Return to Transcripts main page

CNN NEWSROOM

Cosby Going to Trial; Trump and Clinton Dig up Past. Aired 2- 2:30p ET

Aired May 24, 2016 - 14:00   ET

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


[14:00:00] WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: Barbara Starr doing excellent reporting for us. Thanks so much.

That's it for me. Thanks very much for watching. The news continues right now.

ANNOUNCER: This is CNN breaking news.

BROOKE BALDWIN, CNN ANCHOR: Hi there. I'm Brooke Baldwin. You're watching CNN here.

Breaking news out of Pennsylvania. We are leading with the fact that actor a comedian Bill Cosby will stand trial for sexual assault. The ruling came down just about an hour ago at Cosby's pretrial hearing. His attorney, during the closing arguments, screaming at the judge, top of his lungs. This is according to our crews inside that courtroom. We'll talk to her in just a moment, our correspondent, apparently lashing out. The judge eventually deciding there is, indeed, enough evidence to proceed with a case that dates back to 2004.

The 78-year-old actor, comedian is charged with three felony counts of indecent assault against a former Temple University basketball coach Andrea Constand. Constand was the first woman to publicly accuse Cosby of assault. Her civil case was settled out of court back in 2006 for an undisclosed sum, but now, with this criminal trial, Cosby could face up to ten years in prison.

Let's begin our coverage this hour with our correspondent who was inside that courtroom all day long. She is Jean Casarez. She joins us now with extraordinary color.

Jean, I was hanging on your every word earlier. Begin with this defense attorney screaming at the judge.

JEAN CASAREZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: It was amazing. The defense was so aggressive, from the very beginning. I mean, before this thing ever started, it was obvious that the prosecution was not going to call the accuser, Andrea Constand, to the stand. And I think the defense expected that because under Pennsylvania law, up until last year, you had to call the accuser to the stand in the preliminary hearing. So the defense was so aggressive, going straight - looking straight at the judge, saying there's a violation of due process rights. We're not going to have her demeanor on the stand. We're not going to be able to cross-examine her. Might as well go home, he said. It just can't be that way. But the law is changed. The current state of the law is that a detective, someone who was there, can testify and read the statement of the accuser, so that's exactly what happened.

It was a packed courtroom. Bill Cosby was seated at the defense table, extremely professional, not talking to his lawyers a lot, but seemingly listening to every word. And the prosecution's case, in a nutshell, really was that between the months of January and February in 2004, Andrea Constand, who considered Bill Cosby her mentor, she went to him to talk to him about her career, and she was a head of the women's basketball team at Temple University. She was invited to his house by Bill Cosby. Went there. She said that when she got there she told him, I'm just so upset because I'm going to change careers. I think I'm going to go into massage therapy. I wanted broadcasting. He said, look, let me go upstairs, I can get something for you to help you relax.

He came back down, she said in her statement, with blue pills. He told her, take these. She said, what are they? He said, they're herbal. She took them. He also asked her to take some wine with the. He said that's going to help you relax. He did not tell her what they were. He later told police they were Benadryl, but he didn't tell her that.

She said within 20 minutes that her knees were weak. She couldn't talk. The her vision was blurred. That he had to help her to the sofa. And she laid down on her left side initially. Then she says she remembered him starting to undress her, but she was so incapacitated she said that she couldn't talk, she couldn't tell him to stop and she doesn't really remember much more than that except she remembers how he touched her and where he touched her.

Well, the defense on cross-examination on that statement that Andrea Constand made focused on all the lines she crossed out at the end. She x-ed out, for instance, she was invited to and went to Foxwoods Casino when Bill Cosby was performing. She originally wrote that after the performance she was staying there, he invited her to his room because he was going to pack. She crossed that out. But then she writes that she went to the room, they laid down on the bed together and they were touching. She crossed this out and then merely said, we were close.

