tv Don Lemon Tonight CNN August 10, 2022 8:00pm-9:00pm PDT
of the informant, what do you know? >> laura, we know that there were discussions that were ongoing between the trump team and the investigators and the fbi and the prosecutors who are doing this investigation. and something happened in the last couple of months that altered what these conversations were about. and the wall street journal is suggesting that that thing that happened was an informant or somebody, somebody who was a witness, and knew that there were additional documents, or believe there are additional documents, there are being held at mar-a-lago, that the fbi wanted to obtain. so that's why participant precipitated and that's what prompted the activity that we saw on monday at mar-a-lago. that this informant, this witness, was able to tell the fbi that there were additional things there that they needed to go get, and that's why they did this on monday. >> are they reporting in any
way that they know who this informant might be if there is one? >> no, they don't say who this person might be and how that person might have come to know that information. the feature of mar-a-lago and of trump world, as you know, is that there weren't a lot of checks on people coming and going in that circle. so there's just many, many people, we've been making calls, and there's a number of people that come to mind when you talk to people about who this could be. >> the idea, kim, of who could've had access, who could've seen something in some way, or have been witness to something, is really curious here. as evan points out, this investigation, the timeline alone, has been going on for over a year. there was a june of this year, june meeting at mar-a-lago, between trump's lawyers. and then this search happened. something had to have happened in that time to go from this conversation, the idea of discussions happening to an unannounced execution of a
search warrant at the estate. does this make sense to you in the context there may have been someone to tip off the officials? >> well, as you know, laura, the information in the affidavit that supports a warrant has to be fresh, it can't be old information. certainly, there's new stuff that has come to light since trump basically stole 15 boxes of documents from the white house. i know there's been some talk of well, it was inadvertently shipped, but trump is someone who lied over 30,000 times when he was in the white house, frankly, i'm more interested in knowing not so much who tipped off the fbi, but whether donald trump tipped off others that might not be friends of america in having this information in the white house, in mar-a-lago, that reportedly includes classified information. we also know that there is a counter intelligence team that were there during the raid, i think that's more important to
focus on. because it could bear a national security. and the last point i would make is, you know, unless this goes to trial after indictment, we might not see, because merrick garland is so tightlipped, we don't know, and there certainly energy from team trump to start circulating different narratives here, and until it comes out in the justice department directly, or in evidence in a court of law, i'm not so sure we should worry so much about what we're hearing. >> i'm really glad the reorient it away from the idea and focusing on the messenger as opposed to what they may have seen and what may have gotten the affidavit in the first place. i know you worked on the whitewater mastication as well, you mentioned merrick garland being tightlipped, do you think it's important for the doj to come out and say something and explain what they've done? >> i don't, actually. i think in this moment, there's so much information misinformation, there's no way the good guys could manage the message that donald trump is
delayed at that. and of course, whatever happens on this side of the doj or the government to try and get accountability for the many acts of wrongdoing that happened in that four years under donald trump, it's a futile endeavor. so putting merrick garland's nose to the grindstone and all of those public servants that are working on behalf of the american people, i think that's more important. but i think it's unfortunate, laura, that reports that the magistrate who signed this warrant is now getting death threats, that is the kind of thing that is extremely disturbing to me. >> it is, on so many levels. and i always think about that judge in new jersey who lost her son and has been fighting for a protective measure in legislation to protect judges who are simply doing their jobs. and it's just stunning to think about. stuart, on this very notion, if there is not a tip, and i'm really curious about this safe that trump has spoken about, that he claims was entered into,
how would investigators know where to look, or is at the idea of, look, in this residence, there might be evidence, or probable cause, to believe that evidence exists of a crime. and whatever is inside, and whatever evidence might be found, whatever the good stuff is kept, i'm looking there. >> well, look, laura, you know he has around the clock secret service detail and, look, they can easily be vulnerable to being put in a situation, either administratively meaning that they can be brought in unquestioned administratively by the fbi or under a grand jury subpoena with respect to what they see in with a here. my assumption is that you had secret service agents either disgruntled secret service protective agent who may have seen or heard something and i think the word is immediacy, i think the execution of the search warrant on tuesday is evident of some immediate
