Return to Transcripts main page
Fight Over Jodi-Travis Sex Tape; Brett Seacat Trial
Aired June 10, 2013 - 21:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DR. DREW PINSKY, HOST (voice-over): Tonight, the Jodi Arias sex tape part two. What about this?
JODI ARIAS, CONVICTED MURDERER: Do you remember that time I came to visit you when I was in living in California, and I fell asleep on your chair next to your bed. And you woke me up pulling my pants off and totally licking my (EXPLETIVE DELETED).
PINSKY: Prompting a closed door battle. Now, we know.
Plus, Brett Seacat`s life on the line.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: She has had an answer for everything. Now, it`s time to give the defendant your answer. Find him guilty as charged.
PINSKY: And is the verdict for George Zimmerman already decided in the court of public opinion?
Let`s get started.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PINSKY: Good evening, everybody.
My co-host is Sirius XM host Jenny Hutt.
Coming up, hi, Jenny, Brett Seacat`s murder trial has gone to the jury.
But, first, secret transcripts of closed door arguments about the graphic sex tapes in the Jodi Arias trial. We found some clips that we thought might be new to you. A warning, this is very graphic material. Not appropriate for some viewers. Take a listen.
(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)
TRAVIS ALEXANDER, VICTIM: Why don`t we just talk through a list about happy things and get normalized for a moment, and then we`ll see where it takes us.
ARIAS: We`ll see where it takes us.
ALEXANDER: The beginning of June through like the beginning of July is going to be a busy time in Mr. Alexander`s life.
ARIAS: Yes, me, too.
ALEXANDER: My legs sweat when I`m --
ARIAS: When you sweat like that and I`m on top of you, I slip slide all over.
I don`t break a sweat often. But you, when you and I do stuff, like sometimes I get so sweaty, like my back is just drenched. My whole body is drenched.
ALEXANDER: Oh, you introduced me to KY. Did you know that?
ARIAS: I introduced you to KY?
ALEXANDER: Yes, I`d never -- I`ve heard of it obviously, but I`ve never used it.
ARIAS: Remember the first time that you and I grinded?
(END AUDIO CLIP)
PINSKY: That is her using sex for manipulation and interpersonal terrorism, Jenny. I -- that`s where it got going. People wondered, why he would talk to a girl that`s been stalking him? He opened the door and she just reeled him right in.
JENNY HUTT, CO-HOST: Yes, naked.
PINSKY: Shanna Hogan is an investigative reporter and the author of a book about the Arias trial called "Picture Perfect".
Shanna, the court unsealed hundreds of pages about the documents. Is there even more to come?
SHANNA HOGAN, REPORTER (via telephone): Oh, yes, Dr. Drew, there`s a lot more to come. These transcripts of these closed door meetings between the attorneys and the judge are being released over time and we just don`t know when they`ll be unsealed, but we know there`s a lot more to come.
PINSKY: Thank you, Shanna.
Now, listen, rather than just read for you these transcripts, which have now become public, and again, more to come, it`s time for what we call the DR. DREW ON CALL theater, where my guests will perform part of the argument over the phone sex tape that will actually tell us what actually went on in the court.
Jenny Hutt will play Jennifer Willmott. As Nurmi, Darren Kavinoky.
DARREN KAVINOKY, ATTORNEY: I`m just glad I get to keep my clothes on for a role. Finally, thank you.
PINSKY: Host of "Deadly Sins" on Investigation Discovery.
As our judge, attorney and judge of TV`s Paternity Court, Laura Lake. And of course, as Juan Martinez, attorney Mark Eiglarsh of speaktomark.com.
Mark, open us up here.
MARK EIGLARSH, ATTORNEY: OK. It`s a sex tape. If you want, I can give you like a quote, which is a sample. I know it`s hard, so I apologize. But he says at one point, you know, when I come up there, I`m going to stick it in your beep.
And she responds, you know, oh, she laughs and says that`s so debasing. But I like it.
HUTT: The phone sex tape is what it is. We intend to play the entire tape. The statement that is going to come and stick it up wherever is not for the truth of whether or not he was actually going to do that.
LAUREN LAKE, ATTORNEY: Well, why are you offering it?
HUTT: Because it goes to Ms. Arias`s defense with regard to self- defense and the particular type of grooming of the way Travis treated her.
PINSKY: We`re done?
KAVINOKY: And scene.
PINSKY: Scene. Thank you. Well-done.
Listen. Again, the fact that they were suggesting that that was Willmott there, Jenny, that he was grooming, Jodi, I find problematic.
Lauren, my question is to you, though, would you have let the sex tape in at all?
LAKE: Look, the sex tape is way over the top. I don`t think it needs to be in. I really don`t.
PINSKY: Mark, how about you?