Well, the defense really focused on this to undermine her credibility. But the problem is, credibility isn't a part of this preliminary hearing. But consent is. If there was a lack of consent, this case goes to trial. If Andrea Constand consented to what was happening, charges could have been dismissed today. But in the end, the judge ruled this case will continue to trial. The prosecution made out their case that it's probable cause that Bill Cosby committed three counts of indecent sexual aggravated indecent assault of Andrea Constand.

[14:05:09] BALDWIN: So, Jean, before I let you go, that's - that's, you know, excellent on the arguments, both prosecution and defense within the courtroom, the color. Can we just, you know, 20,000-foot view here. You are in this town, in Norristown, Pennsylvania, all eyes as (INAUDIBLE) this is the - you know, we know Mr. Cosby will be going to trial. Talk to me just briefly about the media presence, the spectacle in this Pennsylvania town. CASAREZ: Well, they were expecting 20 media trucks and there are - the

courtroom was packed. Journalists, we understand, as far away as Australia.

BALDWIN: Wow.

CASAREZ: And it is something to see Bill Cosby in that courtroom, to see him walk in. And I have to tell you, I was seated in the second row and all of a sudden my court pew was just bumped so hard. I mean, I moved in my seat. And I looked up and it was Bill Cosby. He was being helped down the aisle and he literally walked into my pew. And so he stepped out and he kept walking. Of course the defense has said for a while now that he is blind and he can't see. But he definitely appeared to hear the testimony today. Didn't talk with his attorneys much at all. But he did wave his formal arraignment, which was set for July 20th. So he will not be coming for that. You can wave your arraignment, but this case will now proceed to trial.

BALDWIN: Jean Casarez, thank you so much, as always, in Norristown, Pennsylvania.

Let's broaden this out and talk to our smart legal minds here. I have CNN legal analyst and criminal defense attorney Danny Cevallos, who knows Pennsylvania law extraordinarily well, practices there. We'll talk to Danny there in PA. Also CNN legal analyst Paul Callan is here with me in New York, as is Misty Marris. She is a defense attorney and trail attorney.

So welcome to all of you.

And, Danny, just so we're all crystal clear, again, we know that Miss Constand and Mr. Cosby did not come face to face today because under Pennsylvania law, as the alleged victim, her testimony could be read aloud by detectives, correct? They - her presence is not required until now we know trial.

DANNY CEVALLOS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: In 2015, the superior court here in Pennsylvania interpreted a rule of court to allow prosecutors to present hearsay and nothing else in making out their prima fascia case at a preliminary hearing. It is a decision, however, that has been bitterly disputed by at least the defense bar and is currently going to go up to the Supreme Court. It's one that could potentially be overruled.

But as it stands, the law in Pennsylvania today is that a prosecutor, in a case like this, may use affidavits read into the record instead of putting that witness on the stand. But you better believe the defense bitterly objected to that admission and they did so for a very good reason, not only to make the point to the judge, but to preserve that issue for appeal because, as I said, that case is winding its way up the appellate pathways.

But as it is, that hearsay evidence was admitted in today. It was simply read from the statement. Another big issue for the defense was, if you are going to admit that statement, the defense felt they should be able to cross-examine the witnesses about each and every aspect of that statement that was taken at least a decade ago.

BALDWIN: Danny Cevallos, stand by.

Paul Callan, let me just bring you in. I think in order to look forward toward the trial, I think it's important to take a couple of steps back. So can you just remind us, we mentioned that she had, you know, settled in a civil case out of court a number of years ago. How did we arrive where we are today with this, you know, preliminary hearing and now trial?

PAUL CALLAN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: You know, it's been a very long journey. The incident itself took place allegedly in 2004. And the defense claims that she didn't actually report it to police authorities until sometime in 2005. A district attorney initially looked at the case and decided that he couldn't prove a case and essentially walked away from proceeding and there was talk that he was doing this in part so that she could pursue a civil case against Cosby -

BALDWIN: Yes.

CALLAN: Which was, in fact, filed in 2005. Now that case resulted in a settlement and a confidentiality agreement and so Cosby's attorneys figured this case is over.