action that needed to be taken. i think the word the supreme court admitted states used as a former federal federal prosecutor would understand the ripeness of the information must be generally within the last 30 to 45 days. and i think this is, as you know, you move forward and move a case one block on top of another. and i think there is something that triggered the immediacy of the concern. either there were documents that they were unaware of that had been taken that really impacted national security, or there were some other information contained either within the safe or on the premises of mar-a-lago, that require them to come in under obviously such a heavy-handed execution of a search warrant. >> you really think it could be a member of secret service for the detail of the former president? >> let me put it this way, in my career, we would generally try to target the weakest links, look, the secret service does an incredible job, they protect
not only the president of the united states but of other dignitaries. but they are vulnerable with respect to, they have their job to protect, and of course, they're vulnerable to being targeted with respect to if in fact they hear or see something, and i think that, you know, if push came to shove, if you get a disgruntled agent who may not be in good favor, it may have been a breaking point. and he or she may have tipped off the fbi or someone else, and this is how a case can, obviously, trickle down and start. >> obviously, we don't know, but stuart, i'm leaning into thinking about this, just given what we've learned in the past few weeks from the same testimony of cassidy hundreds into secure operations surrounding secret service, they certainly came into the limelight yet again about cooperation in the conversations in the congressman so lofgren about who was not -- some coordination or knowledge that would happen. i'm really intrigued by the idea of who it might be.
but to kim's point, evan, the information that's out there, that might actually have been retrieved by the fbi in this instance very well could've been the goal, just a reconnaissance bit bring back what they knew belonged to the united states of america. but the doj is grappling with internally, and you have some reporting about this, that inside the doj, since the search of mar-a-lago, there's been some disagreement, shall we say, about what to do next to inform the public. what can you tell us? >> look, -- >> evan, >> i think there is some frustration among some officials there, because the fact is, as you know, merrick garland and the department generally do not comment on ongoing investigations. the former president, however, is the one that made this public. and so, in so doing, he has
called it a siege, he has portrayed agents as perhaps planting evidence. during the search. and so as a result of that, there is no threats being made against fbi agents and that's one of the concerns that people have, and so, everyone understands that the members, jim comey and what happened in 2016. talking about uncharted conduct. nobody wants to repeat that. but there is a place between that and just complete silence which is what we have right now. i think that's where officials are trying to grapple with. as you and i've talked about is, they're kind of in a catch 22, which is no matter what they say it's probably going to be twisted. but right now, the only people talking or the former president and his allies. and they are portraying it in a way that is really harmful to the greater -- to the purpose of justice. >> you certainly see the confidence as being described
as shaken. i do want to get it back to you one moment, kim, but i do wanna follow but stuart for a second, because i love to know what your reaction is to evans reporting that fbi agents were trying to avoid some spectacle in the search, and also the mistrust that is now being talked about even the accusation of planting evidence. what do you make of this? >> well, first of all, i think the insinuation that fbi agents would plant evidence is clearly unfounded and that's just, you know, that's for movies or fiction. but i am a little disappointed with respect to not the fbi from the director, even up to the attorney general, on all those involved in strategizing and understanding and appreciating the potential fallout from this search warrant, meaning, they knew potentially with the collateral damage would be. and that's why it begs the question as to whether or not the reward was worth the risk with respect to the fbi's
reputation, which going back to 2017, after the firing of james comey, really was devastating to the men and women. so, fast forward five years later, i think this is really tarnished and stained the fbi again, and i said it back to a lot of people are gonna say that the fbi can't be trusted, the legitimacy of the fbi should be questioned. it begs the bottom line question, as to whether or not this type of execution of this particular search warrant on a former president, was really worth the price. and i will say from my vantage point, i'm not so sure it had the value that we're seeing playing out in social media and the media because we are so divided as a country. >> kim, i'd love to hear your reaction to that notion, but also on the idea, you've written quite extensively. we've had these conversations in the past as well. about the idea of sort of the
inoculation surrounding either a sitting president or a former president. and the optics really, in many ways, governing the way in which people decide the doj ought to be performing enacting. and i just wonder from your perspective, on the idea of the perils of investigating or searching the home of a former president. what goes in comes into your mind about that? is the juice not worth that squeeze democratically speaking? >> well, on stewart's point, from my vantage point, we just don't know with the payoff is. because we don't have access to the intelligence that gave rise to the search. so, on the democracy point, as you and i have spoken many times about, laura, i take a long view. and donald trump has had no accountability for two impeachments, the conspiracy giving rise to the january 6th insurrection, that they doing nothing, the cover-up on