EIGLARSH: Yes, the judge has to let it in. She makes a very good point, and that is, you know, let it go to the weight. Let the jurors hear it and then you can cross-examine on it, you can make argument. But to exclude it possibly sets it up for reversal.
PINSKY: What do you mean, Lauren, no?
LAKE: No. I just think that it`s way over the top and I know it`s not going for the truth of the matter asserted. But at the same time, I just feel like some of the details contained in it, there are other evidence that can bring that information out in the trial.
PINSKY: Jenny, what do you think?
HUTT: Yes, but I think showing that Jodi was a willing and able participant was very important to the heart of this trial. She does not sound like an abused woman even kind of, not even a little.
PINSKY: Well, let`s go to act II. This is the same-sex tape. Again, a sex tape argument. Same cast.
Jenny as Willmott, you start.
It`s the best evidence, judge. They actually hear Travis` voice and Travis talking about the things that he supposedly wouldn`t know if he really was a virgin before he met Ms. Arias.
KAVINOKY: At a time when she is supposedly this crazy stalker person that he doesn`t want around, he`s having phone sex with her and talking about the things that he wishes to do.
PINSKY: All right. Darren, aka --
EIGLARSH: But the bottom line is she`s -- there`s more here. Did I ask you to talk, Dr. Drew?
PINSKY: Go ahead, Martinez, please, go.
EIGLARSH: But the bottom line is she`s the one that called him to initiate that. He`s not the aggressor. She is.
HUTT: That`s all for cross, judge.
EIGLARSH: Oh, I can bring that on cross of Ms. Arias is what I can do. Or can bring it out on the cross of Mr. Alexander. Which of the two? Neither of which I have access to.
HUTT: You can certainly cross the doctors.
EIGLARSH: I don`t want to cross the doctors!
PINSKY: Thank you, thank you, judge.
I`m going to go out to Mr. Nurmi, Darren. Did Jodi testify because that was the only way to get that sex tape in?
KAVINOKY: No, I don`t think that`s the only reason we saw Jodi on the stand. Part of the reason we saw Jodi on the stand is she has an absolute right to testify as a criminal defendant. And we have talked all about Jodi`s mental state and some of the things that might drive her to demand being the center of attention. But there`s a lot to her defense that just absolutely required her to testify or we never would have gotten there.
PINSKY: Lauren, it seems like you`re the one that really doesn`t believe that. I wonder where we`ve taken the sanctity of the courtroom with these sex tapes. Has there -- have we gone to a new place because of this trial?
LAKE: Oh, we definitely have. And trust me, I understand what the lawyers are talking about in terms of it being an important piece of evidence, but I just felt like there was so much in this trial, and there`s parts of it where it`s just so sexually loaded where I think that that -- I just feel like it didn`t necessarily always have to come in every single piece of sexual evidence.
PINSKY: Jenny --
HUTT: I think it did. I think there would have been no trial information ultimately if this didn`t come into play, because I think the defense was using it to try to help them. It didn`t help them. It backfired, thankfully, because it showed what a monster Jodi was. That she was in it and wanting to be in it and she murdered the guy --
LAKE: That`s evident by a lot of the other evidence that was shown in the trial. All I`m saying is some of the super salacious parts of it maybe didn`t necessarily have to. But let`s keep it real, was it entertaining to the jury? And did it keep listening? And was it relevant?
KAVINOKY: It`s more than that. It`s far more than that.
EIGLARSH: That`s not the point.
KAVINOKY: The sanctity of the courtroom doesn`t mean that it`s got to be G or PG-rated.
The courts deal with very adult manner. And the fact of the matter is it was all dealt with in a very professional way. You can`t gut the defense`s case by saying -- well, this is too spicy, we`re not going to let it in.
LAKE: I agree with that. But if something is over the top and repetitive, then every single thing doesn`t need to come in.
PINSKY: Right. And we`re going to actually talk to jurors coming up in a few minutes about what they thought, what they think about what was going on behind the scenes and what they think about these -- what they thought about the tapes and what they thought about the secret meetings. Two of them are here, along with the behavior bureau.
And later, Brett Seacat had his say on the stand. Now, it has gone to the jury. They began deliberations today.
And we are coming right back.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You are recalling times of memory loss with Travis. How is it possible you remember such details from those days if you had a foggy memory?
ARIAS: I`m sorry, can you repeat that, please?
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You are recalling times of memory loss with Travis. How is it possible you remember such details from those days if you had a foggy memory?
ARIAS: The fog or the confusion only begins when he starts screaming.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PINSKY: Time with the behavior bureau. Back with my co-host Jenny Hutt and before we go to our panel, I want to get you a tweet.
Let`s see, here we go. This is from (INAUDIBLE).
Everybody, I have to give it to you all, you guys rocked it. Awesome job tonight. Way to go, Jenny, Mark, hats off to you. I laughed, I cried. Again, well-done.
