Return to Transcripts main page


NSA Leaker Speaks Out; Cancer Charity Ripoff; Former Hit Man Testifies Against Whitey Bulger; Midshipman Details Alleged Gang Rape by Classmates

Aired June 17, 2013 - 22:00   ET


ANDERSON COOPER, CNN ANCHOR: Good evening, everyone. It's 10:00 here on the East Coast.

And, tonight, Edward Snowden resurfaces online, answering allegations that he's spying for China. He talks about why he believes he will never get a fair trial in the U.S. and revels in the honor, as he puts it, of some people calling him a traitor.

Later, there might not be honor among thieves, but what about alleged killers? What made a former hit man who confessed to murdering 20 people turn on his former associate James "Whitey" Bulger? And we will show you what happened during their courtroom confrontation today.

We begin tonight, though, "Keeping Them Honest" with a challenge that remains unanswered. Now, last week, after profiling three so-called cancer charities that seemed only to care about their profits, I challenged the people who run them to come on this program or talk to our correspondent Drew Griffin.

Let them explain, I said, the facts uncovered by Drew, "The Tampa Bay Times" and the Center for Investigative Reporting that show these charities, and I use that term loosely, to be abusing and squandering your hard-earned donations like none we have ever seen before.

Tonight, not one of the three has taken us up on that challenge. Two of the three, though, have spoken out elsewhere. But the things they're saying raise more questions and, frankly, don't make sense.

Before we go to Drew Griffin, who has got the latest information on that, I just want to show you his original report, so you can reacquaint yourself with all the players and what they have been doing with all the money that donors believed -- and I emphasize the word believed -- was going to help cancer victims.


DREW GRIFFIN, CNN INVESTIGATIVE CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Drive down these country roads outside Knoxville, Tennessee, and into this small industrial park, and you will find the headquarters of a family conglomerate of cancer charities that return lavish salaries to their owners, but according to their own tax records, donate very little to dying cancer patients, and the last thing the people running this charity want to do is answer questions. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Don't -- don't turn your camera on me. OK?

GRIFFIN: Across the country, in Mesa, Arizona, another outpost of the conglomerate, it's called the Breast Cancer Society. Its CEO and executive director, the man escaping in the truck, James Reynolds Jr.

(on camera): Excuse me, sir, Mr. Reynolds. Hey, excuse me, Mr. Reynolds, right here, buddy, Mr. Reynolds. Hi, hi, can you stop for a second? No, where you going Mr. Reynolds? Mr. Reynolds.

(voice-over): Back in Knoxville, there is another cancer charity, the Children's Cancer Fund of America, and this one run by yet another member of the family, Rose Perkins.

(on camera): Hi. Is Rose Perkins in?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: She's not available and she's not doing any interviews.

GRIFFIN (on camera): Why wouldn't she do us any interviews? She's running a charity here for kids with cancer. Right? That seems like a good idea.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It is. That's what I have been just told to tell you she's not doing interviews.

GRIFFIN: Can you tell us what you guys do, any positive things you do with the money you collect?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You can send your questions to her e-mail.

GRIFFIN: OK. What is that e-mail?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: And we will answer it.

GRIFFIN: If you were asking us for money, what would you say you did with your money?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We help children with cancer.

GRIFFIN: How do you do that?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: What do you mean how do we do that? We help children with cancer.

GRIFFIN: Yes, how? In what way?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We provide them a financial assistance.

GRIFFIN: Financial assistance?


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: If you have any questions, please send them to her e-mail.

GRIFFIN: OK. My question...

(voice-over): Rose Perkins did e-mail us and tell us her charity has a clear conscience "because we feel we are making a good difference in people's lives," but also told us an interview is "not something we can consider."

That may be because of the questions we'd like to ask her and the other members of her extended family, who are essentially making a living on your donations.

Rose Perkins, the CEO of the Children's Cancer Fund, is paid $227,442 a year. Her ex-husband, James Reynolds Sr., is president and CEO of Cancer Fund of America. He gets paid $236,815. And James Reynolds Jr., president and CEO of the Breast Cancer Society, has a salary of $261,609.

It's money that comes from donors like you who in 2011 sent these three charities $26 million in cash. How much of those donations actually went to helping cancer patients? According to the charity's own tax records, about 2 percent in cash.

Example, the Cancer Fund of America raised $6 million through its fund-raising campaign in 2011 and gave away just $14,940 in cash. But that is not what you would hear from the telemarketers hired by the Cancer Fund of America run by James Reynolds Sr.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: OK. How much of my $10 will go -- who is this to?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Cancer Fund of America support services.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: One hundred percent of your donation goes into the fund where we purchase medical supplies for these cancer patients. We also do the hospice care for the terminally ill and we supply over 600 hospice offices with medical supplies all over the United States.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: OK. But how much of my $10 will go...

