Return to Transcripts main page


Obama Covers His Bases On Snowden; Dzhokhar Tsarnaev Indicted On 30 Counts; The NYPD's English Only Policy; Hitting Paula Deen Where It Hurts

Aired June 27, 2013 - 19:00   ET


ERIN BURNETT, CNN HOST: OUTFRONT next, President Obama's double talk, just how concerned is he about the NSA leaker?

Plus, the latest from the Paula Deen scandal, we're going to tell you exactly how much money the controversy is costing her. Talk about adding up.

And more contentious testimony at the George Zimmerman trial today, we go in depth tonight OUTFRONT, what the prosecution's star witness said. Let's go OUTFRONT.

Good evening, everyone. I'm Erin Burnett. OUTFRONT tonight, covering your bases, which seems to be President Obama's motto when it comes to the hunt for the NSA leaker, Edward Snowden. So let me start with this morning. This morning, the president said he's not so concerned about this whole thing.


BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: In terms of U.S. interests, the damage was done with respect to the initial leaks. I'm not going to be scrambling jets to get a 29-year- old hacker.


BURNETT: I kind of love that, all right? But in the very same speech, after he dismissed the 29-year-old hacker, he then seemed pretty worried about the 29-year-old hacker. Here he is.


PRESIDENT OBAMA: I continue to be concerned about the other documents he may have. That's part of the reason why we would like to have Mr. Snowden in custody.


BURNETT: So which is it? He gave everything up at the beginning, you're worried about the documents he still has? All right, the president may just be after some 29-year-old hacker, but does the hacker have some pretty big secrets or not? OUTFRONT tonight, we're talking to Retired General Wesley Clark, former supreme allied commander of NATO, and Peter Brookes, a former deputy assistant secretary of defense.

OK, great to have both of you. General Clark, you know the president. I love the look on the president's face when he got annoyed. He's like, you know what, this guy is -- I'm sure there were some expletives in his head, a 29-year-old hacker and I don't want to deal with it. But can you interpret what he is saying here because at one point he said everything that was released at the beginning, but then he says I'm worried about stuff he may still have. So which is it?

GENERAL WESLEY CLARK, FORMER NATO SUPREME ALLIED COMMANDER: I think the fact is way it came out at the time of the summit meeting with the Chinese president, it was hurtful. But on the other hand, there may be some more stuff behind it, but the truth is people know what's in there. And the American people are solidly behind the prism program and all that's going on.


CLARK: The American people want protection and most people say, look, if that's what it takes, I'm happy. So I think the president's on very solid ground here. Let it work out. Edward Snowden is going to disappear from the pages of history.

BURNETT: All right, Peter, what do you think? By the way, the president had a factual error. I understand Edward Snowden is now 30. Maybe that would make a big difference.

PETER BROOKES, HERITAGE FOUNDATION: He's a 30-year-old spy. He's been charged with espionage.

BURNETT: He has been charged with espionage. Are you confused by what the president is trying to say? At one hand trying to say I'm not worried so all of you people who are trying to say the U.S. looks bad in all of this, I don't give a you know what about this, but then he's still worried. Are you confused?

BROOKES: Well, I'm not confused at all. I think the president has confused people and that's unfortunate. We didn't see the questions from the reporters on that. But, look, the president's trying to downplay this. He wants it to go away. He wants to change his story. He wants to focus on his trip to Africa. He doesn't want any more guff from international leaders. So he's not anything provocative. You imagine if he said something about Russia, what Putin might come back and say. He's been dissed by both Russia and China, and I think he wants that to stop.

BURNETT: General Clark, it is true, Putin has been thumbing his nose at the press. Putin likes to do that.

CLARK: It's an opportunity to take advantage of -- in politics it would be like a gaffe. This is -- for a statesman, it's like a national gaffe. It's where you've been doing something, it comes out like this. Every nation is doing this. What the United States is doing is not any different and probably much less than what China and Russia is doing. BURNETT: In terms of surveillance itself?

CLARK: Absolutely.

BURNETT: What about how the president feels about it? Because, you know, there had been some who have been critical saying, look, this is a big deal. You know, if this is a big as you all have been saying that he could be sharing secrets with China or whatever he might be doing.