Joining us now, Wendy Walsh, psychologist and author of "30-Day Love Detox"; psychotherapist Robi Ludwig, author of "Till Death Do Us Part", and Casey Jordan, attorney and criminologist. Jodi Arias jurors, Tara Kelley and Marilou Allen-Coogan also joining us on the phone.
Tara, the phone sex tape wasn`t a definite, we`re finding out now. My question to you is would this trial have been different for the jurors without it? I mean, obviously, on the surface, it would be different. But would it have made a substantive difference?
TARA KELLEY, JUROR #17, JODI ARIAS TRIAL (via telephone): You know, it would have made the trial a lot quicker if it hasn`t been admitted. You know, I don`t think it would have made a difference. I think the sex deviancy was just a distraction from the truth of the matter what really happened.
You know, for me honestly, the sex tape humanized Travis. You actually got to hear Travis` choice and got to hear the interaction between the two. And based on conversation, she did not sound like somebody who was abused.
PINSKY: Marilou, I want to ask you next, apparently you said that Travis gives -- somebody says gives no indication -- you said no indication of being stalked, displays no fearful behavior and continued his contact with Jodi of his own accord.
Who is saying this now? Can somebody in the courtroom tell me this? Marilou, that had been your question to the jury. I understand.
So how do you reconcile Jodi`s claim of domestic violence if she continues her contact with Travis on her own accord? Where was her fearful behavior?
Marilou, that`s a great question. What made you ask that?
MARILOU ALLEN-COOGAN, JODI ARIAS JUROR (via telephone): Well, I wanted to see the defense was trying to push the domestic violence defense, and I didn`t see any indication that she had any fearful behavior at all.
ALLEN-COOGAN: It didn`t make sense to me.
PINSKY: Right. In fact, she was coming back to him repeatedly, as supposed to, Marilou, you were an ER nurse. You and I have seen emergency rooms, too many case of domestic violence to count, I`m sure. And those people are usually trapped in a domestic violence situation. They aren`t traveling 800 miles to go visit someone who`s a perpetrator. Do you agree with that?
PINSKY: And -- yes, thank you, Marilou.
And, Tara, you didn`t get passed -- you didn`t get a chance to ask this of Dr. Samuels. Does PTSD or amnesia have anything to do with why Jodi killed Travis? Is that right?
KELLEY: Yes, that was a question that I had. And again, I felt like it was another distraction of what really happened. The PTSD/amnesia claims, that happened well after the murder. So to me, I just again thought it was another distraction, just like this sex deviancy.
PINSKY: All right. Let`s bring it out to the panel. So much of this case was just a distraction. Here`s my feeling about what we were hearing about.
I think we were hearing, Casey -- I thought we were hearing about a woman who herself was the perpetrator of some kind of a domestic violence and he was sucked into it, and her strategy of using sex as her weapon failed, then she transitioned over to violence.
Is this all just another case of the legal system interfering, coming to terms with mental health issues and having trouble doing so?
CASEY JORDAN, CRIMINOLOGIST: Well, yes. In a nutshell, yes. But this is a highly complex, complicated case with many layers of psychological intrigue going on on both the behalf of the victim and Jodi Arias.
The bottom line is why would somebody record those conversations? To me, they really indicate how calculating, how manipulative, how contrived those conversations were. I`m convinced she planned on blackmailing him. And it really -- I`m very happy that they were actually admitted.
I think Tara`s questions were really good. You know, where is the PTSD? Where does that fit into any of this? I really think the criminal justice system, if it is unprepared to deal with mental illness and a case like Jodi Arias, the answer is to let the evidence in and let the jury decide for themselves what they think of the state of mind of the perpetrator and the victim.
PINSKY: So you`re enthusiastically endorsing having those sex tapes in the courtroom.
JORDAN: Yes. I think that you really -- I mean, Jodi Arias is an extraordinarily manipulative person. Everybody agrees on that. But those sex tapes really show her true colors. And if you had your doubts, they really were hard, forensic evidence of what she was up to at that time.
And you do see Travis as the victim. Yes, he`s intrigued, he`s titillated by her conversation, but she`s just gushing about stuff that most people keep private and I do think that was part of the setup. She planned on blackmailing him if he tried to leave her.
HUTT: Well, here`s my question for the jurors. Had the sex tape sounded something other than what you heard? For instance, had Jodi Arias sounded less enthusiastic about being involved with Travis and less into it, would that have changed the outcome, do you think? Because even with all that evidence, would that have shown you maybe she was not really into it, maybe she was forced to behave in a way she was not comfortable with?
PINSKY: Marilou, you first.
ALLEN-COOGAN: Yes, absolutely. If I saw any indication, it would have changed my opinion.
KELLEY: You know, I don`t think so. Again, I just think the whole sex thing was a distraction. To me, it didn`t show any type of abuse as far as that aspect of it.
