Return to Transcripts main page

LEGAL VIEW WITH ASHLEIGH BANFIELD

Deep-Pocket Donors Not Rushing To Help Trump; Clinton Has Large Fundraising Advantage Over Trump; Search Warrant Reveals Prince's Doctor; DEA Searches Prince's Paisley Park Home; Federal Charges For SC Cop Who Shot Walter Scott. Aired 12:30-1p ET

Aired May 11, 2016 - 12:30   ET

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


[12:30:02] ASHLEIGH BANFIELD, CNN HOST: OK, so Mac that brings me to you and to the letter that you wrote openly to Republicans probably some of them in that rolodex.

I want to read for our viewers if they didn't have a chance to read some of your pros because it's strong stuff Mack. Let me start with this. "Trump is a boar, a bully, a carnival barker and an embarrassment. Politically, by intent or instinct, he is a neo- fascist, a navitist, an ultranationalist, a racist, a misogynist, an anti-intellectual, a demagogue and a palingenetic authoritarian to whom clings the odor of the political violence he encourages."

Now, here's where it gets good. "He is our responsibility. We spawned Donald Trump, and now we must stop him. We must deny him the presidency by not voting in the presidential election at all or voting for Hillary Clinton if conscience permits."

Mac, tell me how you really feel. Are you going to work hard to make sure that those donors don't come around to Donald Trump?

MAC STIPANOVICH, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST & LOBBYIST: Well, I think Donald Trump was purposely get money from some Republican parties. But based on ringing on the bell - most of the men and women we're talking about are thoughtful conservatives who care about policies.

Donald Trump is an ignorant name-calling bully. If he was your fifth grade classmate, you have to fight at least once a week and your daddy would buy your ice cream for doing it. Do with your neighbors, you plan ahead. Why would you give him that?

BANFIELD: Well, let me ask you this. It's already going to be difficult for these donors to forge the kind of unity that Paul Ryan is up against with his members right now. Donors have really deep memories and of course, money talks a lot of times. It's not so much the heart.

So if it's going to be difficult for those donors. I have to ask you the question you're asking of them and the rest of the Republicans that you sent this letter to. I'm going to repeat it. It says "We must deny in the presidency by not voting in the election or voting Hillary Clinton, if conscience permits."

Mac Stipanovich, are you going to vote for Hillary Clinton? Does your conscience permit?

STIPANOVICH: Does not. I will not vote for Hillary Clinton.

(OFF-MIC)

STIPANOVICH: ... were both on the ballot, he would not vote for either one of them. Pilot in here were both on the ballot and I'm not voting for him.

BANFIELD: Last question for you and it's this. The mechanics that, you know, Hillary Clinton and the Clinton machine have honed so perfectly over, you know, 30 plus years. It's in place and it goes deep all throughout the country, the mechanics of raising money, the apparatus. He's kind of brand new at it and he's got a lot of novices at it. But we had seen him brand new with novices before and he absolutely cleaned up. Do you think he can pull off the same kind of feat with money-raising that he just did with all these last contest?

STIPANOVICH: Well, I don't know. If we're going to find out pretty quickly, I think then, you know, that was talking about Speaker Ryan earlier. Clearly, Speaker Ryan is trying to housebreak Donald Trump. Either that or slow walk him to the exit. We'll see how Trump responds to pressure (inaudible) he's in the NFL now.

BANFIELD: Housebreaking Donald Trump. That is going to be someone's book title right there.

Mac Stipanovich, good to have you. Thank you. And MJ Lee, as always thank you as well for your terrific reporting all through this political season.

Turning now to another story we've been following and it is a sad one. It is the death of the musician prince. As feds go back to his estate, yet again, looking for further clues as to what happened to him. And all of this as news emerges that there was another doctor. A doctor who prescribed Prince drugs shortly before his death and saw him the day before his death.

[12:34:07] The mystery unravels. Next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BANFIELD: A search warrant is providing some brand new intrigue into the story of Prince, more specifically, his death.