CLARK: I'm sure he's not happy about it. He wouldn't like it. You know, in the intelligence business we say, gosh, if they find out sources and methods, we'll lose the sources and methods. I don't think people are going to stop using the internet or stop making cell phone calls because of Snowden. Not people here and not people there.


CLARK: So, you know, everybody's doing it. Most people know it's been going on all along.

BURNETT: And what about what the president said, though, about why he's not personally involved in this. He defended that today. Here's the president.


PRESIDENT OBAMA: I have not called President Xi personally or President Putin personally and the reason is because, number one, I shouldn't have to. This is something that routinely is dealt with between law enforcement officials in various countries.


BURNETT: I was just saying to General Clark during that sound bite, maybe it's because he's in Senegal and not in the United States that he feels -- I mean, that's unusually honest and direct.

CLARK: It's direct. It's not something that should be a head of state issue.


CLARK: It's just not.

BROOKES: He also doesn't want to be rebuffed, Erin. He doesn't want to be rebuffed either. I mean, he's been treated so badly. Even Ecuador is thumbing their nose at us right now. Like I said, he wants to downplay this. He doesn't want to do anything provocative. This is no drama Obama. He doesn't want it to become a big story. If he says something and there's a repost from another leader, he's going to deal with that especially when he is traveling around. It's something that he wants to make this story go away.

BURNETT: He doesn't want to be held hostage by a 30-year-old, Mr. President, hacker, whatever word you want to use, hero, traitor, I don't know. That is political in itself. All right, thanks so much to both of you. We appreciate it. And of course, everyone, let us know what you think of the continuing catch me if you can saga of Edward Snowden.

Well, President Obama is not the only one that seems to be making contradictory statements on this issue. Edward Snowden himself talked about a history of, I don't know, contradiction, hypocrisy. Again, it's all in the words of the beholder. He's been saying things that don't exactly add up and Chris Lawrence is OUTFRONT with that.


CHRIS LAWRENCE, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Edward Snowden began his life of intrigue in Switzerland as a newly hired I.T. analyst working for the CIA. And if online posts are accurate, that life was an open secret. Snowden spilled all, praising the good looks of European women and pining for home when saying European theatres inserted an intermission into the movie "300."

Users from "Poundarsoficial" have released old posts from four to six years ago claiming Edward Snowden ranted about Switzerland under his online user name "Thetruehooha." You guys wouldn't believe how expensive bleep is here either. You can't get tap water in restaurants. Some examples, please, they make you buy it in bottles, glass bottles, 5 bucks a pop. You buy the tap water?

Hamburgers are $15. According to Snowden, they tasted like greasy cardboard and weren't even as good as McDonald's. Speaking of which, he also posted, Jesus Christ, are the Swiss rich. The bleeping McDonald's workers make more than I do. They make like 50,000 franc a year. All of this from an obscure chat room where anything goes.

JOE MULLIN, TECH POLICY EDITOR, ARA TECHNICA: You can think of "Ars Official" as the guys hanging in the back room of the bar who feel like the rest of the crowd is a bit too stuffy for them.

LAWRENCE: And the man accused of leaking U.S. government secrets apparently hated leakers. WTF "New York Times," are they trying to start a war? Jesus Christ, they are just like Wikileaks. They are just reporting, dude. They are reporting classified bleep.

MULLIN: He seemed at this time to have views that were not uncommon in the intelligence community, that leaks are really bad news and that leakers really hurt the U.S.

LAWRENCE: If Snowden seemed rock solid in that belief four years ago.

EDWARD SNOWDEN, FORMER NSA CONTRACTOR: But overtime that awareness wrongdoing sort of buildings up and you feel compelled to talk about it.


LAWRENCE: In fact, chat rooms users described his online persona as abrasive, even arrogant, the kind of guy that could get into a big political argument in a bar and not let it go, going on and on until everyone in the bar is mad at him -- Erin.

BURNETT: All right, thank you very much, Chris Lawrence, a very interesting development.

And still to come, the Boston marathon bombing suspect indicted. There were some big surprises in that indictment especially when you remember all the things you heard about Dzhokhar Tsarnaev back when the bombing happened.