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It goes 100 percent towards the charity itself. I'm calling directly from the charity, and not a telemarketing agency.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Oh, well, that's great, then.

GRIFFIN: According to the Iowa Attorney General's Office, which gave us these recordings, those phone call statements are one great big lie. The callers were telemarketers being paid to make the call. The state of Iowa fined the telemarketing company $35,000 for making false representations.

As for donations to other charities, the Cancer Fund of America claimed on its 2011 tax filings it sent $761,000 in so-called "gifts in kind," not actually cash, to churches, some hospitals and other programs around the country. When we called or e-mailed those other charities to check, many of them said they did get something, things like these supplies. But several of the groups told us they never heard of the Cancer Fund of America or don't remember getting a thing.

The cancer fund also takes credit for serving as a middleman, brokering transfer of another $16 million worth of gifts in kind to individuals and other charities, many of them overseas. Those contributions double up both as revenue and donations on the same tax forms.

Back at the Cancer Fund of America's corporate office, even the chief financial officer, who by the way, has a salary of $121,000, couldn't explain what was happening.

(on camera): We just have all these -- Mississippi North Medical Center, never heard of you. Yolanda Barco Oncology Institute, nothing.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I don't know if that's one of the ones we looked up, but again, you would have to talk to him.

GRIFFIN (voice-over): The "him" is James Reynolds Senior, the founder, who finally told us in an e-mail, his boy thought it unwise to talk to CNN. Even though in a different e-mail he called the news of phantom donations, quote, "most disturbing."

As for his son, James Reynolds Jr. and his charity in Arizona.

(on camera): Hey, how are you?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The camera needs to stay outside.

GRIFFIN: Can he stay right there? Is Mr. Reynolds here?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I'm sorry, he's not in right now.

GRIFFIN: The public relations officer for the Breast Cancer Society, Kristina Hixson, who by the way, is married to James Reynolds Jr., sent us e-mails telling us the Breast Cancer Society's "guiding mission is to provide relief to those who suffer from the effects of breast cancer" and that "we've made a difference in the lives of tens of thousands of men and women." But declined our request for an on- camera interview.

And when our camera found James Reynolds Jr., he made sure we got the message with a single-finger salute.


COOPER: This guy's running a charity, flipping you the bird.

James Reynolds Jr. still isn't talking to us. The Breast Cancer Society charity he runs, they're responding to your report. And they're pretty harshly accusing the reporting as grossly ignorant at best and that we plan to -- quote -- "hold them accountable." What are they saying we got grossly inadequate?

GRIFFIN: Anderson, the headline of the charity's Web site is, "What is the truth about the Breast Cancer Society that you won't hear from CNN's Anderson Cooper's show?"

They claim 75 percent, not 2 percent, of their donations go to charity. But, as we have reported, it's just not so. The Breast Cancer Society took in $13 million in 2011. It gave away, according to its own tax filings, just 2.4 percent of that money to cancer patients or families.

We do know where $261,000 went, and that is into the pocket of the guy giving us the finger, James Reynolds Jr. That's his salary.

And as for you and your show, Anderson, this is what the Breast Cancer Society thinks of the report: "We believe it was maliciously fabricated to support a very crooked and slanderous agenda that Anderson Cooper's show should be ashamed of."

So, there you go, Anderson.

COOPER: What's the agenda? Did they say?

GRIFFIN: No, they did not say, other than that we want to boost ratings with reports like this.

COOPER: So, this guy's father is also involved in a questionable charity, the Cancer Fund of America. Is he talking?

GRIFFIN: Yes, Anderson, but, again, not to us.

James Reynolds Sr. really isn't disputing the fact that just 2 percent or so of the money raised goes to cancer patients; 80 percent, he says, admits really, goes to fund-raisers, along with his $237,000 salary.

But get this. He granted an interview to a local affiliate in Knoxville, Tennessee -- it's a CNN affiliate -- where he said the mission of his charity is really not to give financial assistance, but rather to give gifts that make cancer patients and their families feel good.

They maybe donated gifts. He's essentially re-gifting. But he thinks giving away adult diapers, fans and even treats is what the true purpose of his charity is. Listen to this.


JAMES REYNOLDS SR., PRESIDENT AND CEO, CANCER FUND OF AMERICA: Products that even the children in the family would like, and the adults there too.

I have never stopped liking Little Debbies and moon pies and candies, rocks (INAUDIBLE) each little candy in there was like 7-Up. The (INAUDIBLE) was like 7-Up, Dr. Pepper, where -- and I have never seen them on the market.


GRIFFIN: So, millions of dollars to give away treats.

And just as a reminder, Reynolds Sr. and his charity, the charity run by his son and the charity run by James Reynolds' senior's ex-wife, Rose Perkins, they are three of the 50 worst charities in America, identified, Anderson, by our reporting partners, "The Tampa Bay Times" and the Center for Investigative Reporting.