BALDWIN: Over. Done.

CALLAN: She's not - she can't talk pursuant to the confidentiality agreement. She's been paid a lot of money, which, by the way, she allegedly forfeits if she violates the confidentiality agreement. So they were stunned, I think, when this case, so many years later, came back to life. But there's a 12-year statute of limitations in Pennsylvania.

BALDWIN: That's what it is.

CALLAN: Giving her the right to file the case or giving, I should say, law enforcement authorities the right to file. And don't you know with a new D.A. in office, they decided to file. That this was a case that they could prove.

BALDWIN: That new D.A. said, we're going to take a good look at that evidence again.

CALLAN: That's right.

[14:10:01] BALDWIN: Misty, I promise I'm coming to you in just a second.

But let's pause and head back to Pennsylvania because Gloria Allred joins me now. Gloria represents more than 30 women, you know, suing Mr. Cosby in civil court. Constand, we'll be crystal clear, is not one of them.

But, Gloria, you know - nice to see you. I was listening to you earlier. You were peppered with many, many questions from the media. So let's just begin with number one. I know for - correct me, but I understand you were in the courtroom and we were just talking to our correspondent who described how aggressive the defense was and yelling at this judge. Would you characterize what happened as aggressive? Can you tell me what you saw and heard?

GLORIA ALLRED, ATTORNEY: Yes, I can. But first I'd like to correct the record, if I may. I don't represent 30 accusers in a lawsuit. I only represent one accuser in a lawsuit. That's Judy Huth, on her allegation in her lawsuit that she was 15 years old when she became the victim of sexual misconduct by Mr. Cosby at the Playboy mansion. I do represent more than 30 accusers, but only one in a lawsuit.

In reference to what happened in the courtroom this morning, yes, it was a very aggressive defense argument that was presented. At one point, the court actually characterized what the defense was doing and saying as editorializing, which, of course, is really not appropriate. But having said that, the court didn't say it wasn't inappropriate but she said it was editorializing.

The defense put on a closing argument. I've never seen something like that at a preliminary hearing. Ordinarily that kind of -

BALDWIN: You haven't?

ALLRED: No. Ordinarily - after 40 years of practicing law, no. Ordinarily that kind of argument is preserved or reserved, I should say, for a trial.

Having said that, he said it. He did it. He was permitted to do it. He made the best argument possible. Some people might think it was an attempt to influence the potential jury pool, to be very assertive about his client or perhaps influence the court. But having said that, I don't know what his motive was. Maybe to put on a good show for the media. Whatever his motive, he said what he could argue. It wasn't sufficient in the sense that his client has been required to stand trial on three felony charges and that's not the result that my guess is that Mr. Cosby would have wanted to be the result today.

BALDWIN: OK. Let's, Gloria, let's walk through this because the crux of this, as you well know, is consent, right? This is about, you know, the argument by the defense -

ALLRED: That's correct.

BALDWIN: Is that she did -

ALLRED: Yes.

BALDWIN: That she did not say no. The prior to the, you know, offered these blue pills, she could have said no. She never said no, therefore she did consent. Walk me through that before we talk about the prosecution.

ALLRED: Well, the issue of consent, of course, is going to be a pivotal issue for the defense and for the prosecution at the trial. But the bottom line is, if a victim is incapacitated, either by drugs or alcohol or by both, and in this case it's alleged that she had wine, that she did take three pills from Mr. Cosby that he says were three halves (ph) of Benadryl, although he stated that he didn't tell her that at the time. He said they were herbal. If she was unable, because she was unconscious or in and out of consciousness, to say anything, then she couldn't say no and that cannot lead to the conclusion that she, therefore, consented. She had no capacity to consent is the argument of the prosecution. And so I don't know that the defense is going to get far with that argument, although I'm sure they will continue to argue it at the trial.

BALDWIN: At the trial, Gloria, will - would either your client or I mean there's up to some 50 women who have accused him of some sort of sexual misconduct, could their testimony be, you know, used or could they themselves testify in that trial?