Plus, New York police officers reprimanded for speaking Spanish on the job. The NYPD says it's English only policy is necessary.

And then the "n" word, our own Don Lemon investigates why some people say it's the worst word ever.

And later in the show, we're going to tell you just how much that word is costing dollar by dollar Paula Deen.


BURNETT: Our second story, OUTFRONT, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, the surviving suspect in the Boston marathon bombing indicted today on 30 counts by a federal grand jury. The 19-year-old Chechen native is charged with killing four people using weapons of mass destruction and a further long list of other counts. Seventeen of those counts carry a possible death sentence.

Deb Feyerick was in the courtroom during today's hearing and she's OUTFRONT. Deb, until now, just to profile, I remember standing there that day in Boston and friend after friend, person after person who knew Dzhokhar Tsarnaev said he was a good kid. He was a nice kid. He was a great kid. He must have been brainwashed. He must have been coerced by his brother. Is that what you heard in the indictment?

DEBORAH FEYERICK, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, no, absolutely not. As a matter of fact, the indictment makes very clear that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was very active in this plot, that he was an equal partner with his brother. That the two conspired to use weapons of mass destruction as well as firearms to kill and injure as many people as possible.

And in the indictment, it lays out a story where Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was the one who downloaded "Inspire" magazine, the one which told him how to build that pressure cooker bomb. He also downloaded radical manifestos. He also was the one who bought a prepaid phone the day before the bombing and that's the phone that he used to call his brother just moments before the blasts went off.

According to the indictment, both Dzhokhar and Tamerlan Tsarnaev were the ones who both killed the MIT Officer Sean Collier. So any suggestion according to this government document that in fact he wasn't actively involved in this dismissed once you read the 74 pages -- Erin.

BURNETT: Pretty amazing though that they are trying to paint a completely different picture than the one we had early on, the one that a lot of people watching probably still have. After the attack, Deb, Dzhokhar was hiding, right. And I remember that night you broke the news that he was in that boat. In that boat, he scrawled a series of short messages on the boat wall.

One of them, U.S. government's killing our innocent civilians. I can't stand to see such evil unpunished. We Muslims are one body. You hurt one, you hurt us all. That gives us a little bit of insight perhaps to him, what he was thinking. What other details did you hear today more about motive?

FEYERICK: You know, one thing though is so fascinating. Erin, you remember this as well, that fire fight that took place in the early morning hours of Friday. Well, apparently Tamerlan and his brother, Dzhokhar, both of them engaged police in a fire fight. They were shooting at one another. The Tsarnaev were throwing these improvised explosive devices, including one that resembled the one that was used at the Boston marathon.

Well, this fire fight end up 7 minutes and then three Watertown police officers were able to tackle Tamerlan dead into the ground and while he was struggling and they were kind of handcuff him, Dzhokhar apparently had the idea to get behind the car to -- to get behind the wheel of that stolen vehicle and start driving it directly towards the officers.

The officers jumped out of the way, according to the indictment, one of them tried to pull the brother Tamerlan to safety did not. Dzhokhar Tsarnaev actually ran over his own brother and according to the indictment, quote, "it contributed to his death" -- Erin.

BURNETT: All right, Deb, thank you very much, real surprises and shocks there in that indictment of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev.

Well, now, English-only, all right, that is the law of plenty of places in this country, but apparently now for the nation's largest police force. That of course is right here in New York City, the NYPD. But according to the "New York Daily News," at least nine officers have been formally reprimanded for using Spanish while they were on the job and they say that Latino groups are outraged by this. Does their ire add up?

Joining us now, OUTFRONT, CNN contributors, Margaret Hoover and her partner in crime and in life, John Avlon. All right, so Margaret, Mayor Bloomberg defended the policy, says you can't have a company if people can't communicate in one language. Some people feel the same way about a country. You can't have a country that way.

But in a New York Spanish newspaper, the editorial writes, in a city with 2.4 million Latinos, the NYPD's backwards policy invites abuse of power and discrimination. Do you agree?

MARGARET HOOVER, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: No, I do not agree. Here's the thing. Mayor Bloomberg is talking about the largest urban police force and public safety. He's not propagating a prejudice police. He's talking about public safety and how are you going to communicate clearly between officers if you have a city with over 200 languages and officers, by the way, who speak many of those languages. They have to speak in the same language in order to implement public safety in an effective way. It's simple as that.

