Return to Transcripts main page


Penn State's Unprecedented Penalties; Massacre Suspect in Court; NCAA Announces Penn State Penalties; $60 Million Fine Against Penn State; Investors Worry About Spain's Bailout; Gun Control and the 2012 Race; The Psychology of Mass Killers

Aired July 23, 2012 - 09:00   ET


ZORAIDA SAMBOLIN, CNN ANCHOR: Happening now in the NEWSROOM, unprecedented penalties. The NCAA hitting Penn State right now with a huge fine. We will soon learn of the penalties that await the university.

Day in court. Accused Colorado shooter James Holmes appearing in court in just hours, using a secret underground tunnel to go before the judge. And this morning we're learning more about Holmes' past and what police found in his apartment.

Jackson mystery. Michael's mother Katherine reported missing this weekend tells police in Arizona that she is fine. The grandkids who have lived with her wondering where she is. A missing persons report was even filed. Inside the strange and really bizarre story, straight ahead.

And power right in your wallet. A new iPhone charger the size of a credit card saves you when you run out of juice. We'll show it to you in 20 minutes.

NEWSROOM begins right now.

Good morning, I'm Zoraida Sambolin sitting in for Carolyn Costello.

And just moments from now Penn State faces its next staggering blow in the Jerry Sandusky scandal. The NCAA is about to announce its punishment for the school's cover-up of the child sex abuse. And the penalties are described as unprecedented.

CNN's Mark McKay is in Indianapolis where the NCAA is holding its news conference. He joins us now by phone.

What can you tell us?

MARK MCKAY, CNN SPORTS CORRESPONDENT (via phone): Zoraida, we're meeting to hear from NCAA president, Mark Emmert, and from Ed Ray, the chairman of the NCAA's executive committee, followed by a question and answer session here at NCAA headquarters in Indianapolis. And we're expecting to hear being termed significant and unprecedented penalties on Penn State University. One source familiar with the case told CNN what we will hear, that Penn State will be hit with fines in excess of $30 million. Reports are also circulating that Penn State University will lose a number of football scholarships and may be prevented from going to future bowl games. How many will be answered in just a few minutes as we're awaiting the news conference -- Zoraida.

SAMBOLIN: All right, Mark McKay, live for us in Indianapolis. We'll -- we'll check in with you when we get new developments.

And also new this morning, the first court appearance of the Colorado man accused of last week's shooting rampage inside a theater. Twenty- four-year-old James Holmes is likely to face first-degree murder charges for the 12 people killed at that midnight showing of the new Batman movie. Of the 58 people wounded, eight victims remain in critical condition. Prosecutors have not yet announced whether they will seek the death penalty.

And we're covering all of the angles here and all of the latest developments.

CNN's Don Lemon is outside the courthouse for this morning's arraignment and we're going to check in with him shortly.

Poppy Harlow looks at the anguish of a heartbroken community from the vigil to the presidential visit.

We're going to start with you, Poppy.

POPPY HARLOW, CNN CORRESPONDENT: You know, Zoraida, as we were talking this morning about the vigil, you know, I've been covering this since Friday when the shooting occurred, and last night that vigil was really the first moment of the beginning of the healing process that I saw here.

It was amazing. Thousands and thousands of people gathered. They lit candles. Government officials spoke. None of the family members did speak but they were certainly present. They walked in carrying signs and pictures of the loved ones that they lost.

Some things did stood out to me, the mayor of Aurora, Steve Hogan, said this. He said the pain is so raw, but we will reclaim our city with goodness, kindness and compassion, and that brings up the real issue of forgiveness, I think. How does this community begin to heal and begin to forgive if they can?

So I went around the vigil last night and talked to a few different people about that issue. Take a listen to what they told me.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Forgiveness isn't always only for the person that you're forgiving that committed the crime. It's also for yourself and it's part of that healing. If you can't forgive someone and you hold it in your heart, then you're going to stay angry.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: A little girl was killed, you know, it's just like my daughter. My daughter is 1 year old and I have a three-year-old daughter myself, and so I don't think it can be forgiven.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Part of the prayers this morning were not only for victims and their families, and for first responders and for everybody that's helping, but also for the shooter and his family. Because for me personally and for our belief system, it's not our place to judge, and not forgiving only puts us in a place where we can't move forward.