That warrant reveals that there was a doctor, a doctor named Michael Schulenberg who was actually at Prince's home and there to deliver some test results to him.

Sadly, it was on the day that his body was found. That same doctor actually examined Prince as well, not just once, two times all in the last month before he died and he told investigators that he had prescribed medication to Prince.

So this all happens at the same time the DEA showed up again at Prince's Paisley Park Home. There are the cars. There is the gate. This is becoming a familiar scene. More investigation, more searching, they need more clues.

CNN's Sara Sidner is live outside of that home and she's getting some of those clues. So tell me more about this doctor and then this new warrant and this new search at Prince's home.

SARA SIDNER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: So the search of Prince's home is a separate thing to the search warrant that was served on the hospital where the Dr. Schulenberg worked.

Now, we're told by the hospital because we tried to get in touch with them that he no longer works at that hospital. But he was certainly working there during the time where he met Prince and said that he performed some tests on Prince. And you know that he showed up here the day that Prince died with the results of those tests.

He had met with Prince on the 7th of April, he told investigator, and the 20th of April. The 20th being the day before Prince died.

[12:40:05] So we showed up here that next day to hand over those test results according the paperwork that has been filed in court. And, of course, Prince's body was found dead in the elevator.

He also talked about the fact that he had served prescription so the Prince got a prescription from him for medication and that that prescription was filled at a local Walgreens sometime before Prince died.

So there's a lot of small details that are coming together here. We did check his medical license to see what standing he was in. He's got a perfectly good standing there. And no complaints against him, he has no criminal history. Simply, he became Prince's doctor at some point.

Now, we're trying to find out what the DEA and the sheriff's department was looking for in that house because we do know sources told us in the very beginning of the investigation that there were prescription painkillers found on Prince's body. Ashleigh?

BANFIELD: All right, Sara Sidner reporting for us from Minnesota.

I want to discuss some of these new developments that Sara's reporting with CNN Chief Medical Correspondent Dr. Sanjay Gupta.

You're one of the first people I thought of when I read about this warrant for medical records. We hear about the warrant for the house and that but they went to the hospital to get Prince's medical records from this Dr. Michael Schulenberg.

This is one piece of a puzzle. These records are not going to solve this mystery.

SANJAY GUPTA, CNN CHIEF MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: No, they're not going to solve the mystery. But you want to start to see if that one piece matches other pieces.

So for example, what is in the medical records? Does it match the types of medications that were actually found in the home? Were there medications that also came from other doctors, for example? Could it with be that certain medications that were found in the home were prescribed for someone else who actually may have been a staff member or somebody else in the home that was all -- they were also being used by Prince? That's called diversion. And that's something that happens and that's something the D.A. is going to want to know about.

BANFIELD: We could also find out that Prince actually had some kind of condition for which he was getting legitimate prescriptions and we just don't know how he might have taken them.

GUPTA: Yeah, I think it's a really important point, Ashleigh. You know, these are medications that can have a legitimate use. We overprescribe them in a crazy amount in this country for sure. But that's not to diminish the fact that people do get legitimate use out of these medications.

The problem is that even in the single bottle, let's say you have a month supply which is too much, frankly. But let's say you had a month's supply. If you took too many of those pills, what would otherwise been a legitimate prescription can turn into a fatal prescription.

BANFIELD: A fatal prescription. And that brings me to what you just said. The overprescribing in America, the statistic will rock your world if you haven't already heard it ready, you need to hear this and often 80 percent of the world's opioids are consumed by 5 percent of the world's population that lives right here.

And for that reason, you and Anderson Cooper are holding a very special town hall tonight on CNN live.

GUPTA: It is a crazy statistic. It boggles my mind. I mean, you know, that really speaks volumes about the fact that we have let this epidemic completely manmade epidemic go on for too long. It is causing the number one cause now of preventable death in the United States.

BANFIELD: Number one.

GUPTA: Number one. More than car accidents, OK.

BANFIELD: Unreal.

GUPTA: Accidentally opioid overdoses. It's insane. And it's fixable. I believe it's fixable which a lot of what we're going to be talking about tonight in the town hall.