COOPER: Everyone loves moon pies. And the guys seems like a charming elderly man talking about his recollection of eating moon pies and 7- Up and stuff.

But the bottom line is he's admitting 80 percent of the money that they raise goes to fund-raising to try to rope in more people to get more money. And I don't think the people are donating money to this charity thinks it's about giving adult diapers and moon pies to kids and adults with cancer.


COOPER: Did they give you a reason for not just sitting down and answering our questions, instead of running from our cameras and giving you the finger?

GRIFFIN: Well, the closest we got was a statement from the Breast Cancer Society which claimed that CNN -- quote -- "will not share editorial privilege and as such we can't responsibly engage in an interview."

COOPER: I don't even know what that means.

GRIFFIN: I don't know what that means either, because I don't know. I don't know either.

They go on to say that we would just butcher and rearrange to meet CNN's -- there's another quote, Anderson -- "agenda of tabloid-like deception and slander to bump ratings."

So, instead of all that, he gives us the finger.

COOPER: Again, it just blows my mind. These are people who are asking for money from good people, from Americans, all across the country and you would think anybody who runs a charity would be willing to give an interview any time to talk about what they're doing, show you their books.

And what's also amazing to me is how this is all a family affair. I mean, you have got the dad, you have got the son, you have got the ex- wife with the current wife. And it doesn't seem like dad and the son really got together and had a phone conversation, because son is saying, well, it's not 2 percent. Dad's not arguing with the fact that it's 2 percent. He says, in fact, 80 percent were given away to fund-raisers. So, they need to get their stories together, it seems like. And you know what? We will do a live interview with them, no editing at all. We will be happy to do that. I know, Drew, you would be happy to do that as well. So, again, the challenge is out there. If they're legit, they should show up or eat some more moon pies or something. I don't know. It's really -- it's infuriating. It's really infuriating.

It's just -- it's unbelievable, because people are donating their hard-earned money, thinking they're helping people, and these folks are living high off the moon pies. Drew, thanks very much. Thanks for the reporting.

Follow me on Twitter right now @AndersonCooper. Let's talk about it right there.

Next, what the NSA's leaker is saying now about allegations of spying for China. I will talk with Glenn Greenwald, one of the people who launched the entire saga, continues to make news on this.

Later, mobster Whitey Bulger coming face to face with his alleged former hit man, an amazing confrontation in court, a confessed killer who's now gunning in court for Bulger.


COOPER: New word tonight from the NSA leaker, Edward Snowden.

Answering questions for Britain's "Guardian" newspaper, he says the U.S. government has destroyed his chances of a fair trial, in his words openly declaring him guilty of treason. He says that's why he fled to Hong Kong, where he may or may not still be. In fact, the Justice Department has yet to even decide whether to charge him.

However, plenty of political figures have called him a traitor, including most recently former Vice President Cheney.


DICK CHENEY, FORMER VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I think he's a traitor. I think he's committed crimes in fact by violating agreements, given the position he had.

I'm deeply suspicious, obviously, because he went to China. It's not a place where you ordinarily want to go if you're interested in freedom, liberty and so forth. So it raises questions whether or not he had that kind of connection before he did this.


COOPER: That's former Vice President Cheney on FOX News.

He went on to say that he worries that Snowden still has more intelligence to shop to the Chinese in exchange for sanctuary. Now, today online, "The Guardian"'s Spencer Ackerman asked him to address that allegation. Snowden replied -- quote -- "This is a predictable smear that I anticipated before going public, as the U.S. media has a knee-jerk 'Red China' reaction to anything involving Hong Kong or the People's Republic of China and is intended to distract from the issue of U.S. government misconduct."

He goes on to say: "Ask yourself, if I were a Chinese spy, why wouldn't I have flown directly into Beijing? I could be living in a place petting a phoenix by now."

Later in the Q&A, Ackerman asked Snowden directly whether he had secretly given secret classified information to the Chinese government. Snowden replies: "No, I have no contact -- I have had no contact with the Chinese government. Just like with 'The Guardian' and 'The Washington Post,' I only work with journalists."

He also said that being called a traitor by Dick Cheney is, in his words, the highest honor you can give an American.

Joining us now, one of the reporters who first broke the Snowden story, "The Guardian"'s Glenn Greenwald, who was part of today's online chat.


COOPER: So, Glenn, first off, we know Edward Snowden is in hiding, believed still to be in Hong Kong under considerable scrutiny. Why did he want to go public today in this online discussion?

GLENN GREENWALD, "THE GUARDIAN": I think usually what happens with whistle-blowers is they end up being not part of the debate, either because they are in hiding or because they are indisposed in prison.