HARLOW: And Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper was there as well, He spoke. One of the things he did was he read off the names of the 12 people that died in this horrific shooting, and those that were at the vigil responded after each name, saying, "we will remember," and we have to keep in mind, Zoraida, you still have 17 victims hospitalized at this hour. Eight of them still in critical condition including the mother of that 6-year-old girl, Victoria -- Veronica who passed away.

So you still have a lot of fear here about what is ahead but that vigil was a very important moment for the folks here in Aurora.

SAMBOLIN: OK, thank you very much, Poppy. We're going to check in with the NCAA now. They're making that decision on Penn State. Let's listen in.


ED RAY, NCAA EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN: And the powerful people who let them down. There has also been much speculation on whether or not the NCAA has the authority to impose any type of penalty related to Penn State.

Not only does the NCAA have the authority to act in this case, we also have the responsibility to say that such egregious behavior is not only against our bylaws and constitution, but also against our value system and basic human decency.

The executive committee which acts on behalf of the entire association and implements policies to resolve core issues, along with the Division I Board, a body of presidents representing all of Division I, directed President Emmert to examine the circumstances surrounding the Penn State tragedy, and if appropriate, make recommendations regarding punitive and corrective measures.

As a result of the information produced from the Sandusky criminal investigation and the free report which Penn State commissioned and also agreed to its findings, it became obvious that the leadership failures at Penn State over an extended period of time directly violated association bylaws and the NCAA constitution, relating to control over -- over the Athletic Department, integrity, and ethical conduct.

The corrective and punitive measures the executive committee and the Division I Board of Directors have authorized should serve as a stark wake-up call to everyone involved in college sports that our first responsibility, as outlined in our constitution, is to adhere to the fundamental values of respect, fairness, civility, honesty and responsibility.

I'll now turn to President Emmert to discuss today's actions and what is expected of Penn State in the future. President Emmert?

MARK EMMERT, NCAA PRESIDENT: The Penn State case has provoked in all of us deeply powerful emotions and shaken our most fundamental confidence in many ways. As we, the Executive Committee, the Division I Board and I, have examined and discussed this case, we have kept foremost in our thoughts the tragic damage that has been done to the victims and their families.

No matter what we do here today, there is no action we can take that will remove their pain and anguish. But what we can do is impose sanctions that both reflect the magnitude of these terrible acts and that are also -- and that ensure that Penn State will rebuild an athletic culture that went horribly awry.

Our goal is not to be just punitive but to make sure the university establishes an athletic culture and daily mindset in which football will never again be placed ahead of educating, nurturing and protecting young people. More than 100 years ago, the NCAA was created to assure that sports are fully integrated into our colleges and universities, and that the athletic programs wholly embrace the values of higher education.

Our constitution and bylaws make it perfectly clear that the association exists not simply to promote fair play on the field but to insist that athletic programs provide positive moral models for our students, enhance the integrity of higher education and promote the values of civility, honesty and responsibility.

The sanctions we are imposing are based upon these most fundamental principles of the NCAA. With these intentions in mind, the executive committee, the Division I Board and I have agreed upon the following sanctions.

First, the NCAA is imposing a fine of $60 million on the university with the funds to be used to establish an endowment to support programs around the nation that serve the victims of child sexual abuse and seek to prevent such abuse from happening. This amount is the equivalent of one year's gross revenue of the football team.

Second, Penn State football will be banned from bowl games and any other post-season play for four years.

Third, Penn State's football team will have its initial scholarships reduced from 25 to 15 per year for a period of four years. In order to minimize the negative impact on student athletes, the NCAA will allow any entering or returning football student athletes to transfer and immediately compete at the transfer university provided he is otherwise eligible.

Further, any football student athlete who wants to retain -- remain at Penn State may retain his athletic grant and aid as long as he meets and maintains appropriate academic requirements regardless of whether he competes on the football team. Fourth, the NCAA vacates all wins of the Penn State football team from 1998 to 2011 and the records will reflect these changes.

Fifth, the University Athletic Program will serve a five-year probationary period during which it must work with an academic integrity monitor of the association's choosing.