BANFIELD: So that's the question I've had, I mean every time I hear of another celebrity, because those are the deaths that make the headlines. Plenty of people are dying every day about this stuff. It feel like the tooth paste is out of the tube with that many pills in production and those kinds of companies that can benefit from the money. They're very expensive. There's a lot of money at stake. But you're saying the tooth paste is not out of the tube?

GUPTA: Well, let me put it this way. We, you know, that we - you've been reporting this, I've been reporting in this for years, this issue.

You know, this is not t a brand new issue. And it comes to life when somebody famous, we don't know for certain what happened to Prince, but if this was opioids, people are fascinated, interested, and want to know more about it.

But it feels a little different now, the U.S. government, from a policy standpoint, starting to regulate these opioid manufacturers. But I think the American people are really, really frightened now of this.

They're worried about their kids starting to take opioids, they're worried about themselves. Never had an addictive sort of problem in the past but all of the sudden finding themselves dependent on these opioids. And then the numbers of people who are dying is just, I mean, people know people now who have been affected or died from this. So it seems to have hit a critical mass in some way.

BANFIELD: Well, I'm thrilled, speaking from someone who is so sick and tired of the Groundhog Day reporting of these deaths. This presentable death as you said 9:00 tonight live, you and Anderson together, town hall, I look forward to it.

Thank you, Sanjay, for doing this. Thank you so much. Prescription addiction made in the USA 9:00 eastern, folks.

A white police officer who shot a black man in the back. All of this after a traffic stop. And today, indicted on federal charges in Walter Scott's death.

[12:44:55] I'm going to break down what the federal charges are and get the family's reaction, just ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

BANFIELD: It is this hour's breaking news here on CNN. A federal indictment has been handed down for the South Carolina police officer who shot dead an unarmed man after a traffic stop.

Officer Michael Slager has already been charged with murder locally and the state level. And he was also fired from the North Charleston Police Department too. But these brand charges, they come from the feds. There's a federal grand jury that did this. And it's a civil rights violation, obstruction, as well. The victim, Walter Scott, 50- years-old, started running away when Officer Slager pulled him over last April. Slager shot him five times in the back. It was captured on cell phone camera video.

CNN's Martin Savidge is watching this breaking news today. So take me back to the day and why it has taken this long to hear what we've heard from the federal grand jury?

MARTIN SAVIDGE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: We should point out that these charges in circumstances like this are exceedingly rare against law enforcement. There have been a number of high profile cases where the federal government has not interceded, but this is different. And we'll tell you why. I will warn you. We are about to show you the cell phone video that captured the death of Walter Scott. Again, it's graphic, but it's important because this sets up everything else.

[12:50:15] It was on a Saturday morning. It started as a routine traffic stop and then Walter Scott ran. And there you see the officer who opened fire.

Now, there had been a tussle, but you saw that Walter Scott was able to break away. Michael Slager, allegedly fired eight times, striking Walter Scott five times in the back. It was that video that once it was released, triggered what would be, of course, outrage and the murder charge on state charges.

But now comes this federal indictment that's been handed down and as you pointed out, there is one count of civil rights violations that's basically because law enforcement over excessive use of power that was the use of a weapon in the commission of a crime and then obstruction of justice.

This is brought up because Michael Slager allegedly told investigators initially that Walter Scott was charging at him with his own taser and that he had to shoot to protect himself. That video shows a very different story.

The attorney that represents Walter Scott's family issued a statement. It reads, "This rare federal indictment reconfirms the fact that Walter Scott did not die in vain. His family is pleased that the federal government has taken this almost unprecedented action and hopes this will serve as a turning point in police brutality cases."

Arraignment will take place about 45 minutes or so from now. Ashleigh?

BANFIELD: All right. Martin Savidge, thank you for that.

I want to bring in Joey Jackson and Paul Callan, our legal analysts.