multiple states. a fake electors trying to use the justice department to bully people into stealing an election from the voters? american democracy could actually die in the next few years. we're also seeing big liars, election deniers, populating elections across the country. the supreme court took a tea case that could very well say that gerrymandered state legislatures get to decide elections. what happens at the next nominee of the republican party loses the popular vote and the illegitimate electoral college vote based on the popular vote, but legislature say they're going to declare the next president. that's what's at stake. in my mind, the fact that the fbi agents are willing to stand in the line of fire for democracy, and take the heat, somebody's got to do something. because we're hanging on by a thread. so i applaud those people. i have full faith in them, and until there is evidence
demonstrating that there was some wrongdoing that is presented to a judge in a court of law that is tested, i am going to stand behind the men and women of the american government, civil servants who took an oath of office and hope that they can carry the ball across the finish line for our children and grandchildren when it comes to people of this country. >>c if you can keep it thank you will. >> investigators are spending hours inside of mar-a-lago where they were. with more than 100 rooms, they have a lot to search and i for one see the images can we go aside for a second and see what we're talking about a minute take you there. next. next. (jackie) i've made progress with my mental health. so when i started having unintentional body movements called tardive dyskinesia... i ignored them. but when the twitching and jerking in my face and h hands affected my daday to day... i finally had to say, 'it's not ok.'
it was time to talk to my doctor about austedo. she said that austedo helps reduce td movements in adults... while i continue with most of my mental health medications. (vo) austedo can cause depression, suicidal thoughts, or actions in patients with huntington's disease. pay close attention to and call your doctor if you become depressed, have sudden changes in mood, behaviors, feelings, or have suicidal thoughts. common side effects include inflammation of the nose and throat, insomnia and sleepiness. don't take austedo if you have liver problems, are taking reserpine, tetrabenazine, or valbenazine. austedo may cause irregular or fast heartbeat, restlessness, movements mimicking parkinson's disease, fever, stiff muscles, problems thinking, and sweating. (jackie) talk to your doctor about austedo...it's time to treat td. td is not ok. visit askforaustedo.com.
new tonight, the wall street journal reporting an informant tipped off federal investigators that were likely more classified documents that trump's mar-a-lago property. it was searched by the fbi early this week, and it was sprawling right on the breach on florida's east coast. cnn's tom foreman is gonna take us inside. >> mar-a-lago is a merely hundred year old age of more than 100 rooms. the fbi search could've been impossible. at least sarah thought so. she is the co-author of a book about trump and his florida home. >> my thought was how are they going to find anything? in mar-a-lago? because there are so many nooks
and crannies. >> but then the washington post said some boxes were found in the basement area, and she recognize another focal point. just above the ballroom on the second floor. the presidents personal suite. >> and around that same location, is where his office would have also been. and so those areas are private, they are accessible only to the family. and then also the staff that keep it clean, and that kind of thing. >> trump spent hundreds of days of his presidency at his properties. mar-a-lago above all others. there he played golf at his nearby course. ordered a missile strike on syria, and entertained the president of china, the prime minister of japan. >> many of the world's greatest leaders requests to come to mar-a-lago in palm beach. they like it, i like it, we're comfortable. >> political allies were welcome. so warm members of the private club who insiders say, a few years ago, could enjoy the warm
florida sun for a cool 200,000 dollar fee. along with a pool, and proximity to the leader of the free world. new york times called mar-a-lago, a washington steakhouse on steroids. where members and their guests enjoy a level of access that can allude even the best connected of lobbyists. >> mar-a-lago is a place where you want to do business with him. it wasn't ever the white house. mar-a-lago is where you close deals. and that's because where he was comfortable. >> trump called all the shots. but then he lost the presidency. this past january, officials at the national archives say they collected 15 boxes of documents from mar-a-lago. some containing items marked as class fide national security information. some including papers that had been torn up by the former president. and now they have taken another batch out of trump's grass. exactly what it is? we don't know. suffice to say agents cracked
that makes work from home work for you. it's started. somewhere between a cuddle and a struggle, it's...the side hug. tween milestones like this may start at age 9. hpv vaccination - a type of cancer prevention against certain hpv-related cancers, can start then too. for most, hpv clears on its own. but for others, it can cause certain cancers later in life. you're welcome! now, as the "dad cab", it's my cue to help protect them. embrace this phase. help protect them in the next. ask their doctor about hpv vaccination today.