And finally, the NCAA is reserving the right to initiate a formal investigation and disciplinary processes to impose sanctions as needed on individuals involved in this case after the conclusion of any criminal proceedings. Beyond these sanctions, the NCAA is imposing other corrective actions to ensure that the intended cultural changes actually occur.

The NCAA is requiring the university to adopt the formal reforms delineated in Chapter 10 of the Freeh report, particularly Section 5.0. Additionally the association is requiring Penn State to enter into an "Athletic Integrity Agreement" with the NCAA and the Big 10 conference. This agreement will require the establishment of a chief compliance -- officer position, a compliance council and an array of control mechanisms that are intended to ensure the athletic culture will be fully integrated into the broader university.

And finally, the NCAA will select an independent athletics integrity monitor who will, for a five-year period, report quarterly to the NCAA, the university's Board of Trustees and the Big 10 conference. They will report on the progress Penn State is making in implementing all provisions of this agreement.

Let me address also the issue of the so-called death penalty. The executive committee, the Division I Board and I, had extensional discussions about the appropriateness of imposing a suspension of football for one or more years. An argument can be made that the egregiousness of the behavior in this case is greater than any other seen in NCAA history, and that, therefore, a multi-year suspension is appropriate.

After much debate, however, we concluded that the sanctions needed to reflect our goals of driving cultural change as much as apply punitive actions. Suspension of the football program would bring with it significant unintended harm to many who had nothing to do with this case. The sanctions we have crafted are more focused and impactful than that blanket penalty.

Moreover, the actions already taken by the new chair of the board, Karen Peets, and the new president, Rodney Erickson, have demonstrated a strong desire and determination on the part of Penn State to take the steps necessary for the university to right these severe wrongs and were appreciated by all of us.

For the next several years now, Penn State can focus on the work of rebuilding its athletic culture not worrying about whether or not it's going to a bowl game. With the sanctions imposed today and with the new leadership, the university, we hope, indeed we intend to ensure that that will be the case. In closing, let me say that this case involves tragic and tragically unnecessary circumstances. One of the grave dangers stemming from our love of sports is that the sports themselves can become too big to fail, indeed, too big to even challenge. The result can be an erosion of academic values that are replaced by the value of hero worship and winning at all costs.

All involved in intercollegiate athletics must be watchful that programs and individuals do not overwhelm the values of higher education.

In the Penn State case, the results were perverse and unconscionable. No price the NCAA can levy will repair the grievous damage inflicted by Jerry Sandusky on his victims. However, we can make clear that the cultures, actions and inactions that allowed them to be victimized will not be tolerated in collegiate athletics. I would be happy to take your questions.

HAROLD HAYES, KDKA: Harold Hayes, KDKA, Pittsburgh.

The Paterno family issued a statement yesterday calling the Freeh report pretty much an indictment, a charging document, not necessarily a verdict. Don't you usually conduct your own investigation? And why did you rely so heavily on the Freeh report?

EMMERT: The Freeh report, as well as the data that came out of the criminal trial provided extensive information in this case. The report has been accepted by the university itself. It was the result of more than 450 individual interviews, an examination of more than 3 million e-mails and other documents. It is vastly more involved and thorough than any investigation we've ever conducted.



Does this speculate it opens up some sort of Pandora's box for future cases, or is this unique in and of itself?

EMMERT: This case is obviously incredibly unprecedented in every aspect of it as are these actions that were taken today, and we do not see them as opening Pandora's box at all. This is a very distinct and very unique circumstance.

MARK PAT FORDE, YAHOO SPORTS: Mark Pat Forde from Yahoo Sports.

Along those lines, how much communications have you had with Penn State about this? Do you expect them to appeal in any way?

EMMERT: We have informed Penn State of the findings, the adoption of the findings coming from the Freeh report, and also of our penalties. We have crafted this in the form of a consent decree which university has signed, as well as we have.

REPORTER: Pete Mantin (ph), WJIL Harrisburg. Classify the seriousness of these sanctions for me. Do you consider this more serious than a death penalty?