You've read the indictment. I just want to make sure everybody is aware, once again, as Marntin said this is one count of a civil rights violation. Charges are depravation of rights under color of law, it's important to note. Use of unreasonable force, misleading investigators, obstruction of justice, which is the most serious or all together in a package, are they just the ...

JOEY JACKSON, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Well, collectively, they're damning. But of course the willful violation and the willful deprivation of the rights, I mean that's your -- it's a life sentence.

And so therefore, should the feds establish through the videotape, through independent witness testimony, et cetera that what this officer did was a clear violation of the civil right of Michael Scott. And of course you may ask, what's the violation?

Well, he fact is, is that we have a right, all of us, collectively, to be free from the use of unreasonable force. And so that alone carries a life sentence. It's important to mention and Paul shall speak to this, is there is of course the state prosecution that's proceeding and a trial will be coming up in October. So which begs the question ...

PAUL CALLAN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: It's also, of course, the other thing. I think most people when they hear about these civil rights cases, they would think, well, this has to do with race. You know, there's a white police officer and the suspect who was being chased was African- American.

These charges are not based on race. They're based on the deprivation of a constitutional right as Joey was just saying and that's right to be free from unreasonable force being used on you by a police officer.

BANFIELD: The only color issue was color of law. Make no mistake. It's color of law. It's not color of anybody's skin.

CALLAN: You hit right on the head. Is the person using that force has to be acting under color of law.

BANFIELD: So the, I think people would wonder going back to several other police shootings ago, there were these similar investigations by the feds in the Trayvon Martin death, in the Michael Brown death. But the feds did not go ahead with these kinds of charges. What's the difference?

JACKSON: I think it's important to speak to the distinctions between the two. Now, each and every person that dies at the hands of police, you know, there needs to be an investigation and there needs to be justice. And of course, some of it found justified, others have not.

I think in this particular instance where you have a videotape surface that clearly demonstrates that you have someone who is running away from an officer posing no immediate threat whatsoever, you have to question the propriety of the officer's judgment and the legality and illegality of it.

And I think if you look at the video tape in and on itself it cries out for such a charge of a deprivation of a civil right.

In the other type cases, there was not that clear cut type of smoking gun, if you will, like here which demonstrates that, you know what, this was not.

CALLAN: I think we all have to say also that Trayvon Martin didn't involve a police officer using the force. Remember, that was a private security guard. So that's really not.

BANFIELD: And that's not color of law.

CALLAN: It's not under color of law. So civil rights charges, it was investigated but they weren't going to make out a case there.

Now, the Michael Brown case is a different matter. There you had a police officer using force but the local grand jury ultimately decided that Brown's use of force was justified under the circumstances and the feds essentially didn't contradict that. But here, the real question, Ashleigh, is he's facing a life sentence on local murder charges. Why are the feds getting involved in this? This is almost unprecedented because usually they jump in when something goes bad in the local prosecution or the locals aren't prosecuting the cop.

BANFIELD: ... it's layout and then ...

[12:55:02] CALLAN: But here, they're -- and now they're indicting on the state level for murder, life sentence, feds, life sentence.

BANFIELD: Will they share resources?

CALLAN: It's very unusual.

BANFIELD: Or will they stay to that.

CALLAN: Well, I would assume they will.

JACKSON: Although, I think it's important to mention when we speak to that Ashleigh, is that federal courts are courts that what we call concurrent jurisdiction. That means no matter what the state does, the feds have an independent responsibility and obligation.

And speaking to that, we should say that mere days after this occurred, the feds got involved. And clearly this is a result of what they're doing.

The second thing is, there's a matter of public confidence, if we're going to really investigate things, there needs to be findings. This was the federal investigation. These were the findings. The indictment is the result.

BANFIELD: All right, Joey Jackson, Paul Callan, thank you both. Appreciate it. We'll continue to watch this. And thank you everyone as well for watching Legal View.

To continue watching CNN, you can stay right here or you can go online, do the same thing. Watch live at cnn.com.

In the meantime, stay tune because Wolf starts right after a quick break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:00:13] WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: Hello. I'm Wolf Blitzer. It's 1:00 p.m. here in Washington,