wanna help kids get their homework done? well, an internet connection's a good start. but kids also need computers. and sometimes the hardest thing about homework is finding a place to do it. so why not hook community centers up with wifi? for kids like us, and all the amazing things we're gonna learn. through projectup, comcast is committing $1 billion so millions more students can continue to get the tools they need to build a future of unlimited possibilities.
conceding her race on tuesday. she is one of ten house republicans who voted to impeach trump. now seven of them have lost primaries, or chosen to retire. and congresswoman liz cheney of wyoming faces her own tough primary battle next week. so the big question is, what does all of this tell us about the future of the republican party? joining me now, lieutenant governor of georgia, jeff duncan, and cnn commentator se. glad to see you today, this is the question on everyone's mind. the lieutenant governor, because the defeat of herrera butler is seen as a win for trump, in a primary that was all about her vote for impeachment. i'm wondering what does that say to you that people who essentially set up in that way, who voted their conscience, which is i guess what you want your leaders to do, and did the right thing to suggest that she vote that way, why are they the ones playing the price?
what does that say to you? >> well it's unfortunate that the focus is to go on people who did the right thing, instead of focusing on joe biden's failing record, record inflation, international turmoil. all those issues that we should be focused on. unfortunately, some of those have been taken on those who did the right thing. it's also a constant minder that we are in a marathon with the republican party. not a sprint. anybody with that we could do this thing overnight is wrong. it's gonna take time to do it. >> i'm fascinated because i don't get it, on the one hand, there are those who say it was the wrong thing. that's why they're trying to vote the person out. on the other hand, you do wonder. if the only platform is, as long as you are backward looking, it doesn't really bode well for the future of the party. but wyoming is next week. you've got congressman liz cheney, she's a very tough primary challenge from someone who is backed by trump. and she has, as you well know, been arguing the most outspoken republican against trump.
what does that mean if she still loses? >> well, she is going to lose. i think that is pretty clear. i think she knows that. that is the price that you pay. and that price, i think, was known. back in 2016. it's why a number of us decided we weren't gonna go off with donald trump, jettisoning principles, ideas, things that pull folks like me will come up with. in conservativism, and the republican party. have cared about as bedrock. things like anti-protectionism, the deficit. strong national defence. bedrock traditional orthodoxy that has driven the conservative movement for decades. trump did not care about. and he convinced a lot of republicans not to care that much about it. and either. he made the party orienting around him. and that meant that you either needed to endorse what he did,
and said, or be quiet about it. shut up about it. and that meant saying some really bonkers, bananas, at times dangerous stuff. the conspiracy theories, the lies, the violent rhetoric. some things that are just a fact now of the republican party. but that is how wholly he remade the party in his image. and i think if i told republicans six years ago, this is where they would be, chasing after a demagogue who doesn't care about any of the things that they cared about, they would've laughed at me. but that is where we are. and so it is no surprise that the folks who dared to stand up to him are being shown the door. unelected. as jeff beside. i mean, lieutenant governor on that point, on as he's point, if the republican party to sc and many others is wholly unrecognizable, and the identity crisis really fully
fledged out, you have to wonder if all the critics are pushed out? if all those who are willing to say something different, or more in line with what traditional republicans have asserted. do you have fears for the longevity of the republican party? or is this something that is going to enter or allow for maybe a third party system that reclaims says some aspect of this? >> i've been republican a lot longer than donald trump's ever been one, and i'm only 47 years old, i'm not going anywhere. i'm gonna fight for my conservative values. i think is a golden opportunity here, it's going to take. time you've got folks on the republican side that now for the first time majority of them don't want donald trump to run again, those numbers might oscillate now with some additional attention he's gotten with the fbi search. but they're tracking in that direction. and you've got a middle that just completely embarrassed at their vote for joe biden and
all the misgivings he's given america over the last two years. so, if we put the right candidate forward that's got solutions, that's energetic, that's not 78 or 82 years old. they certainly have lost their best fastball. let's get somebody that's capable of leading this country in the right direction, helping our inflation issues pushes us back on the map, understands immigration, the realities of immigration. we've got a chance to convince the middle and win for decades. but it's going to take time to get their, and the quality of the candidates still matters. if we win the house, and we shove a bunch of marjorie taylor greene's in there, we're gonna be embarrassed as republicans for the next couple of years. >> sec, is the time running out? as the clock running out? obviously, the primaries are coming up, the midterm elections. 2024, i mean it's still two years away, but everyone's looking towards that to figure it what's gonna happen next. is the shot clock gonna run out? i hate to mix analogies, he's a baseball one lieutenant governor, i may go to a different one, is a shot clock running out here?