EMMERT: Well, I leave those kind of judgments to all of you. Obviously, these are very, very serious sanctions. We certainly hope and I know President Ray and the executive committee hopes that the fines being imposed will allow some very serious good to be done out of this circumstance. The imposition of both the corrective measures and the punitive actions will most certainly have a significant impact on the university that's their intention. I'll leave it all to you to speculate whether that's better or worse.

I think one of the mischaracterizations that is out there that these penalties are coming somehow instead of a death penalty, I think that would be a false assumption. If the death penalty were to be imposed, I'm quite sure that the executive committee and I may ask President Ray to speak to this. The executive committee and I certainly would not have agreed to adjust the death penalty. It would have included other penalties as well.

President Ray?

ED RAY, NCAA CHAIRMAN: Let me briefly say that in our discussion in the executive committee in the division I board, we were very clear that in talking about options, we were always, if the death penalty were to be considered or suspension of play really is appropriate that that in and of itself would not be the only penalty, that other elements would be there, not just punitive but corrective -- the kind that President Emmert talked about.

There was discussion, there was some preliminary sense, and I can tell you that overwhelmingly the executive committee and the division I board did not feel that the suspension of play would be appropriate. And for the measures that you've just heard about, those who were able to participate in the conversation, both the executive committee and the division I board of presidents and chancellors unanimously supported the actions that you've heard about this morning.


SAMBOLIN: Let's bring in B.J. Schecter, executive editor at "Sports Illustrated".

I think we have the list here of all of the sanctions that were handed this morning. Of all of this, what surprised you the most?

B.J. SCHECTER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, SI.COM (via telephone): Well, you know, I think the level to which the NCAA kind of stepped in. President Emmert spoke to the unprecedented nature of this. And this pretty much goes a against the way that the NCAA has operated from its inception, meaning that they have set procedures and hearings and notices, and they've taken it upon themselves to levy what many might consider worse than the death penalty, even though they said they didn't give Penn State the death penalty.

SAMBOLIN: Their objective here, a change of culture -- I was trying to count how many times I heard the word culture. So, this is really far more -- should be far more reaching than Penn State.

SCHECTER: It is, and I think what the NCAA is coming in and trying to say, and you could agree or disagree with whether they have the authority or whether this is their place, necessarily, but what they're saying is, you know, we are going to take a bigger role in not only athletics but integrity. And, you know, I think that was the thing that President Emmert, you know, tried to make clear, that this is more of a moral and institutional issue rather than a football issue. The beef that I have with all of this is you're penalizing football and then using it to cripple the school, not the other way around.

SAMBOLIN: How do you call it penalizing football?

SCHECTER: Well, you know, if you look at the penalties, they're all around football. And yes, it happened with an assistant football coach and head coach that allowed this to happen.

But if you look at -- if you look at this case, it's much, much bigger than football. You know, it goes way beyond sports. It's criminal. And if you look at --

SAMBOLIN: It is criminal, but it happened within football. So don't you think that that's where, at the very least, it has to begin and maybe it sets a precedent that way for all programs across the board?

SCHECTER: Potentially. I think it's -- I understand why they did what they did, but I think, you know, it's perhaps a dangerous precedent to set, because any time anybody gets arrested for anything, does the NCAA step in? And, you know, now are they forced to levy penalties?

So, you know, it obviously -- you know, this was the worst scandal in college sports history. There needed to be very harsh action taken. Whether this was the right way to approach it, you know, I would say right now it's debatable.

SAMBOLIN: All right. Executive director B.J. Schecter, thank you for being with us this morning. We appreciate your time.

SCHECTER: OK. Thank you.

SAMBOLIN: A former police sergeant accused of killing his third wife and suspected in the disappearance of his fourth wife, he goes to court. We'll take you to the appearance of Drew Peterson's murder trial.


SAMBOLIN: Jury selection begins this morning in the murder trial of former Chicago area police sergeant, Drew Peterson. He is accused of killing his third wife and is the main suspect in the disappearance of his fourth wife.

His third wife, Kathleen Savio, was found dead in a bathtub in 2004. There's a picture of her there. She had been divorced from Peterson about five months when she died, and her death at the time was ruled an accident.

After Peterson's fourth wife, Stacey, went missing in October of 2007, authorities exhumed Kathleen Savio's body and did a second autopsy and ruled her death a homicide at that point.