ALLRED: In Pennsylvania, there is what's called a prior bad acts doctrine. In other words, that other accusers could be called if it's - their testimony is considered relevant to the charges facing Mr. Cosby. In other words, is this a signature crime? Are the acts that the other accusers allege that they were forced to suffer at the hands of Mr. Cosby, is it same or similar such that their testimony might be admissible at trial? Essentially it's going to be up to the district attorney. It's going to be up to the court. And I'm sure there will be many objections by the defense to the calling of others accusers to testify. So at this plot, I can't predict. I don't know what the district attorney's office intends to do.

[14:15:04] BALDWIN: Sure, sure.

ALLRED: But I think it's a fair guess that if they do try to call other accusers, some will be willing to testify and the defense will object.

BALDWIN: OK. Gloria Allred, thank you so much. I really do appreciate your perspective.

ALLRED: Thank you.

BALDWIN: My apologies for my error at the top there.

ALLRED: All right. That's all right.

BALDWIN: Misty, let me bring you in, because I'm listening to all of this and I really want to hear from a defense perspective as well, just being totally even on both sides. You heard Gloria, you heard Danny earlier, you've heard about the yelling, you know, you know, who knows whether or not some of these other women will testify. What are your thoughts?

MISTY MARRIS, DEFENSE/TRIAL ATTORNEY: Well, first and foremost, it's going to be a critical issue whether or not these other women testify. And the defense is going to vehemently object. They're going to say the prejudicial value of that testimony far outweighs any probative value. And it's going to depend on which way the judge goes. Each -

BALDWIN: Totally up to the judge. MARRIS: It's up to the judge. And each individual witness is going to be assessed to say, does this person have any relevant testimony or any relevant information regarding this particular incident? The defense is going to have to work very hard to bring this case back to Andrea Constand alone and not be talking about all these other women parading through the courtroom.

The other thing here is, talk about a difficult jury pool. We're going to have -

BALDWIN: Everyone has known Bill Cosby for years and years and years.

MARRIS: Absolutely. He is a figure that is endeared to young and old and this case has really affected the public persona of him. And not to mention every fact about every case has been media fodder. So finding a non-biased jury is going to be the defense's number one priority. And that's why I think the defense went and took that path at the end of the hearing. They're setting the tone. They're taking a vehement stance that our client is innocent. They're setting the tone for trial.

BALDWIN: You think they were already thinking ten steps ahead to the trial, to that jury pool and that's precisely why he raised his voice?

MARRIS: No question.

BALDWIN: How about that? Do you agree? What do you think?

CALLAN: Well, I - yes, I agree. I mean a lawyer blowing up like this in court and even giving a closing argument, this is a preliminary hearing. Usually lawyers just walk out of court and they move on.

BALDWIN: Save the drama for trial, come on, right?

CALLAN: Right. But this is to get the Cosby position out, to create the idea that he's being treated unfairly. He's being railroaded. Which ultimately, I think, will poison a potential jury pool.

And, you know, getting back to the other thing that Misty was talking about, because I think this whole thing is going to turn on whether other alleged witnesses get to testify. When we heard about the charges against Cosby, nobody believed it. America's dad and now you can fill a greyhound bus with the alleged victims. People start to say, well, because, remember, when we first heard about these charges against Cosby, nobody believed it. You know, America's dad. The nicest guy in the world. And now, of course, you can fill a Greyhound but with his alleged victims, people start to say, well, maybe he is guilty. However, the cases get tried on a one on one basis. And each of these cases have problems. So they're going to be trying to say, you know what, the one thing he consistently does is he slips pills to these women so that they are drugged -

BALDWIN: Themes. Finding themes.

CALLAN: That's right. But that's the one theme that makes it a signature crime because they're going to come in and say, it's not just that he has sex with women, it's because he's got a way that he always does it. He gives them alcohol and then he drugs them because he can't get voluntary consent.

BALDWIN: Modus operandi.