A lot has been said about him. Lots of accusations have been made toward him. And I think that he feels as though he wants to account for his own behavior and speak directly to the public and answer questions about what he did and why he did it.

COOPER: He was asked today, if anything should happen to him, do others have access to his documents?

And the answer -- and I want to read to our viewers what he said -- he said, "All I can say right now is the U.S. government is not going to be able to cover this up by jailing or murdering me. Truth is coming, and it cannot be stopped."

First of all, does he really believe that his life is in danger, that the U.S. may want to murder him?

GREENWALD: Just go and read the what the U.S. officials are telling the media outlets, like "The New York Times" from 48 hours ago.

What they're saying is that if the information that he has in his possession, and including the information in his head, ends up in the hands of any other foreign government, it would be the gravest threat to national security in a very long time.

So, I don't think that it's necessarily probable or likely or anything like that that the U.S. government is going to try to use physical force to prevent that from happening. But if you're him and you hear U.S. officials saying that you -- they think you pose the greatest threat to U.S. national security in a long time because of what you have and what you know, it's certainly sensible to think about those risks, to take precautions.

If you look at what the U.S. government has done in the last 12 years in the name of national security, there's a lot of extreme behavior that they have engaged in. So, I think anybody in that position would be thinking that way.

COOPER: Do you buy that, when U.S. officials say this is the gravest risk? Do you buy that?

GREENWALD: No, I think U.S. officials always say that about any time that they are having light shined on what they have been doing in secret.

It's the way that they try and keep that wall of secrecy erected. At the same time, it is true that the National Security Agency is a critically important part of what the U.S. national security state has built up over many years.

And if huge amounts of secrets were to simply be turned over en masse to another government, it's true that that would be damaging. But he's been very clear that that's not his intention. If that were his intention, he could have done that in lots of different ways. And so I think what this really is, is a fear-mongering campaign on the part of the U.S. government to turn Americans and the public against him and therefore turn away from the disclosures that have been made as a result of he's been done.

COOPER: He says that he's not given information about any U.S. operations against what he's called legitimate military targets.

But his critics would say, who is this guy to determine what is and is not a legitimate military target?

GREENWALD: What he's saying is that there are certain countries in which the U.S. Congress has declared a war, essentially, the authorized use of military force, in places like Afghanistan, and that he's not interested in exposing secrets of what is being done against those countries.

He instead is wanting to inform the citizenry, not just in the United States, but around the world, that the NSA is targeting everybody, and trying to erode privacy for all of us.

COOPER: The heads of the Intelligence Committees have now asked to declassify information that they say proves dozens of terror plots have been foiled because of these programs. If that happens, would it justify in your mind the existence of PRISM and other similar programs that might exist?

GREENWALD: No. And this is such an important point. Let's say the U.S. government collects everybody's phone records and taps into everybody's Internet chats. They then say, when it turns out that they get caught doing that, well, look, we detected terrorist plots as a result of this program. No, that isn't correct.

They ended up detecting terrorist plots because they specifically listened in on the phone conversations or e-mail communications of specific people about whom there was evidence to believe they were actually engaged in terrorism. So, what the U.S. government always did in the past, when they battled the Soviets, when they engaged in the Cold War was it was a very targeted surveillance. It was only against people for whom there was really evidence to believe they were engaged in wrongdoing.

Indiscriminate, massive Surveillance absolutely makes it harder to find the bad people, because they have so much information, they can't even process it. But the fact that they end up finding somebody bad through mass surveillance doesn't prove that they would not have found those same people through more targeted surveillance programs.

COOPER: All right, Glenn Greenwald, Glenn, I appreciate it.

GREENWALD: Thanks, Anderson.


COOPER: The Snowden affair seems to be putting a dent in President Obama's polling numbers, his jobs approval now underwater, 45-55 in the latest CNN/ORC data. That's down from 53 to 45 last month.

And asked whether Mr. Obama is honest and trustworthy, people are now almost evenly divided; 49 percent say yes; 50 percent say no. That's an 18-point swing from May, when the numbers were 58 yes and 41 no.

Here to talk about the impact, chief political analyst Gloria Borger.

So, this drop in the approval ratings, how do you account for it? Is it directly related, do you think, to the NSA revelations?

GLORIA BORGER, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Yes, I think there are a couple reasons here.

First is, the president has had an awful lot of controversies on his plate, not only the NSA surveillance, but also the IRS controversy, controversy over drones, controversy over a leak investigation that some people believe is -- was more of a dragnet.

And so the president has been in kind of a defensive crouch on that. When you dig deeper into our poll numbers also, Anderson, you see this huge decline he's had, again, in that one-month period of 17 points with younger voters, the under-30 set.


BORGER: These are the stalwart Obama supporters who have real trouble with the surveillance issues. So, I think it has a lot to do with it.