So, let's bring in our resident legal expert, CNN contributor and criminal defense attorney, Paul Callan. He's joining me now.

So, today is jury selection. And still, we're talking about this hearsay evidence and potentially people speaking from their grave. Can you tell me about that?

PAUL CALLAN, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Well, it's a very strange situation because usually when we hear the word hearsay, we don't allow it in court because it's considered to be unreliable evidence. And yet, the whole central core against Drew Peterson is based on evidence. It's based on statements that were made by the wife that he's been tried for killing, which is Kathleen Savio, and his fourth wife who is still missing, Stacey Peterson. And --

SAMBOLIN: How unusual is that?

CALLAN: Well, it's very, very unusual, because the U.S. Constitution says if you're going to convict somebody of a crime, they have the right to confront and cross examine the witnesses against them. Now, you can't confront somebody who's in the grave, cross examine about the reliability of the evidence.

However, in Illinois, they passed a special law that said if you kill somebody who is potentially a witness in a case against you, that evidence can come into evidence as an exception to the hearsay rule. We find that it's highly reliable, and so it's permitted in Illinois.

It's only fair to say there are other examples of hearsay evidence that get into court frequently. There are a lot of exceptions. There is no certain rules in the law.

But this, a murder case based entirely or almost entirely on circumstantial evidence and hearsay -- very, very rare.

SAMBOLIN: Some people have found it remarkable he was sitting in jail when, in fact, it was all circumstantial or hearsay evidence. This is a very high-profile case. This man is quite a character. There was a made-for-TV movie.

How is it that you get an impartial jury when there has been so much exposure?

CALLAN: Very, very difficult to do so. But, of course, we've had a lot of other high-profile cases in the United States. Heavens, it seems week after week, we have a high-profile case starting with, you know, Casey Anthony in recent times, moving on to the Penn State case.

And we are able to try those cases, because the rule is, if a juror will sit in the box and say, yes, I've read about it, I've heard about the evidence, but I will base my verdict only on what I hear in court. If a juror will say that, then he or she is allowed to serve. Of course, you can also move a case to a different county if you wish to do so.

SAMBOLIN: And the "Chicago Tribune" had today another delay possible at the start of the Peterson trial. So they may be facing another delay today.

CALLAN: Well, sure. One of the things that's happened -- this case has been going on for so long, they're running out of jurors. They had originally picked a huge panel of jurors. They pre-screen them and I think they had it down to about 240 or 250 jurors. But a lot of those have dropped out due to the passage of time.

So, they may have to pick more jurors and there are a lot of hearings that have to take place in this very serious and very, very interesting case.

SAMBOLIN: All right. Paul Callan, always a pleasure talking to you. Thanks for coming in. We appreciate it.

CALLAN: Nice being with you, Zoraida.

SAMBOLIN: All right. Stories we're following in THE NEWSROOM:

In about two hours, accused massacre shooter James Holmes is expected to appear before a Colorado judge.

President Obama offered his sympathy yesterday to the survivors and the families of 12 people killed in Friday's shooting.

Look at this video. Tensions are still high in Anaheim, California, after police clashed with protestors hours after officers shot and killed a man. Protestors reportedly threw rocks and bottles at officers who responded by firing bean bags and pepper balls. The two officers involved in the shooting are on administrative leave.

The NCAA slams Penn State with a $60 million fine over the Sandusky child sex abuse scandal. It's also banning Penn State from bowl games for four years and reducing the number of football scholarships from 25 to 15. And it also vacated Penn State's wins from 1998 to 2011, which means Joe Paterno isn't the winningest college football coach anymore.

It is looking like a rough day on Wall Street. Fears that Spain might need a full bailout are sparking a sell-off. We are watching the markets all day.

Plus, imagine never having to carry around a smartphone charger again. It's coming, but this is a catch.

Alison Kosik is at the New York Stock Exchange.

Alison, what can you tell us?

ALISON KOSIK, CNN BUSINESS CORRESPONDENT: OK. First of all, let's get to the markets because they're falling very quickly. Just a couple minutes since the opening bell rang, Zoraida, we are seeing the Dow drop 115 points. This is falling in the heels of the global sell- off that happened overnight. There are big worries that Spain is going to have to follow in the footsteps of Greece and Ireland and Portugal needed, and they all needed a full government bailout.