PINSKY: Wendy, go ahead.
WENDY WALSH, PSYCHOLOGIST: Well, what`s fascinating is that this tape was played for the defense to try to show that potentially she was abused. But in fact, I hear the jurors saying that it humanized Travis. When you listen to it, he actually feels like he`s having authentic emotions and feelings, and she feels like she`s reading a script, doesn`t she, when you listen to it?
PINSKY: What I was surprised, yes --
ROBI LUDWIG, PSYCHOLOGIST: I didn`t get that feeling.
PINSKY: Robi, go ahead.
LUDWIG: I mean, I didn`t get the feeling that Jodi was reading a script. If anything, I think it shows how obsessed Jodi was with Travis, and how important this relationship was to her and her identity. And I don`t know exactly why she was having this conversation taped, but I mentioned it once before, and I think that there`s a lot of truth to this.
I imagine -- I can almost see Jodi listening to the tapes and the nuances of the tapes when she wasn`t with Travis.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I agree.
LUDWIG: Just to tease out how much he loved her and how successful she was at seducing him. But if anything, I think it shows how Travis in some way was an innocent up against Jodi`s type of illness.
PINSKY: And somebody is agreeing, I think Tara was agreeing.
Someone in the behavior always makes me creep out. Thanks, Robi, for bringing me there today already. That is a creepy image of her listening to tapes. I don`t want to think about that.
But, Jenny, go ahead.
HUTT: I was going to say I agree 100 percent with Robi. It`s like a trophy. It`s like a serial killer who saves a skull. It was her heir trophy of their relationship and was a reminder --
PINSKY: I`ll you what --
WALSH: Yes, but -- I don`t mean to defend Jodi here, but plenty of single girls listen to the voicemails of the guys they have crushes on over and over and over.
PINSKY: Wendy --
WALSH: I`m not saying I have.
PINSKY: Yes. We`ve established that everyone does stalking light once in a while, has done it in their life. I understand that, Wendy.
But yes, you`re right, there`s some sort of tantalizing quality to that connection with the voice. But I`ll tell you what got me today, what we listened to earlier in the previous block, was how quickly and slippery and how quickly she reeled him in.
Casey, did you hear that, that tape we play? She was like -- I mean, the allure and the way she worked her way in so fast. I was shocked by that today.
JORDAN: Yes. But, Drew, you just creeped me out by using the word slippery, because that`s the word that Jodi Arias used in the tape.
WALSH: Right, agreed.
PINSKY: Mea culpa.
JORDAN: If you want to use the word contrived and calculated. I`m going to split the difference. I think Robi could be absolutely correct, that she wanted the keep them and replay them to hear Travis` voice and to see the impact that she had on making him talk to her in sexual ways, which was such the antithesis of what Travis was like to the outside world.
But I still think it was a setup. She recorded those. She asked him those specific questions. She brought up those sexual scenarios to memorialize it, not so she could listen to it again, but so she could say if you try to leave me, I`m going to tell everyone in the outside what you have done.
PINSKY: Which is high stakes for him.
Let me get one more question to jurors. This would have gone to Jodi. It says, "It was brought up earlier in trial that you had a breast enhancement done while living in the house with Darrell. Can you explain why you did this given the financial constraints you and Darrell were experiencing?"
It`s a good question. Anybody want to react to that? The jurors, did you guys -- did Tara or Marilou know that had been asked?
KELLEY: I didn`t know that had been asked.
PINSKY: Seems like a good question, doesn`t it, Tara?
KELLEY: I think in the fact that she was saying, you know, Travis always borrowed money from her and stuff like that, I think it showed that maybe that wasn`t necessarily the truth.
PINSKY: And, Marilou, let me just finish with this. You`re again the ER nurse in the group. Are the -- is the group holding together as cohesively as say the last week when we spoke together? Are people starting to have symptoms now, sort of let down, some sort of acute stress reaction? Or is everyone holding together pretty well?
ALLEN-COOGAN: From what I understand, everyone`s trying to hold together pretty well. We`re trying to get together a bunch of us this weekend. So, we`ll see.
PINSKY: Fair enough. Have a nice time, guys. Thank you, Marilou. Thank you, Tara.
Next, verdict watch begins in the Brett Seacat murder case. Did crossing argument seal his fate? We`ll get into that.
And later, the behavior bureau comes back to analyze Brett`s smiles on the stand during interrogation.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIPS)
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: He made threats continuously in a time period leading up to the divorce, threatens to take the kids away. He threatens that if she ever leaves, if she ever has an affair, that he`ll kill her. If you divorce me, I will kill you, I will burn the house down, and I will make it look like you did it.
And none of those threats deterred her from divorce, so he had to make good on them. It proves beyond a reasonable doubt that Brett Seacat committed these murders.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I told you that we knew that Vashti had had bouts of depression going back to high school. We`ve got HCG onboard, causes depression. We have a victim of child sex abuse, causes depression.