COOPER: He's actually scoring worse than President Bush did on the issue of restricting civil liberties.

BORGER: I know. I know. He probably can't believe that one.

But, yes, when President Bush had that warrantless wiretap controversy in 2006, which then Senator Obama opposed, his -- the question of whether he went too far, you see there, Bush, only 39 percent thought he had gone too far. And now that the president's in the middle of this NSA controversy, 43 percent of the public thinks he's gone too far.


BORGER: I think that plays into the trust issue, Anderson, that you were talking about earlier. He's down on trust. People always give someone they trust the benefit of the doubt.

And now I think they're attaching him to government, which they don't trust.

COOPER: You think he needs to get out in front of this and lift the veil on these programs?

BORGER: I do. I do.

COOPER: It's a hard thing to do, though. These are supposedly classified programs.

BORGER: Right.

Well, a couple weeks ago, he came out and he said to the country, this is a debate I want to have, I'm glad we're having this debate. I think he needs to get out there and lead it. One way he can lead it, and I believe they're trying to do this, is declassify some of the instances in which this kind of surveillance has actually succeeded in thwarting terror attacks.

Then I believe the president also himself needs to get out there and lift the veil, as you say, let the American public know a little more about what he's been thinking, because a lot of people can be confused for thinking, wait a minute, this is the man who railed against warrantless wiretaps when he was in the Senate. OK, I get we don't do that anymore. But now he is presiding over a surveillance policy that maybe years ago he might have questioned.


BORGER: So American people want to hear from the president on this, I think, Anderson.

COOPER: We will see.

Gloria, thanks very much.


COOPER: For more on the story, you can go to right now.

Coming up: a midshipman at the Naval Academy who says she was raped by three classmates. She's speaking out tonight about why she waited so long to report the assault. She's afraid to show her face, but she wants her story told.


COOPER: So, you didn't want to tell the authorities about the sexual assaults?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Ironically enough, I didn't want to tell them, but I still wanted justice. I live in close proximity of these people. I see them all the time. One of them lives directly below me.


COOPER: Hear what happened to her ahead tonight.

Also, reputed mobster Whitey Bulger's alleged hit man testified against him in court today. It was fascinating. He's now a government witness who is itching to take Bulger down. How much damage did the testimony do? We will get some answers next.


COOPER: In "Crime & Punishment," a dramatic day in the Whitey Bulger trial. Convicted hit man John Martorano took the stand to testify against the gangster he once considered his best friend and partner in crime. Martorano served time for 20 mob-related killings for the South Boston gang that's Bulger allegedly ran.

Now, in a 2008 interview with "60 Minutes'" Steve Kroft, here's what he said about those murders.


STEVE KROFT, "60 MINUTES": Did you keep count of how many people you killed?

JOHN MARTORANO, FORMER HIT MAN: No, no. Until in the end I never realized it was that many.

KROFT: How many?

MARTORANO: A lot. Too many.

KROFT: Do you have a number?

MARTORANO: I confessed to 20 in court.

KROFT: You sure you remembered them all?

MARTORANO: I hope so.

KROFT: Did you always kill people by shooting them?

MARTORANO: I think I stabbed one guy.

KROFT: But you like guns?

MARTORANO: Well, it's the easiest way, I think.


COOPER: Under a deal cut with prosecutors, he served a life sentence for his own crimes and in return became a government witness.

Now today, he gave testimony intended to directly tie Whitey Bulger, his former friend, to the 19 murders that he, Bulger, is now charged with.

Deborah Feyerick was in the courtroom and joins me now from Boston. It was the first time these two former best friends were face to face in nearly 31 years. Were they checking each other out? What did they -- I mean, what was it like inside the courtroom?

DEBORAH FEYERICK, CNN CORRESPONDENT: It was so fascinating. I mean, these two men barely looked at one another, even though they were about six feet away. John Martorano in the witness box, Whitey Bulger at the defense table staring straight ahead.

Martorano testified that, yes, they were incredibly close, that he even named his youngest son James in honor of Whitey Bulger. He said that came to an end when he learned that Whitey Bulger was an FBI informant. And from that moment, he says, "It broke my heart. It broke all loyalties." And that's why he's testifying against Whitey Bulger.

And because the two of them spent so much time together, he can really testify as to which murders Whitey Bulger was present at, and that's exactly what he did today on the stand.

He talked about how the two men would pick a victim. They would target their victim. And then as the victim was pulling away in their car, Martorano would be in one vehicle. Bulger in another to make sure the hit was successful. Martorano would open fire, and Bulger would prevent anyone from getting in the way, even if that meant trying to block somebody or cut off a police car.

It was a lot of dramatic testimony. Martorano betrayed barely any emotion as he testified to murder after murder after murder. But when he talked about this betrayal by Whitey Bulger, which is the worst thing you could be here in South Boston, Anderson. That's a rat, an informant, specifically an FBI informant. That's when he seemed a little sad, that he had been betrayed by this man who he had been so close to, Anderson.