There had been high hopes that rescuing Spain's bank would have been enough. But no such luck. It looks like Spain is in deep trouble, financially at least, and that is having a ripple effect here for U.S. stocks. Once again the Dow down now 136 points -- Zoraida.

SAMBOLIN: I know you're going to continue watching that for us.

Let's talk about the smartphone charger. It sounds great but there's always a catch with things that sound really great.

KOSIK: Isn't there always?

So here's the catch. You still need a USB port with this thing, and what it's called, it's a charge card. It's actually the size of a credit card and what it does is it plugs into your smartphone, the other end plugs into a USB port so you don't need a regular power outlet.

Now, this whole this came about in interesting way. It was developed by three guys in Los Angeles. They're actually raising money on to try to sell it to the masses, and I tell you what, it's become a pretty darn hot item, and it's not available yet in stores. Already 2,500,000 people have contributed $70,000 to the project.

Now, in exchange for backing them, you can get one of these devices for a minimum donation of $18 on Kickstarters. There are 35 days left until the Kickstarter campaign ends. Well, over the goal, though. They've already reached well over the goal of $50,000 that they wanted.

The team says the money will go toward getting the product into stores. There is some speculation on that Website that if it does go into stores, it would sell for about 25 bucks, but this could be the answer for so many iPhone users that are caught with their dead cell phones, their dead iPhone because the battery goes so quickly, right, Zoraida?

SAMBOLIN: It's great. I would definitely be purchasing one. Thank you very much, Alison Kosik, at the New York Stock Exchange for us.

KOSIK: Sure.

SAMBOLIN: And would stricter gun control laws have saved the lives of 12 innocent people in Aurora, Colorado? The massacre has renewed that debate, and one prominent politician says it is time the presidential candidates lay out their plan for combating gun violence.


SAMBOLIN: Renewing the debate over gun control. Friday's movie theater massacre in Colorado has some saying that it's time to put the issue back front and center, perhaps no one more so than New York Mayor Bloomberg, a very outspoken gun control advocate. He is challenging President Obama and his Republican rival Mitt Romney to lay out a strategy for combating gun violence.


MAYOR MICHAEL BLOOMBERG (I), NEW YORK CITY: Somebody has to do something like this, and this requires, particularly in a presidential year, the candidates for president of the United States to stand up and once and for all say, yes, they feel terrible, yes, it's a tragedy, yes, we have great sympathy for the families, but it's time for this country to do something. And that's the job of the president of the United States.


SAMBOLLIN: So let's talk about this with CNN contributors Will Cain and L.Z. Granderson, who happen to be two of my favorite guys.

You just heard Mayor Bloomberg. Now take a look at this recent poll, gentlemen. It shows Americans are almost evenly split on whether it's more important to control guns versus protect gun ownership. But the differences are really highlighted along party lines. With Republicans overwhelmingly saying it is more important to protect gun ownership.

So is it time for the candidates to address these issues? L.Z., we'll begin with you.

L.Z. GRANDERSON, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Well, I mean, it's always time to address these issues, but I think what's more revealing in that poll isn't necessarily along party lines but about geographical lines. I bet if you did a poll of people living in concentrated areas urban areas versus rural areas, you would see it's not about politics or even race or socioeconomic status. It's about the climate you live in.

I don't understand why we think that one is off. You know, I actually have guns in my home. I live in a less concentrated area in Michigan, but I wouldn't want the rules to me in the west side of my state to apply on the east side of the state, which is much more concentrated and violent and guns are much more prevalent.

SAMBOLIN: Will, do you agree with that?

WILL CAIN, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Look, I would say this, Zoraida, is it time to have this debate again? We've had this debate for 20-plus years.

The arguments are largely the same. There are no new arguments whether or not we should put stricter gun laws on ownership.

And whether or not it happens to be an effective argument politically, I like something L.Z. said, he talked about geography. But the real geography of the matter, I don't think it's urban versus rural. It's actually state-by-state because that's how we make national laws in presidential races, and you won't hear debates in this presidential election because gun control laws don't do well in states like Ohio and Pennsylvania that are important to winning the presidency.

SAMBOLIN: So, do you think that this issue will fade away?