>> listen, 2024 is around the corner. and trump is really the only one who has expressed an interest in getting in to the race. everyone else seems a little cautious around him. if he has no competition, in a party that wants no competition of ideas anymore, then you know, we know where this is going and it's pretty inevitable. but to the lieutenant governor's point, it's such a shame that these are the candidates americans are forced to choose between. because the vast majority of folks are somewhere in the middle on most issues. they're not to the far right, they're not to the far left, and they don't feel like either party really represents them. they feel orphaned. so, something's gotta change with this political system. it's not all trump's fault. it's not all where trump has taken the republican party. these two parties just don't get most people anymore, and we don't have options. there's no apparatus to like,
come up with other candidates. and loosen the hold that the rnc in the dnc have on our presidential elections. it's a shame, and i can't see a way out within the next couple of years. >> lieutenant governor, s.e. cupp, as we all know the government formed by the people, the idea of democracy coming down to, as you suggest, sometimes the lesser of two evils, probably not with the vision was for people to think about. we'll see where it goes from here. thank you both. >> thank you. >> thanks. >> she was 17. and pregnant. and she didn't want to have a baby. so, she messaged her mother over facebook. but now, those messages she sent are being used against both of them, as they now both face abortion related charges. i'll tell you about this case in just a moment.
when we started carvana, they told us selling cars 100% online wouldn't work. but we went to work. building an experience that lets you shop over 17,000 cars from home. creating a coast-to-coast network to deliver your car as soon as tomorrow. recruiting an army of customer advocates to make your experience incredible. and putting you in control of the whole thing, with powerful technology. that's why we've become the nation's fastest growing retailer, because our customers love it. see for yourself at carvana.com
a nebraska mother and her now 18 year old daughter are facing multiple charges in a case that involved police obtaining facebook messages between the two women. and one of those messages show, authorities say of an illegal abortion, as well as a plan to hide the remains. cnn's lucy kavanaugh has the
latest on the charges, and cnn legal analyst is here as well. lucy, let me start with you here, celeste and jessica burgess, they weren't facing charges related to an abortion at first. so, what changed here? >> yeah, so let's talk about how this unfolded. the court documents show that initially, investigators were looking into reports of a stillborn that may have been disposed of. the daughter, according to court documents, celeste, telling investigators that she had miscarried a stillborn, and that her and her mother buried the fetus. police then exhumed the remains, they found an indication it might have been burned. and initially, the pair, the mom and the daughter, were only charged with a single felony for removing concealing or abandoning a body as well as two misdemeanors. during those two early interviews, laura, investigators saw celeste scrolling through facebook messages. to pinpoint the date of which he claimed was this miscarriage.