BURNETT: English only, agree?

JOHN AVLON, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: I do agree with that Spanish language editorial and I disagree with my beautiful bride on this one because we need to deal with cities as they are, not as we want to be. This is a city with 2.4 million folks who have Spanish descent, over 300 languages at least spoken. So you're going to have, inevitably, folks who speak Spanish in the same precinct.

If they speak to each other in Spanish, it's not the most important thing the NYPD has to deal with. If you want to deal with this problem, it's a deeper cultural problem. We can deal with bilingual and education reform and issues like that, but this is not worth throwing the book at cops.

BURNETT: You're saying this is not the place to do it?

AVLON: This isn't the time or place to do it.

BURNETT: And Whole Foods had a policy at one point, English- speaking workers must speak English to the customers and other employees while on the clock unless the customer speaks another language. Now they then kind of backed up with that because they got picked on, but I mean, that's imminently sensible, right. I mean, if the customer speaks another language and you speak it, you can speak it. Otherwise, speak English, what is wrong with that?

HOOVER: Look, I'm with you, Erin. I happen to think Mayor Bloomberg (inaudible) about running companies and so did Whole Foods. Also, what happened in the Whole Foods case, it looks like, a left wing interest group got really sort of into the multicultural police issue. They got 14,000 people to sign on the petition and that's when they backtracked. Look, this isn't a racist policy. This is about implementing an effective business, having solid policies, being able to deliver goods. It's not about being multicultural sensitive.

AVLON: Yes, look, I mean, multicultural police aside, which is it's of course a self-appointed job and at the end of the day --

BURNETT: There are plenty of countries with self-appointed police.

AVLON: And that always turns out well, doesn't it? Companies have responsibility to their customers. Cities have responsibilities to their communities. That's I think the fundamental different. At the end of the day, companies can do whatever they want. They have to be accountable to their customers. If they are not, they are going to go out of business.

BURNETT: All right, two different points of view from two wonderful people. Let us know what you think. Still to come, Paula Deen's empire taking another big hit today so we're going to tell you why. And then the numbers, everyone has been talking about how she's so loaded and so rich. Guess what, we found out how much she has and how much this is costing her.

Plus, the head of the IRS grilled on Capitol Hill today. The agency accused of wasting millions of taxpayer dollars.


BURNETT: Our third story, OUTFRONT tonight, hitting Paula Deen where it hurts. Paula Deen is getting dropped left and right after the n-word controversy. Today Target and Home Depot announced they are cutting ties with the queen of southern cooking. So where does it hurt, it hurts somewhere in the middle section where her wallet sits.

The latest blows to her empire which could top $40 million. According to "Forbes," Deen brought in $17 million in income last year alone, holy smokes Batman, as you can see, the bulk of that coming from licensing deals, restaurants, and her television show. All right, so how much is that going to hurt?

OUTFRONT tonight, the man who has been crunching the numbers and knows them, Caleb Melby, "Forbes" wealth reporter. You're the one who got this number on the annual income, Caleb, and did all this work. All right, so how much are earnings going to take a hit now because it just sounds like she's losing all of her income all of a sudden?

CALEB MELBY, "FORBES" WEALTH REPORTER: Right. So we look at 2012 and that was $17 million. If we go back to 2008, that was $4.5 million and as we see all these licensing and merchandising deals falling through, it looks like she could fall back all the way to 2008, lose all of the ground that she's gained in the past five years.

BURNETT: That's pretty incredible. So you're basically saying when we hear Home Depot, Target, and Wal-Mart, that's where the big money is for her.

MELBY: Absolutely.

BURNETT: More than cooking stuff.

MELBY: You can split the Paula Deen empire up into essentially three major pillars, the licensing and merchandising is about one- third, her restaurants are about one-third, and her media and appearances are about one-third. And with the licensing going away, that's one-third and Food Network makes up a healthy portion of her media appearances and that leaves her essentially with her restaurants, her magazine, and her cookbooks.