CAIN: I do. Yes. I think as a national issue, a debate, it will fade away.

SAMBOLIN: L.Z., do you agree with that?

GRANDERSON: I don't think the issue is going to will fade away. It never faded away. Our focus may fade from time to time, but that hasn't changed the fact that this is still a problem.

SAMBOLIN: So, let's talk about this Colorado case in particular. Investigators say the suspect purchased four guns legally at different stores around the Denver area, plus 6,000 rounds of ammunition online.

Do you think we need to be policing the amount of ammunition that is sold individually?


GRANDERSON: I'll take that. I'll start off by saying, you know, I live in an area that has a lot of pollen, right? So I need Claritin-D in my life. I'll tell you that.

I can't buy two boxes of Claritin-D at a department store because it's against the law. But I can on the same department with a concealed weapon and buy as much ammo as I want and spray the whole place up. To me that doesn't make any sense.

I spent a lot of time in Mississippi, where my family is from. I cannot buy Claritin-D without a prescription. But I can carry a gun into church or into a sporting arena. That doesn't make any sense to me either.

SAMBOLIN: Will, do you think we should be policing what's sold and to whom?

CAIN: You know, Zoraida, look, here's the deal. In the wake of a national tragedy, it is very understandable that we as a society want to try to find ways to fix this problem. But you have to ask yourself logically then what can be done.

You know, is the answer stricter gun control laws? Is it policing this issue further? Well, you know, in Norway, a place with very strict gun control laws, we saw a year ago a horrible massacre.

Is it owning high-powered assault rifles? Is that what we can do? Well, in Virginia Tech, we saw a guy kill more people than we just saw in Colorado with handguns.

So, the common denominator does not seem to be the laws nor the gun ownership. The common denominator seems to be the mental illness or a problem at the personal level.

So before we run off making rules, we need to ask ourselves do the rules actually solve the problem we're hoping to solve.

SAMBOLIN: Now, do we not think that politically --

GRANDERSON: Well, I think the rules.

SAMBOLIN: Go ahead, L.Z.

GRANDERSON: I was going to say, but I think the rules of anything helps deter. I mean, you're right, the whole saying goes -- guns don't kill people, people kill people. OK, I get that.

But if you can at least deter some mentally disturbed individuals or some people with some anger issues from getting guns and ammunition easily, I think that helps. I don't think we should run away from this discussion just because we can never solve it.

CAIN: I think we constantly deter the ability to deter a madman. And I think James Holmes is actually an illustration of that, as he threw an incendiary device into that theater, as he rigged his home with incendiary devices, people who are sick and mad will do things to accomplish their goals. We need to be able to address this at the personal level if there is a way of addressing this problem, this deviance.

SAMBOLIN: I think at the end of the day, Will, that's probably the absolute truth.

Gentlemen, thank you very much. L.Z. Granderson, Will Cain, thank you very much.

CAIN: Thanks.

SAMBOLIN: We're keeping a close eye on the markets. Down more than 200 points right now.


SAMBOLIN: In less than two hours, we're expected (ph) the man accused of killing 12 people in a Colorado movie theater to make his first appearance in court. And three days after the deadly shooting, there are so many unknowns regarding the accused shooter, James Holmes.

What was his possible motive? What was the former graduate student thinking and what is his state of mind now? Jeff Gardere is a clinical and forensic psychologist and he joins us now to help us try to figure this out to get inside the head of this man.


SAMBOLIN: What we do know about him, everyday says he was a brilliant man.


SAMBOLIN: He graduated with top honors at the university.


SAMBOLIN: He was in a doctoral program. We know that he had quit that program. We don't know the reasons why. When you read everything about this man are there any red flags that you see?

GARDERE: Well, let's start with the doctoral program. He is a brilliant individual and then pulls out of the program, is not doing so well. The tip off for me there might have been some cognitive processes that were being interfered with perhaps with some deranged sorts of thinking.

Certainly we could see from the scope of the carnage perpetrated by this individual, he is extremely emotionally ill, but we don't know whether that rises to the level of a legal insanity.

I look at the fact that he was isolated from other people. Some of the reports have come in that said that at times he was extremely angry when people would try to communicate with him.