Depression. Now, recurrent depression. She instead was on a drug that causes depression. If it causes depression and you already have depression, gee, I wonder what happens.
(END VIDEO CLIPS)
PINSKY: Welcome back. My co-host is Jenny Hutt and we are now in verdict watch in the Brett Seacat case, the ex-cop is charged with having murdered his wife and setting the house on fire to cover it up. The prosecution held nothing back.
Jenny, you want to make a comment?
HUTT: I do want to comment. First of all, depression doesn`t always equal suicide, thankfully. So let me start with that.
HUTT: And B, Seacat is a smarmy -- ugh. I want him to go away.
PINSKY: A smarmy ugh. Well, those clinical, I like the way you sort of frame them. Way to go, Jenny.
But the fact is HCG is not known really to cause depression. The circumstance is just awfully shady, the fact that he had threatened -- anyway, we`ll talk more about it.
Let`s look at this tape.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PROSECUTOR: You threatened to kill Vashti, burn the house down and make it look like she committed a suicide.
BRETT SEACAT, MURDER DEFENDANT": I absolutely never said anything even remotely like that.
PROSECUTOR: You killed your wife, didn`t you?
SEACAT: No, ma`am.
PROSECUTOR: You shot her in the head.
PROSECUTOR: You burnt the house down around her.
SEACAT: I would never burn our house.
PROSECUTOR: And you did it while your two kids, 2 years and 4 years old, were in the house.
SEACAT: Absolutely not. I would never expose my children to any situation like that.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PINSKY: Back with us to discuss, Darren Kavinoky, Lauren Lake, Mark Eiglarsh, and CNN correspondent Ted Rowlands.
Ted, we couldn`t see Seacat`s face during that cross-examination. What was his demeanor during those exchanges?
TED ROWLANDS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Drew, in the cross examination, he was very intense. He leaned up in his chair and he was combative. You could tell that he was trying to send out the message that he was going to go toe-to-toe with this prosecutor, and he came across as sort of an investigator/attorney. The one thing he didn`t come across as is the grieving husband.
PINKSY: How about during the closing arguments? Sounds almost threatening, Ted. But I wondered almost during the closing arguments how he appeared.
ROWLANDS: He was -- when his defense attorney was up there, he was focused in and thinking oh, this is great. But when the prosecution was up there, there were a few times where he had this look of bewilderment, like good God, they`re making me sound like a murderer.
And he talked to his lawyer, you know, he was questioned back and forth. It was -- it was almost distracting. But I looked at the jury and they were not focused on him at all. They were zeroed in on the prosecutor.
Ted, stay with us.
Lauren, she was planning a trip to Mexico with her sister. She told friends she was looking forward to her life after divorce. What else have we learned?
LAKE: I`m sorry, Dr. Drew --
PINSKY: You lost your piece?
LAKE: Yes, and I can`t -- I missed you for a second.
PINKSKY: It`s OK. Don`t worry.
Jenny, I`ll go to you with this. She was going to go to Mexico.
PINSKY: We`ve learned that -- yes, I mean, there`s no sign of depression anywhere, bottom line.
HUTT: Right. The word I should have used before was he`s a monster. I just get so emotional when I see this guy that I might go to the profanity place and I don`t want to. So, then, "ugh" comes out. We`ve learned that she was really hopeful. She had filed for divorce. Now, she was free. That`s not when one ends one`s life.
PINSKY: Mark, none of the witnesses that testified on Vashti`s behalf said she was depressed. Did that hurt the defense? Or did they keep barreling right through it? In fact, they brought up today at the closing arguments, suddenly, she`s a sexual abuse survivor. Where did all that come from?
EIGLARSH: Let`s make something very clear. I am certain of two things. One, Jenny`s hair looks great tonight. And secondly, he will be convicted. And the main reasons why include, number one, the physical evidence doesn`t match his story. There would have been soot in her lungs if she was -- if she died in a manner in which he claimed.
And then, secondly, who burns their house down with children that she loves in the other room? That makes no sense. And third, the marriage counselor said he admitted everything to her. What`s her motive to lie?
PINSKY: Exactly, exactly. And Mark, we kid Jenny, but she looks like Ariel from "The Little Mermaid," doesn`t she, when her hair like this, don`t you agree? No?
EIGLARSH: Fabulous. Yes.
KAVINOKY: We`re talking hair. Come on, Drew.
PINSKY: Yes, Darren. In fact, your head was not shiny tonight.
PINSKY: What did the defense do right, Darren? What did they do right?
KAVINOKY: Well, you know, in this particular case, I have to say, I think there`s a special place in hell reserved for Mr. Seacat. And really, fundamentally, as Mark points out, the evidence just didn`t match, but as bad as our acting might have been at the table reading tonight, his acting from those interrogation tapes was worst!