that prompted investigators to ask for a search warrant, they got the search warrant, facebook turned over data pertaining to both the mother and daughters accounts, and those private messages between celeste and jessica appeared to have made references to abortion pills, also burning the quote evidence. after reviewing the data handed over by facebook, authorities added felony abortion related charges against the mother. laura? >> and just to be clear, lucy, they were charged before roe v. wade is overturned, is that right? >> the investigation began before roe v. wade was overturned, the investigation started in april, but nebraska already had a law on the books banning abortion after 20 weeks. this mare miscarriage or abortion to, depending on what the evidence turn turns up, the pregnancy we know ended about 28 weeks. again, these court documents show how abortion cases could potentially be prosecuted in other places. >> and to that point, areva,
they were charged before authorities got their hands on the facebook messages. but their case does show how private information, the messages they send online, potentially could be used against them in a court of law. and in this instance, to enforce abortion laws. what strikes you about that in particular? >> this is the case, laura, that every woman has dreaded happening. we talk about this from a hypothetical standpoint, and now, we're faced with a real life case where someone, of these two women, have engaged in what they believe to be a very private conversation, using a social media app. that app then gets a subpoena from law enforcement, and turns over what they believe to be this private conversation. and then the information in what they believe to be this private conversation is used to level criminal, in this case, felony charges against this mother and this daughter. and what's so disturbing, laura, about this case is that facebook messenger, depending
on what device you use and one button you push, sometimes those messages are encrypted. and that information is not even available to facebook. but if you're not on the right device, and if you don't push the right button, then facebook has access to that information, and they can make that information available to law enforcement in a way that they did in this case. that's what is so disturbing. >> let me ask you, areva, on that point, the idea of having a subpoena issued to the holder of the platform that has the message is, what is at the fact that this is related to abortion related charges that makes this distinct? or this is actually in the essence not a pure novelty, right? the idea of being able to get into data? >> yes, we've seen other cases, laura, not involving abortions where law enforcement has issued a subpoena to a social media site, and they have released that information to law enforcement. but in this case, this abortion
post roe v. wade, there's been a lot of talk about menstrual cycle tracking apps, and that information perhaps being made available to law enforcement, and then in this case, just a conversation between a mother and a daughter about what may have been a miscarriage, what may have been an abortion, again, being made available to law enforcement. this is what women have dreaded. is that law now reaches into every aspect of your life, including what you believe to be a private conversation with your own mother on a social media app. >> i do wonder, lucy, what has been facebook's response? the idea of, on the one hand, people often lament with facebook nothing seems private, nothing feels private, they essentially own the communication. we heard that about the photographs etcetera and the theory of it. but what have they said about this particular case? because there has been quite a reaction for what she was talking about the prospect of other communications to be used. in these types of cases and
beyond? well absolutely. facebook and its parent company meta didn't realize this is gonna be an abortion investigation. in the statement tweeted on tuesday, they said, and i quote, nothing in the valid warns we've received from local law enforcement in early june, prior to the supreme court's decision, mentioned abortion. the robin's concerned charges relating to a criminal investigation, and court documents indicate that a police at the time were investigating a stillborn baby that was burned and buried. not and the decision to have an abortion. but of course this case does raise a good question on how the tech companies will respond to -- people of obtaining or offering abortions in other cases and other states. >> a lot disturbing about this case. we'll continue to follow this thread because as you both articulated, the nuances involved here really bear our coverage. thank you so much.
up next, kobe bryant's wife is suing the l.a. county for photographs taken of his death. and the first day in court had multiple people breaking down. and cnn was in the courtroom. we'll tell you about it after this! [eerie shrinking sounds] (brad) congratulations! you're having an out-of-apartment experience- 'cause these cramped confines aren't going to fit your rapidly expanding family. but with more rental listings than anybody else, apartments-dot-com can help you trade this love nest for... (woman) ...an actual nest. (brad) baby names! for a boy, brad. for a girl, brad. apartments-dot-com. the place to find a place.