His mother says, "Yes, this was my son." So I suspect that his family knew that he had some severe mental health issues but perhaps couldn't reach him or he wouldn't participate in trying to get some help.

SAMBOLIN: So do you think today when he appears in court that they're going to order a psychological evaluation?

GARDERE: Absolutely. They will order that psychological evaluation with a lot of paper and pencil testing, perhaps a psychiatric evaluation to be done by a psychiatrist. Part of this to see what his state of mind is now, whether he's competent to stand trial so he can understand the charges being filed against him.

And then at some point, I -- I - I'm sure they're going to go with an insanity plea because they really have nothing else. There's nothing else he can do but to try to say or for them to say that when he acted when he did this, he was not in his right mind, he was legally insane.

SAMBOLIN: So the police are saying that he's not talking right now. But at the time that he was apprehended, he did talk. He said he had booby-trapped his apartment.

GARDERE: That's right.

SAMBOLIN: What do you make of that? Why do you think he told police that?

GARDERE: Well it -- it -- it is a big mystery as to why he did that, and we won't know for days to come, but part of it, there might have been a moment of clarity. There might have been a moment where he was feeling a guilty conscience for what he had done and didn't want to commit any more carnage.

It could have been a situation of where he is in control, feels in control. Certainly he was, over those victims and felt that he was in control right then and there with the police by showing them how powerful he was and what he could possibly do to them if he wanted to.

SAMBOLIN: You know, a lot of us know people who we would consider loners, right and so now people are asking themselves, how do you know? How can you identify somebody that's on the brink in order to avoid tragedies like this? Is that even possible? Are there any signs that you say this is really serious?

GARDERE: It is possible to know. Again, we look at the isolation, we look at -- we look at the anger, we look at the paranoid thinking. People are out to get me or people don't like me. People disrespect me.

And we see that anger building up, we see some of that magical thinking. I have these powers where I can do this or that and we know it's nonsensical. However, that being said, those red flags aren't enough in nine out of ten cases to contact the police and say, "This person is dangerous."

But it is enough to get that person some help to say this person needs to get mental health treatment before he de-compensates further and that's perhaps what didn't happen with this person, getting ill, at that age of onset for schizophrenia or some severe mental illness and just not getting the help or participating in trying to get the help.

SAMBOLIN: All right, Dr. Jeff Gardere, thank you so much for coming in today and talking to us.

GARDERE: My pleasure.

SAMBOLIN: We really appreciate it.

GARDERE: Thank you.

SAMBOLIN: All right, we're going to take a quick break and we'll be right back.


SAMBOLIN: Katherine Jackson has been found. Michael Jackson's mother and guardian of his three children is staying with a family member in Arizona to de-stress -- that is according to her son, Jermaine. Her nephew reported her missing on Saturday. Concern mounted when Michael Jackson's daughter Paris tweeted that she had not seen her grandmother in a week and wanted her to come home now. Next hour, Nischelle Turner joins us with the latest information on the tragic loss of Usher's stepson, as well.

And we are still watching the DOW, now down more than 220 points. Alison Kosik is at the New York Stock Exchange. We'll get the latest from her at the top of the hour.


SAMBOLIN: Other stories we're watching this morning. Texas border patrol agents this morning are joining the investigation of a horrific crash. Take a look at this. Police say 13 people were killed when a truck veered off a highway, this is southeast Texas. It slammed into two large trees. Ten others were injured there.

And in money, Rupert Murdoch is stepping down from several company boards of directors. It comes one month after his embattled News Corporation announced plans to split its publishing interest from its television and film operations. Murdoch will stay on as CEO of those units.

And in weather, check out this massive dust storm engulfing Phoenix. Some spots reported wind gusts of 60 miles an hour. This was Saturday. The rain storm later washed away all that dust. It's also known as the haboob (ph) there for you.

And in sports, pretty impressive skills from a baseball fan who catches a foul ball with one hand while holding, what we believe is a beer in the other hand. Yes, indeed, something to be proud of. In the next inning of the Rockies/Padres game, guess what, it happened, again. This time a different fan pulling off a similar catch with a beer in the other hand. It's very impressive, gentlemen.

The next hour of CNN NEWSROOM begins after a quick break.