COOPER: We also learned today about the relationship between former FBI agent John Connolly, who was convicted of helping Bulger avoid arrest and Whitey's brother, former Massachusetts State Senate President Billy Bulger.

FEYERICK: Yes, absolutely. And the relationship between Whitey Bulger and the rogue FBI agent, John Connolly, is what many people believe allowed Bulger's empire, his criminal enterprise, to grow and flourish for so many years.

But apparently, when Connolly returned to Boston, he met with Billy Bulger, who was then very powerful, who was the senate president here in Boston for a number of years. He met with Billy Bulger and said, "Look, thank you for keeping me honest. If there's anything I can do, let me know."

And Billy Bulger said, "Keep my brother out of trouble."

And that's when the relationship began. Whitey Bulger soon after began paying Connolly cash, bought him gifts, gave him some diamonds to give to his wife for his anniversary. But it was a long relationship and one that allowed many of these murders, prosecutors contend, to take place, because Connolly was telling him when someone was going to testify against him. That allowed Bulger to wipe him out -- Anderson.

COOPER: Deborah Feyerick, thanks very much.

"Boston Globe" columnist Kevin Cullen is co-author of "Whitey Bulger: America's Most Wanted Gangster, and the Manhunt that Brought Him to Justice." A longtime reporter for "The Globe," he was the first to raise questions about Whitey Bulger's relationship with the FBI. He joins me now.

So Kevin, on this program on Friday, you said you expected that today Bulger would stare down Martorano and they would stare each other down. That didn't seem like that's how it played out. Did it surprise you?

KEVIN CULLEN, AUTHOR, "WHITEY BULGER": No, it didn't happen. I think the flip side of Whitey, Whitey will either try to intimidate you or make you believe that you don't exist.

One of the things we found, Shelley Murphy and I found when we were writing our book, that we sent him letters asking for his cooperation or even for him to read the manuscript and check it for accuracy, and he wrote to somebody who gave us his letters from jail, in which he said, he would not even give us the satisfaction of knowing he's read those letters.

So this is sort of out of Whitey's playbook, too. He couldn't be bothered to look at Johnny today. They kind of more or less ignored each other.

COOPER: And the fact that this guy, Martorano, who's this infamous boss and mob figure in his own right, cut a deal with the government to testify against Bulger, how much does that affect his credibility as a witness?

CULLEN: Well, that's clearly -- I mean, you can see Jay Carney and Hank Brennan, the defense lawyers, they can't wait to get at him.

But you know, I was in Miami when he testified against John Connolly, Anderson. And I have to be honest with you. I think Johnny Martorano is a repulsive figure. I also think he was a very effective witness.

He is what he is. He's a self-admitted murderer. And, you know, I just finished my column for tomorrow, and I said, even if Whitey's lawyers are able to convince the jury that he's only half as bad as Johnny Martorano, that means he's only half as bad as a sociopath who admitted to killing 20 people. That's not much of a defense.

COOPER: What do you think that Bulger hopes to get out of this trial? I mean, what's the best possible outcome for him? Is he concerned about his legacy or anything like that?

CULLEN: Oh, yes, absolutely. He's concerned about the self- -- the self-serving narrative he created his entire criminal life, is that he's a gangster with scruples, you know, a benevolent wise guy. And gangster with scruples don't inform on their friends, and they don't kill defenseless women. Those are the two things he wants to really refute.

I mean, his own lawyer got up there on the opening day of the trial, and in his opening statement, he said, "Hey, my client is a book maker. He's an extortionist. He's even a drug trafficker, but he didn't kill those women, and he wasn't an informant."

So I think that's going to be the tone of this. I mean, I question having the lawyer going to admit that, why are we wasting all our time going over all this stuff? I mean, he probably should have just said, "I'll admit to all this other stuff, but I want to refute that I didn't kill the women, and I wasn't a rat." Those are the only two things he's obsessed with.

COOPER: So fascinating. Does he -- does Bulger, I mean, have any of the power that he used to have, or is all that gone?

CULLEN: Oh, no. No, that's gone. And like I said, once everybody that knew he was an informant and that all the loyalty he demanded went one way, the only people that are still with them are his family -- his brother, Jackie, has shown up.

I pointed out, this is a classic example of Whitey's idea of loyalty. Jackie Bulger, his brother, who's been there every day in court, he was the clerk magistrate in the juvenile court. When Whitey went on the lam, he enticed Jackie, he begged Jackie to give him some photographs that they could use, because they look alike. He could use them as phony I.D.s. So he lured his own brother into his conspiracy. That cost Jackie a felony conviction, and it cost him his pension. Whitey Bulger did that to his family. Not me, not Shelley Murphy. Not the "Boston Globe."