It was like one of those old Godzilla movies where the dialogue doesn`t match up with the mouth. It landed horribly, and he had to get up on the stand to try for some redemption. And I agree with Mark. I think it fails and I think, ultimately, Jenny is going to get her wish. He`s going away.
PINSKY: I don`t know if the producers caught this, but the attorneys are now making comment, giving notes to acting. See, the acting ability of people in the courtroom.
PINSKY: Lauren, I want to go to you. Sixty-one witnesses reported on the stand. Sixty-one in such a short period of time. How did they do that and did it help the defense or hurt them?
LAUREN LAKE, ATTORNEY: Well, you know what? That was a lot of information in a short amount of time. At the end of the day, I feel like I wasn`t in the courtroom, but for the defense, that`s a lot of witnesses. And the evidence did not add up for them.
And I don`t think it helps them. And what I felt was most important was the laundry list of things I heard that prosecutor lay out today that in order for the story to go the way the defense claimed it would have gone. It would have had to be this and that, and he would have had to call here. It was so compelling, Dr. Drew.
Honestly, I was in the middle of the work and when I was listening to the coverage on HLN, I stopped everything and I was like you better go, girl. That prosecutor laid it out.
PINSKY: I think you`re absolutely right. Next up, the behavior bureau is back regarding a friend`s claim that Brett Seacat had a difficult childhood. We`re going to dig into that, how that may have impacted on him, whether or not this business about the wife having had sexual abuse was or was not a contributing factor.
And later, Trayvon Martin`s death sparked nationwide outrage. Will this affect the George Zimmerman trial and how?
VINNIE POLITAN, HLN ANCHOR: Coming up at the top of the hour on "HLN After Dark," it`s day one of jury selection in the George Zimmerman case. But Ryan, I don`t call it jury selection. It`s actually juror rejection, because you don`t pick jurors, you get rid of them.
RYAN SMITH, HLN ANCHOR: They were going to do our own version of jury rejection. You see our 12 men and women of our in-studio jury, six of them will make our jury, six of them will get the big red X.
POLITAN: Oh, I wonder if they`ll be upset if they get X. Anyhow, we`re doing our own jury selection. Day one of George Zimmerman, top of the hour, "HLN After Dark."
"APRIL," GREW UP WITH BRETT SEACAT: I think he was just a very controlling person. And with Vashti filing for divorce and gaining back her own control, he decided to take it back by controlling on how she left him.
PINSKY: Tell me about Brett`s mother. You would see her once in a while and tell me about her.
"APRIL": Yes. She worked at an appliance store there in town. And, we all thought she was a little odd.
PINSKY: April, how about the dad?
"APRIL": The dad was a highway patrol trooper. I would say like military-style. We were sure that he ruled his house with an iron fist.
PINSKY: Do you believe that Brett would be someone capable of murder?
PINSKY: Oh, my goodness.
PINSKY: That was April who described herself as a family friend of the Seacats. They are her experiences and her interpretations of interactions with that family, of course. Back with my co-host, Jenny Hutt, and the behavior bureau, Wendy Walsh, Robi Ludwig, and Casey Jordan.
Casey, I want to go to you first. You know, these days when you`ve got the Newtown, Connecticut, the Aurora, Colorado, and these things are -- particularly Aurora, Colorado cases in the courtroom now, it feels like cases like this, the Seacat case and so many that we read about in the news is a complex relationship.
And you`re the exact person I want to discuss this because you have expertise in mental health and in the legal system. This relationship between mental health and legal system, we just never seem to get it right. And here`s another situation where a lot of mental health`s terminology and things were thrown around the courtroom, and frankly, misused, it seemed like to me. Can you help us understand how this is going to -- how the future looks for this, perhaps, or maybe where this goes wrong?
CASEY JORDAN, CRIMINOLOGIST: Well, the frustration, and I see it every single day in the court system, both in doing defense work and I do mediations and divorce cases and everything else. The key is that there is this thing called the constitution. When you start looking at these criminal cases where everyone says after the fact, I could see that he would be a murderer (ph), the writing was on the wall.
He was controlling. He was manipulative. I mean, when everybody agrees on that, we want to blame the system and say, why couldn`t the criminal justice system stop this before it happened? And it`s a simple answer. You can`t just intervene and civilly commit anyone until they actually do something, cause harm, a real threat to themselves or others.
And that`s a very scary thing to think that people can get locked up over anything less. So, there is this huge problem where we want the system to step in, but they can`t until you have a tragedy like the Seacat case.
PINSKY: Jenny, you`re nodding your head, but I think there`s still an imbalance between personal liberties and privacy issues versus the safety of the community. Is that what you want to talk about?