CALLAN: That's a - that's a devastating piece of evidence if it goes in.

BALDWIN: Paul Callan, Misty Marris, thank you so much. Danny Cevallos, thank you. And, of course, Gloria Allred, thank you. Wow, what a day in Pennsylvania here.

Coming up, though, we will switching gears and talk about the battle of Fallujah. Reports are emerging of 10,000 families trapped in that city. We'll take you there next.

Plus, Bernie Sanders say things could get messy at the Democratic Convention in Philadelphia in July. We are just learning as well his campaign wants a recount from the Kentucky primary. We'll get a check- in on all things politics on this Tuesday.

You're watching CNN. I'm Brooke Baldwin.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:23:00] BALDWIN: Welcome back. You're watching CNN. I'm Brooke Baldwin.

Let's go to the race to the White House. On the day Washington state holds its Republican primary, along comes another example of how ugly things could get before it's all said and done. The two most negatively viewed candidates since favorability polls began are digging up the past to cut down his or her opponent. Donald Trump's new Instagram video revives decades-old sex allegations against not Hillary Clinton but her husband. And Hillary Clinton is tweeting out today audio of Mr. Trump saying that he, quote, "rooted for," end quote, the 2008 recession.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I sort of hope that happens because then people like me would go in and buy. If there is a bubble burst, as they call it, you know, you can make a lot of money.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BALDWIN: And while Donald Trump may be, you know, slamming Bill Clinton now, back in the day, Trump defended him. What's more, Trump went after the women making the accusations. Chris Cuomo on "New Day" this morning brought up those points and more to Trump's attorney, Michael Cohen. Here is just a piece of their conversation.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CHRIS CUOMO, CNN ANCHOR, "NEW DAY": Why go after Bill Clinton? Isn't that bad for Donald Trump? MICHAEL COHEN, SPECIAL COUSEL TO DONALD TRUMP: Why? Why is it bad for

- why is it bad for Mr. Trump? What he is doing is he's exposing not just Bill Clinton for what he was and what he had done, but it's the same as it relates to Hillary. She attacked Mr. Trump as being a sexist, misogamist, and that's inaccurate.

CUOMO: Here are my two reasons that I think it's bad for him. One, hypocrite. Two, glass houses. He defended Bill Clinton for years. He said the same allegations that you guys are talking about now were a waste of time, were wrong, were hollow. That Bill Clinton was a terrific guy. That he was a great president. That the impeachment was wrong. That it was a waste of time.

COHEN: And Hillary Clinton said Donald Trump was one of the smartest, best businessmen in the United States on several occasions. Now she's attacking him on these ads claiming -

[14:25:04] CUOMO: Well, but hold on. All right, so she's bad too.

COHEN: So - OK.

CUOMO: So she's bad too.

COHEN: So she's - she's -

CUOMO: Isn't he bad for saying that Bill Clinton's great and now going after him?

COHEN: All he's doing is he's giving the facts. It's absolutely fine.

CUOMO: So he was lying then?

COHEN: It's not lying. He was protecting a friend. There's a difference.

CUOMO: What is the difference?

COHEN: The difference is, he was being a true friend. He was - it didn't matter to him at that point in time.

CUOMO: So he would be friends with a guy that he thought was a piece of crap basically? Is that what he meant (ph)?

COHEN: What he - what his relationship is with his wife is between the two of them. Now it's different. They're attacking Mr. Trump on a daily basis.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BALDWIN: All right, let's me bring in CNN's senior Washington correspondent, Jeff Zeleny, who is in Los Angeles. I see you shaking your head. I know, I know. You're following the Clinton campaign for us today. And CNN political director David Chalian.

Fellows, nice to see both of you.

JEFF ZELENY, CNN SENIOR WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENT: Hey, Brooke.

BALDWIN: And, Mr. Chalian, to you first. You know the fact that Donald Trump is going there so early, when you look at Hillary Clinton's attacks, you know, she's attacking his business acumen or lack thereof, it's nasty, it's just May. What will the next five months look like?

