images of the A.R. 15 as a combat weapon used for the purposes of waging war and killing human beings." It continues on "This marketing tactic dove tails with the widespread popularity of realistic and addictive first person shooter games most notably of course "Call of Duty" that prominently feature A.R. 15s and rewards players for head shots and kill streaks."

So they're going at it saying that this was negligent marketing and also that it violates a Connecticut statute about unfair trade practices.

BANFIELD: Well, I think that the first question I would have out of that is, what are the chances that to some people that sounds like one hell of reach, you know, just to go after the marketing, Paul Callan. But this judge has a reason for doing what she did.

PAUL CALLAN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Yeah, this is a really novel theory. And frankly if it were sustained it could shutdown the gun industry. There's very aggressive marketing done with virtually every kind of weapon, some of it on television and some of them in supporting magazines.

And this ruling by the way by Judge Barbara Bellis, who by the way, highly respected judge in Connecticut. appointed to the court in 2003, and just considered to be a smart judge.

I think is correct under Connecticut procedure but in the long run it's not going to mean a lot, and I'll tell you why. This motion just said you have the right to forward with the case at this point. It was that the court has jurisdiction, has the right to hear the case. But remember there's a federal immunity statute that says, if a gun manufacturer is being used because a gun was used in a crime, they get immunity.

[12:45:15] And yeah, in other words, as long as the gun wasn't defective, this wasn't a defective gun. It did what it was supposed to do.

You can't sue the gun manufacturer. That's step two. There'll be another motion made, maybe before any discovery is completed to dismiss the grounds of the federal immunity statute and the gun manufacturers may very well win on that. We'll have to wait and see.

BANFIELD: Really fascinating. And we'll definitely have to follow and see what's next.

Jessica welcome to the CNN team ...

BANFIELD: ... it's nice to have you and Paul Callan as always, thank you.

Coming up next, a big win in federal court for a transgender high school student in Virginia, given the right to use the restroom of the choice that that student has made, so what does that mean for those so-called bathroom bills that have been passing in other states?

We're going to sort it all out for you. And tell you what it means next.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SANJAY GUPTA, CNN CHIEF MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: Richard Horn is quite the Renaissance man, musician, woodworker, magician.

RICHARD HORN, PERFORMER: I can literally turn them into 100 bills.

GUPTA: A neuroscientist by trade, he's also a professor emeritus of physiology at Thomas Jefferson University.

HORN: I am a passionate man in many ways.

GUPTA: When Richard was diagnosed with Parkinson's disease in 2010, he thought he would have to give up what he loves.

HORN: It was devastating because I saw all the beauty and magic and music being taken away from me.

GUPTA: Parkinson's disease is a progressive motor system disorder that can cause a gradual loss of movement. Symptoms are pretty mild at first. Sometimes just a hand tremor, but eventually balance and coordination can also start to deteriorate. Treatments can slow the progression but, as things stand now, there is no cure.

Richard refuses to let the disease stop him.

The 70-year-old still plays piano several times a week.

HORN: It improves my coordination pretty dramatically.

Everybody gets four cards.

GUPTA: And performs magic. He says his shows have actually gotten better.

HORN: It changed my focus. To people, poetry and artistry are things that drive magic. Not fast hands.

GUPTA: He's also encouraging others not to give up, just like him.

HORN: For the moment I'm motivated to keep going. It will get harder, but it isn't necessarily going to stop me.

GUPTA: Dr. Sanjay Gupta, CNN reporting.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:52:10] BANFIELD: A transgender student in Virginia says that he is feeling vindicated today after winning a federal lawsuit. And it's a lawsuit that allows him to use the boys restroom at his high school. That's Gavin Grimm on the right and he's told CNN that he thinks that discrimination against the transgender community comes from people who get bad information.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GAVIN GRIM, SUED TO USE BOYS RESTROOM: When you consider certain, you know, I guess arguments or what have you, it doesn't really stand up to scrutiny. But I think a lot of it is just misinformation and people haven't had a chance to really deal with transgender people in meaningful way.

There were people, we're not -- what, you know, just weird alien thing or concept. We're just sort of people that are trying to live their life and be their self.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BANFIELD: CNN Legal Analyst Danny Cevallos is back with me now to sort of walkthrough the implications of this.

This is the federal case, it involves title nine. And federal cases tend to affects other states and we know there are other states that passed transgender bathroom bills. So what happens to those states now?

CEVALLOS: Well now you have an interpretation of federal law saying that transgender students have to be accommodated.

Here's how this case went down. The Department of Education, regulations implementing title nine and they say that there shall be separate facilities and it uses words like male, female, and sex.

Now, the reality is, is that they wrote a letter the office of civil right then wrote a letter saying, "Hey, when we said sex and male and female, we also meant that transgender students should be recognized." And that's what this case boils down to because if that basis of sex and male and female if that in the regulation is unambiguous, then the office of civil right, it's not allowed to write opposing regulations or closing letters interpreting its own regulations.

But if on the other hand it's ambiguous, then it can interpret those regulations. So this comes down to whether the words male, female and sex are ambiguous or unambiguous. And the court here, the appellate court here said, "They were." It was not provided for in the regulations.

Therefore, the office of civil rights was allowed to interpret it and was allowed to give transgender that empowerment.

BANFIELD: So if you are said the North Carolina governor at this point looking at what happened in Virginia, do you say, "Well, OK, if I have to abide by this, it only applies to students. It doesn't apply to the grown-ups. And I will leave my bill in place," or can you have a bill that separates by age? CEVALLOS: That's correct. I mean federal government. The federal jurisdiction is limited by nature. It's limited to that which is in the constitution, empowers that flow from the constitution.

The idea behind this Republican form of government is that the states reserve the power to regulate in many different areas. In fact, the default is that the state should be allowed to regulate in most other areas.

[12:55:05] So a governor could take the view that, "hey, this is a limited ruling. And I'm still empowered. My legislature, my state legislature is still empowered to govern as do all of the other issues that are left to the states, police power which means the health, the safety, the morals, the general welfare of its state constituents.

BANFIELD: Yeah, it's still very, very complicated. But -- I mean safe to say, victory in Virginia and we will see the effects elsewhere.

Danny Cevallos, thank you very much. Appreciate it.

Still waiting as I mentioned before for that live announcement from the Michigan attorney general about the criminal charges in the Flint water crisis. You can see the live mics are being set up in Flint at this time. The press is assembled.

And this has been long awaited for a lot of people who are sick in Flint and those who feel they could still get sick because this crisis isn't over yet.

The news conference expected to start at 1:00 p.m. eastern right here at the top of the hour.

My colleague, Wolf Blitzer, has that right after this quick break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)