HUTT: Well, again, I would totally agree with you -- with that, Dr. Drew, that there has to be more done and more sort of assistance provided. However, I think what Casey said is spot-on. There are a lot of people walking around who seem somewhat creepy, but wouldn`t do this sort of horrific crime.
HUTT: So, it`s finding a balance between who`s really off the rails and who`s just a little bit nutty.
PINSKY: OK. Now, Wendy, Vashti was an alleged survivor of sexual abuse. This is what the defense said in their closing arguments. How do we understand that figuring into the story? Do you think it would have made a difference if we think about her as an abuse survivor?
WENDY WALSH, PH.D., AUTHOR, "30-DAY LOVE DETOX": No. I think they`re really grasping for straws here, the defense, in the sense that they`re trying to make some kind of causality to this whole idea that she committed suicide. That if she was sexually abused, then therefore she must be depressed, therefore, she must have committed suicide.
Well, those are three big leaps, because most people who are sexually abused don`t necessarily commit suicide nor most people who are depressed. So, I think they`re reaching for straws. But I do want to say one thing about the legal system and mental health. I do find that since juries are becoming more sophisticated and they`re also more compassionate, that they`re looking at these criminals and saying do we really want to convict them? They do seem like they`re mentally ill.
PINSKY: Interesting. And finally, Robi, Brett told his wife the manner in which he would kill her. He actually said this is what he`s going to do. What was that about?
ROBI LUDWIG, PH.D., PSYCHOLOGIST: Well, that`s very common for men and husbands who end up killing their wives. Very often, there`s a warning. There`s a statement, "I am going to kill you." The wife often feels very afraid and threatened and fears for her life. And in many, many cases, the husbands will lay out how they plan to kill their wives.
It`s probably something that they`ve ruminated over for a long time. And especially, I want to say in domestic violence cases where they lose control, the woman decides to leave, then the man who feels worthless and is able to defend against that worthlessness has to face himself, and that`s intolerable.
PINSKY: Yes. I remember that --
LUDWIG: And that`s usually when they act out.
PINSKY: Remember that guy that blew his kids up in the house, burned everything down, remember that, a couple months ago. I think it was up in Northern California or something.
All right, guys. Thank you very much. If you`ve got a question --
HUTT (ph): Josh Powell.
PINSKY: Josh Powell, thank you very much. If you have a question for the behavior bureau, send us a tweet @DrDrewHLN #behavior bureau. We will put it up -- we will put it to the behavior bureau.
Next, does the death of Trayvon Martin represent anything about the culture of fear in this country? Back after this.
PINSKY: back with my co-host, Jenny Hutt. And we are discussing the George Zimmerman case. It`s complicated. It`s gone on for more than a year. And joining us to discuss, this is the first day of the trial, everybody, they`re just trying to select a jury here. Mark Eiglarsh, Lauren Lake, and Michael Skolnik, editor-in-chief of GlobalGrind.com.
He`s on the board of the Trayvon Martin Foundation. Mark, first, I want to straighten something out for me. Why only six jurors in Florida?
EIGLARSH: Because this is not a life felony. A life felony is when the possible penalty could be a term of life imprisonment. Anything short of that here in Florida, you get six jurors.
PINSKY: All right. Now, do we have -- OK, I have a question for the panel, generally. It seems like the -- where the relationship between these men went off the rail -- well, we could sort of conceptualize it this way. Fear was at the foundation of what happened here. Michael, I want to ask you. Who these days is afraid of whom and why and what does this tragedy tell us about that?
MICHAEL SKOLNIK, EDITOR, GLOBALGRIND.COM: Well, Drew, I don`t think much has changed since only 16 months ago when Trayvon Martin was murdered on February 26th, 2012. I mean, he was walking through Sanford, Floria with a hoodie on and pair of jeans and George Zimmerman was afraid of him, was profiled him, and called the police and saying he looked suspicious.
I just came from Sanford. I had dinner in Sanford. I guarantee you, if I wore a pair of jeans and hoodie, no one is going to stop me. No one is going to say, hey, what are you doing in my neighborhood? Why are you here? And the simple answer is because I`m white. Trayvon was Black. He was stopped. He was profiled. And ultimately, he was killed.
PINSKY: And I think, Lauren, that Trayvon was afraid of Zimmerman, also. There`s fear in both directions. No?
LAKE: Well, absolutely. If you`ve got a man in a car staring you down, then coming to pursue you, of course, this young kid would be scared. And Dr. Drew, I have to say that this fear that`s clothed in racist undertones, it`s at the crux of this case and it`s going to open up the larger context in our society that we have to deal with our dirty little secret, that we still have these racist thoughts that would allow something to happen to a child carrying a Skittles and an iced tea with a hoodie on in the rain. It`s just unbelievable.
PINSKY: Jenny, go.