COOPER: That's incredible. Kevin Cullen, it's fascinating. Thank you so much for being on the program again tonight. Appreciate it.

We've got a lot more tonight including this: Is the mystery of Jimmy Hoffa's whereabouts on the verge of being solved? I know a lot of people have said that before. A retired FBI supervisor believes that agents are about to crack it wide open with the discovery of Hoffa's remains. We'll have that story ahead.

And next, breaking her silence. A midshipman at the elite Naval Academy says she was raped by three classmates.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: They said that "You can't talk, you can't tell. We'll get kicked out. You can't do this. We'll" -- you know, they really did play on my emotions. And at that point in time, it was what felt like the entire football team against me, given that all these individuals were on the football team. And you know, I felt ostracized.



COOPER: Big development tonight in an alleged sexual assault case at the U.S. Naval Academy, where a midshipman claims she was raped by three classmates, all members of the football team.

A Navy official tells CNN that the academy's superintendent, Vice Admiral Michael Miller, has ordered what's known as an Article 32 proceeding. A hearing will be held where evidence is presented to a military legal officer, who will then decide if a court-martial is warranted.

The decision was made by the superintendent after he reviewed an investigative report of the alleged incident. It's an important development for the midshipman who is speaking out tonight. She agreed to tell us her story as long as we conceal her identity.


COOPER (voice-over): Heavily intoxicated at an off-campus party, this young midshipman, then 20 years old, remembers nothing of the alleged assaults. And yet the morning after, she says she knew something was terribly wrong.

(on camera): When did you realize something had happened?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The next day when I woke up, I noticed that I had bruises on my body. And I just didn't feel right. And then when I got back to school, I started to notice a lot of, like, chatter on social media.

COOPER: What kind of chatter on social media?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: People were making really derogatory terms toward a female. I didn't know at the time that it was directed towards me. Just kind of, like, bragging about the situation that had happened. I then began to inquire about the situation or, you know, what had happened to myself. Then I came to the conclusion that these individuals were talking about me.

COOPER: How did that feel?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It was devastating for me. It's a very small school. And at that point in time, I felt like my reputation was ruined forever. I had no clue what had happened. And I knew I would never consent to do these type of things.

COOPER: Did you go see a doctor?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I did. Just for health reasons. I chose not to get a rape kit.

COOPER: What was the thinking in not getting a rape kit?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I wanted nothing more than for the situation to go away. I felt like I was living a nightmare every single day. And it just couldn't end fast enough.

COOPER: You really thought this was a matter of survival?


COOPER: You were scared for your safety?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes. And at that point in time I approached the administration several times, asking them about harassment. They couldn't guarantee me anything. And I was -- I feared that trying to pursue them on the harassment charges would only -- if nothing happened, it would infuriate them more.

COOPER: Who was harassing you?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It was other members of the football team that were constantly making derogatory terms. Kind of like just, you know, eyeing me down, things like that, or making sexual gestures towards me, or constantly just making comments to people, to my face.

COOPER (voice-over): She didn't report the alleged crimes to authorities for eight months, living in constant fear, she says, the backlash might take a more violent turn.

But word of the alleged attack spread across campus. A female student reported the alleged incident as a number of other students had, only this time, for the first time, the alleged victim's name was made public.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Someone came forward with my name, someone who hadn't been at the party. That's how large the situation had gotten. She had heard about, and she felt compelled to go forward and let people know what she knew was going on.

COOPER (on camera): But you didn't want to alert authorities? UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I was scared. I'd seen -- this is not the first time these type of situations have occurred at the academy, nor do I think they'll be the last, unfortunately. But I was terrified, because I saw what the victims went through. And just, you know, not only the situation within itself, but everything that follows after.

COOPER (voice-over); And immediately after came charges but not of an assault. School authorities first charged the female midshipman with underaged drinking.

Two of the football players maintained the sex was consensual. The third pleaded the fifth. And without a report by the female midshipman, and with evidence scarce, her alleged attackers played out the season under a presumption of innocence. The case was closed by year's end with no charges brought as the female midshipman watched, infuriated and helpless.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Nothing was done in regards to my personal situation. And these individuals were still on track to graduate and become commissioned officers.

COOPER (on camera): Did it surprise you that they waited until after football season to discipline them?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Did it surprise me? No. Did I think it was right? Absolutely not.

You know, I was suspended from a lot of things. It actually -- it hurt me as far as seeking counseling, because I had lost privileges. The administration was having problems commuting me back and forth to get to my counseling, so I just ended up, I couldn't go anymore. So it just caused a downward spiral of a lot of events.

COOPER (voice-over): In January she says she finally decided to tell all she knew to Navy investigators, though to her, it was frustrating to start the process all over again.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I can't, you know, speak on an official capacity, but that's what, like, kind of what hurt me and why I kind of -- I'd lost faith in the chain of command.