discover the power of 3 in the ozempic® tri-zone. in my ozempic® tri-zone, i lowered my a1c, cv risk, and lost some weight. announcer: ozempic® provides powerful a1c reduction. in studies, the majority of people reached an a1c under 7 and maintained it. ozempic® lowers the risk of major cardiovascular events such as stroke, heart attack, or death in adults also with known heart disease. and you may lose weight. adults lost up to 14 pounds. ozempic® isn't for people with type 1 diabetes. don't share needles or or r. don't take ozempic® if you or your family ever had medullary thyroid cancer, or have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if allergic to it. stop ozempic® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, or an allergic reaction. serious side effects may include pancreatitis. gallbladder problems may occur. tell your provider about vision problems or changes. taking ozempic® with a sulfonylurea or insulin may increase low blood sugar risk. side effects like nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea may
lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. join the millions already taking ozempic®. ask your health care provider about the ozempic® tri-zone. announcer: you may pay as little as $25 for a 3-month prescription. emotions running high in court today. vanessa bryant, wiping tears during opening statements in her lawsuit against los angeles county. over gruesome photos taken of the helicopter crash that killed her husband, nba legend, kobe bryant, and her beloved daughter, gianna. cnn national correspondent
natasha chan was inside the courtroom today. she joins me now. natasha, it's just so devastating to think about what happened. and this trial is now here. tell us what you heard today, and what did these photos show. and what is mrs. bryant a legend about them? >> it was an extremely dramatic first day. and the question about what the photos show, that's the thing. vanessa bryant has never seen them. they have not appeared online in two and a half years. and the second plaintive, named christopher chester, who lost his wife and daughter in the same crash. has also never seen them. so the case really centers around the emotional distress that these families say has been inflicted upon them just by the sheer idea that these photos taken of their loved ones remains at the crash site. could potentially pop up on line at any point in the future and the anxiety that miss bryant has in knowing that
possibility is out there. her attorney louis lee made an opening statement today. really describing that emotional distress as saying that the deputies should not have been taking these photos. it was no part of their job duties. and that he claims the l.a. county's chief, villanueva, really swept this under the rug. ask these deputies to delete the photos. did not do a thorough forensic exam of the devices. did not check if they were uploaded to the cloud. and did not discipline these deputies. >> it's so important think. about the point you raised, this allegation, this was not part of some official investigation or part of the regular course of investigative proceedings. what has l.a. county said about this? how they responded to the allegations? >> l.a. county does say that taking photos of a site like that is part of their job. and they described, for example, one of the deputies being the first person to have made it up the hill to that crash site.
we are talking about a really tough terrain. that morning was very foggy. it was very muddy. it took him about an hour to get up there. and she said that the attorney, that is amir ashmont, said that he had not taken sight photos, he would not have been able to communicate to the command center 1200 feet below. those were determined based on the photos, how to respond. and it's not just a search and rescue that they had to strategize about. it was also the firefighters having to strategize and having to put out this wildfire that had sprung up because of the crash. so the attorney for the air county alleges it was part of their job. they do say, they do concede, that it was not great. how it was circulated. for example, the deputies were sharing it. in one case, the plaintiffs say that they were being shared between deputies. playing a video game, playing call of duty. and that one deputy trainee actually showed the photos to the bartender at a bar he was
at. so, i think they can see that the way it was spread was not appropriate. but they feel it was contained. laura. >> well, unbelievable. unimaginable to think about. being shared in that way. and i understand that there were more tears. i mean, bryant's first witness was lakers general manager rob pelinka, and he broke down while testifying. is that right? >> he couldn't even begin his first answer without starting to cry. he described how he was best friends with kobe bryant. and how he is the godfather of gianna, so you can imagine how close the families are. and he said that he spoke to vanessa bryant, pretty much every day before this crash. and ever since. he was with her the day of the crash, he went with her to the sheriff station where he said to the court today, that he had helped vanessa bryant seek assurances from the sheriff on the day of the crash. to make sure the site was
blocked off the people. lookie loos who wanted to take photos. and so, he described the anguish that vanessa bryant experienced, then finding out that deputies did take close-up photos of the remains of their loved ones. and some of the descriptions, laura, the attorneys talked about having potentially images of close ups of limbs, burnt flesh. in the case of the other plaintive, chester, christopher chester, his attorney had to tell the court. had to tell the jury that mr. chester's wife was actually severed. and they never found her legs. so you can only imagine what these photos might have shown. laura. and the type of anguish these families have in worrying about whether they will actually service. >> and the anguish continues to this day. this is unbelievable story, thank you for giving us all of the information. we'll be watching it very closely natasha.
must like hard work, punctuality, and a good firm handshake. if you're someone who likes earning rewards as much as earnings reports, i would be honored to be your perfect somewhere. ♪ ♪ alright, limu, give me a socket wrench, pliers, and a phone open to libertymutual.com they customize your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need... and a blowtorch. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪
good evening, tonight, new reporting, just as department officials pushing that fog meant to do one thing it tries never to do and caused disaster to last emitted. namely going public about an active investigation of a political figure close to an election, in this case, a former president. who, ironically, benefited the last time the department straight from that policy back in 2016. the very public reopening of the fbi email investigation. this latest development, which we will bring you details on shortly, comes 2 days after he became the first current or former president ever to be hi
Uploaded by TV Archive on