HUTT: I have to agree. This case was so upsetting from the outset. I remember when it happened, and it was devastating. This was a kid. Exactly, with Skittles and an iced tea. And for sure, Zimmerman was afraid of this kid. And I think Mark can speak to this better than I can probably because he`s a criminal attorney, but, I don`t know if the stand your ground thing is going to apply here, because Zimmerman did stalk Trayvon Martin initially.
And then, to me, it looked like even if Trayvon fought for himself, I feel like Zimmerman was the initial aggressor and this should have never happened. Of course, Trayvon would have been afraid.
PINSKY: Mark, go ahead.
EIGLARSH: Yes. O`Mara has said to me privately and publicly he`s not going with stand your ground. He`s arguing traditional self-defense. He`s arguing conveniently that the person who was killed somehow placed him in fear. Here`s the problem. We know that Zimmerman isn`t telling the whole truth. He conveniently killed the one person who could explain what really went on there.
Why Trayvon felt such fear? And why, ultimately, he reacted in a physical way? I think that had a lot to do with how Zimmerman treated him. And unfortunately, we don`t have all the facts and won`t ever have all the facts.
PINSKY: Michael, finish up real quick.
SKOLNIK: I`ve got to say, you know, if George Zimmerman is making (ph) a claim of self-defense in this trial, he has to take the stand. He has to have the courage to take the stand and tell America and tell the world, I was acting in self-defense. If he doesn`t, he`s a coward.
PINSKY: OK. You heard it here first. Michael, you say -- you challenge him to. Mark says he will. We`ll have more on the Zimmerman trial after this.
EIGLARSH: He`s going to. He has to. He has to.
PINSKY: So you say.
PINSKY: I`m back with my co-host, Jenny Hutt. We`ve been talking about the George Zimmerman trial, which began today. My question to you guys, I`ll throw this up to Lauren first, can Zimmerman find an impartial jury?
LAKE: I do believe he can, Dr. Drew. Will it be hard? Absolutely. Will it take some time? Yes. But the point is is that he`s not trying to find a jury -- you`re not going to find a jury that doesn`t have bias against things at all. That just doesn`t exist. We all have biases. The question is despite those biases, despite those believes, can you be impartial?
Can you apply the law impartially? And I think as we`ve seen through the trials we`ve been watching on HLN, Casey Anthony, jurors come up with decisions that we kind of say, huh? Because they`ve applied the law impartially. They take their job seriously.
PINSKY: Mark, go ahead.
EIGLARSH: Yes, and the only thing I would add is that they need to make a decision solely based on the evidence that is presented, not what`s in the media, and then, the law as applied to them by the judge. Here`s the problem. I think you`re going to find stealth jurors in this trial. Those who say, yes, I can set aside all my biases and prejudices and get that guy or vice versa. I have concerns about that.
PINSKY: Now, Michael, you were actually with the Martin Family today. Can you update us on how they`re doing?
SKOLNIK: Sure. It was an emotional day for the family. I was at the courthouse with the family all day. There was -- family in prayer. This family has been so courageous in their fight for justice for their child. But I want to say about the jury as well. I sat in the courtroom this afternoon and listened to some of the questions by the lawyers and the jury. You know, what was interesting, there was one woman, a potential jury member, who said she doesn`t have cable television.
She has rabbit ear antennas on her television. She has, 2, 4, 5, 32, and 72 on her television. So, I think there are a lot of people in this country and in Seminole County who haven`t paid attention, who haven`t watched this trial day in and day out. So, we believe -- we strongly believe in the American justice system and we do believe we`ll find a fair jury. We do believe we`ll find folks from this county who will be impartial and listen to the evidence and make the right decision.
PINSKY: Mark, what goes on in your fair state of Florida?
PINSKY: I blame you.
EIGLARSH: Well, hopefully, people listen to the evidence and make a proper decision.
PINSKY: We`ll see.
EIGLARSH: It`s my fault?
PINSKY: Thank you, guys. Next up, we`ll have the last call. We`ll be right back.
PINSKY: Time for the last call. Before I get to my co-host, Jenny Hutt, I want to say a shout out to Danine Manette who`s a contributor here. She`s sick at home watching us. She wants to really dig in to the Zimmerman case. Come on back as soon as you`re well. We`ll have you in here. Jenny, you have a question before we wrap?
HUTT: Yes. How do we get society as a whole serve (ph) to respect the system? Because I happen to think Zimmerman should get in trouble for what happened. That`s my opinion. I`m not a juror. But let`s say he doesn`t. How do we get the system -- how do we get people to respect it and not flip out?
PINSKY: I don`t know. It scares me what`s going to kind of bubble up here either way. It`s a galvanizing, galvanizing case. And, we`ll continue covering it here at HLN. Jenny, thank you, for joining me. Thank you all for participating tonight. Of course, thank you for watching. We will see you next time. And, "HLN After Dark" begins right now.