COOPER (on camera): Why did you want to be in the military in the first place?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: This is kind of cliche, but you know, I love my country. My family has all served on the enlisted side. I thought it was a great opportunity to serve. I wanted -- I'm the first one in my family to go to college. This is something that I always wanted and I still hold true.

I think that there are some problems. But I hope that these things can get fixed. But I do still want to serve my country.


COOPER: By the way, I did ask the midshipman why she wanted us to conceal her face. She says it's because, while many at the academy know who she is and know the story, not all of her family and friends know her story. And she doesn't want the story that she's telling to define her in her career moving forward.

Up next, the search for Jimmy Hoffa. The former Teamsters boss vanished nearly 40 years ago. Now, some believe his remains may be found in this field in Michigan where the FBI is digging.

And celebrity chef Nigella Lawson, was she attacked by her husband in a London restaurant or is it just a misunderstanding? The story ahead.


COOPER: Let's get caught up on some of the other stories we're following. Isha is here with a "360 Bulletin" -- Isha.

ISHA SESAY, CNN ANCHOR: Anderson, a new development concerning an alleged attack of celebrity chef Nigella Lawson by her husband, Charles Saatchi. Police say that a 70-year-old man who they didn't name has accepted a warning related to the incident. Several U.K. media outlets identified the man as Saatchi, who had denied attacking his wife.

Over the weekend the British tabloid, "The Sunday People," shown here by CNN's Matthew Chance, published photos showing Saatchi apparently grabbing Lawson's neck at a restaurant table. Earlier today, a spokesman for Lawson said she and her children had moved out of the family home.

Information from an ailing reputed mobster sparked a new hunt for Jimmy Hoffa's remains, this time in a field in Oakland Township, Michigan. FBI agents are digging on private property about 20 miles from the restaurant parking lot where the former Teamsters boss was last seen in 1975.

A risky rescue. It took a helicopter team several tries to hoist two teenagers from a narrow ledge on an 8,600-foot cliff in northern California. The boys were stranded while hiking in the Sierra Buttes. No one was hurt.

And a Florida teenager got the thrill of his life. Nineteen-year-old Chris Kreis was fishing in the Gulf of Mexico when he encountered this 30-foot whale shark and caught a ride. Wow -- Anderson.

COOPER: Isha, thanks.

Up next, nothing brings America together like a beauty pageant blunder. You don't want to miss this one. "The RidicuList" is next.


COOPER: Time for "The RidicuList." And tonight we're adding pageant haters. That's right. All you skeptics out there who don't appreciate the perky magic and sparkling importance of America's pageant culture. Take, for example, last night's Miss USA pageant in Las Vegas on NBC.


NENE LEAKES, REALITY TV STAR/ACTRESS: A recent report shows that in 40 percent of American families with children, women are the primary earners; yet they continue to earn less than men. What does this say about society?


COOPER: Stop right there. Now, first of all, it's an important question. I'm not making fun of that, so delete that tweet you were about to send me.

Second of all, I think we can all agree that, when it comes to any national discussion, Nene Leakes should play a crucial role. I digress.

Let's see how Miss Utah responded.


MARISSA POWELL, MISS UTAH: I think we can relate this back to education, and how we are continuing to try to strive to...


COOPER: Ouch. Let's just stop there, OK? She needed to pause and compose her thoughts. Who among us hasn't had to do that. You should hear wolf Blitzer rehearsing his show in the men's room. Believe me. Let's check back with Miss Utah.


POWELL: Figure out how to create jobs right now, that is the biggest problem. And I think especially the men are -- and seen as the leaders of this, and so we need to try to figure out how to create education better so that we can solve this problem.

Thank you.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Thank you, sweetheart.


COOPER: That was painful. There you have it: create education better. Who's laughing now, pageant haters? You don't get that kind of insight at the Kennedy Center honors. No, you don't.

It brings to mind, of course, one of the all-time best pageant moments. A moment, something all you haters still cannot accept for the perfection that it is. I'm talking, of course, about the 2007 Miss Teen USA pageant and our friend, Miss South Carolina, who was asked about the large number of Americans who couldn't find the U.S. on the map.


LAUREN CAITLIN UPON, MISS TEEN SOUTH CAROLINA 2007: I personally believe that U.S. Americans are unable to do so, because some people out there in our nation don't have maps, and that I believe that our education, like such as in South Africa and the Iraq, everywhere like such as.


COOPER: "Everywhere like such as."

Get on board, America. Get on board. As for all you pageant haters, why don't you pull out a map and see if you can find yourselves on "The RidicuList." Or everywhere like such as. E

That's it for us. Thanks for watching. "ERIN BURNETT OUTFRONT" starts now.