DAVID CHALIAN, CNN POLITICAL DIRECTOR: A lot more like this, I'm sure, which nobody - no American voter is going to be excited to hear. But, listen, I mean, what we're seeing is that everyone's sort of throwing stuff out to see what sticks. But not all attacks are equal, right? I mean they're both doing character attacks. But Hillary Clinton, in what you played there and what she launched today, is trying to replay the Obama playbook on Romney and try to attack Donald Trump's character by tying it to her pursuit of being seen as the protector of the middle class, because his business strategies they believe may have harmed people along the way that were more middle class voters.

Now, what Donald Trump is doing is taking entirely unsubstantiated claims, some proven false conspiracy theories, and injecting it into the conversation, so it's not quite equal warfare here.

BALDWIN: So do you think, just staying with you, do you think either will stick?

CHALIAN: You know, listen, I think that some of this may stick. I'm not - I know that we are looking back to the '90s and seeing the Republican playbook against Clinton at the time and it didn't work to the Republican benefit. You remember Newt Gingrich stepped down and Bill Clinton became more popular. Hillary Clinton got a ton more popular.

BALDWIN: Sympathy.

CHALIAN: Yes, lots of sympathy. It launched her own political career, actually.

Now, I just want to say, though, those attacks were not delivered in the same way. Again, I think this is - when Hillary Clinton says, oh, I'm used to these attacks for 25 years, I think it underestimates that Donald Trump is a unique figure when it comes to this. He's not doing this the way maybe the Republicans of the '90s did this, sort of do the character attack book within the confines of the decorum of Washington, if you will. This is real hardball in a way that I don't think Hillary Clinton's experienced. So we may see some effect. It certainly will rally his troops.

BALDWIN: Jeff Zeleny, you want to jump in on that and then I want the move topics?

ZELENY: Well, David's right. I mean, look, we haven't - we've heard these attacks, but this is a whole new context. And there is a new generation of voters out there who actually, you know, are experiencing this for the first time.

BALDWIN: Don't even know what happened. ZELENY: This is new information. So that's one of the reasons that

Donald Trump is doing it. But it's also those voters in the middle here where all elections are won or lost by. Donald Trump, right now, wants to start this campaign with Hillary Clinton by reminding them of all the stuff that they may not have liked about it. Now at the same time, he is going to energize those Democrats and fire up Democrats here, but, you know, we don't know if he'll continue doing this for the next five months or so, but for right now it's just sort of get those voters' attention here and to cause a distraction. I mean Hillary Clinton has a substantive attack ad today that Donald Trump, yes, was a success, but for himself, not for you, not for voters. So that's what the Clinton campaign is really circling the wagons, doing the first sort of concerted effort am among Democrats. Even on the floor of the House of Representatives today, House Democrats from swing states were repeating this message. So that is a coordinated message from the Clinton campaign to go after Donald Trump on substance. So there is a difference here.

BALDWIN: What about, you know, I was listening very closely to Manu Raju on The Hill today, other reporting from, you know, we know there - we know, of course, that Mr. Trump met with the House Speaker, I want to say it was two weeks ago now in Washington, right, and that was the beginning of several pivotal, you know, conversations before perhaps ultimately Speaker Ryan might endorse. And part of the conversations, from what Manu was reporting, had to do with executive overreach. Let me play a little bit of Paul Ryan and then we'll talk on the other side.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REP. PAUL RYAN (R), HOUSE SPEAKER: We believe that this president has grossly exceeded his authority. He's not the only president to do that, but he's just the most recent president to do it and he's taken it very, very far. So, yes, this is one of the things that we are in discussions with our presumptive nominee about, which are our steadfast commitment to our principles of self-government, which is to restore the Constitution.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[14:30:03] BALDWIN: David, when's he really getting at when it comes to executive overreach and the Constitution and having these chats with Donald Trump?

CHALLIAN: Well, first of all, I'd just note that he continues to call Donald Trump "our presumptive nominee" instead of his name. But --