BURNETT: And you've got to hope that she saves some money. But what about the cookbooks because this is amazing, if some of you are angry with her, you may be surprised to hear this. Her book due out this fall, this one on Amazon and by the way, that's because of this controversy. Her other cookbook was 750 and now it's number 7. Is that going to make up enough money to make a difference here? MELBY: That's exactly what you see her supporters doing is try to show support for her wherever they can and that's in her restaurants, where they are lining out the doors and at Amazon where they can buy her books. This is a grassroots efforts where she was having Wal-Mart and pharmaceutical companies and Home Depot paying her millions of dollars annually to shelter various products and it's not going to make up for it.

BURNETT: That easy money could be gone. All right, well, thank you very much, Caleb, and thank you for running the numbers. So many people had those questions so we appreciate it.

MELBY: Glad to be here.

BURNETT: Still to come, a shocking new development in the Aaron Hernandez investigation. The NFL star now tied to multiple murders.

Plus, the latest from the George Zimmerman trial today, we're going to go in depth. The woman on the phone with Trayvon Martin when he was killed describes his final moments and hours on the stand today.

And later in the show, why is Germany building robot apes?


BURNETT: Welcome back to the second half of OUTFRONT where we start with stories we care about where we focus on reporting from the frontlines and I want to begin with breaking news just coming in at this moment, the former second highest ranking officer in the U.S. military tonight being investigated for a leak about a secret U.S. cyber attack on Iran's nuclear program. This report is from NBC News.

According to NBC retired Marine General James Cartwright, the former vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has been notified that he is under investigation for leaking information about the computer virus which was called Stuxnet on Iran's nuclear facility.

The Obama administration has already prosecuted or charged eight individuals under the Espionage Act. CNN has not been able to independently verified the investigation but the Justice Department, U.S. attorney, Cartwright, and his lawyers have so far not formally commented.

We have new developments to report to you on the Aaron Hernandez case. A law enforcement source tells us the former New England Patriots' tight end is now being investigated in connection with a double homicide that took place in Boston last year. Boston Police say they found a silver SUV they believe Hernandez was renting when those killings happened and note that that alleged double homicide would come a day after Hernandez was charged with murder in the death of a friend.

Well, David Werfel is the acting chief of the IRS. He's been on the job for five weeks but that did not prevent Republican Congressman Paul Ryan from grilling him on Capitol Hill today. Ryan is angry about the IRS' reckless spending and today read off a laundry list of expenses, including one we'd heard of before. $17,000 the IRS spent to create paintings of Bono, Michael Jordan and Abraham Lincoln for a conference.

Somehow it's like this is supposed to be a joke but then you realized it's reality. All in $49 million was spent on conferences between 2010 and 2012 by the IRS. So Ryan was in disbelief that the agency is now asking for a $1 billion budget increase.


REP. PAUL RYAN (R), WISCONSIN: How on earth do you think you have the moral authority to ask for this?


BURNETT: Werfel agreed the costs were excessive and inappropriate but insisted those patterns of spending are not happening at the IRS now.

Well, it's been 691 days since the U.S. lost its top credit rating. So what are we doing to get it back? Well, today mortgage rates surged. Nearly 4.5 percent. We're at 4.46 percent for a 30- year fixed rate mortgage. It is the biggest weekly jump in mortgage rates in 26 years according to Freddie Mac. Last week when the Fed made its decision, we told you to go out and re-fi or purchase that home and we really, really meant it, because rates are going up.

And now our fourth story OUTFRONT. The star witness takes the stand again. So Trayvon Martin's friend, you may remember her, we'll show it to you in a second, returned for a second day of contentious questioning in the murder trial of George Zimmerman. Rachel Jeantel was on the phone with Martin moments before he was shot and killed by Zimmerman. She heard the altercation. And today, during five hours of testimony, the defense tore into Jeantel's version of what she heard on the phone.


DON WEST, ATTORNEY FOR GEORGE ZIMMERMAN: So the last thing you heard was some kind of noise, like something hitting somebody?

RACHEL JEANTEL, WITNESS: And Trayvon got hit -- Trayvon got hit.

WEST: You don't know that, do you?

JEANTEL: No, sir.

WEST: You don't know that Trayvon got hit?

JEANTEL: He could be --

WEST: You don't know that Trayvon didn't at that moment take his fist and drive it into George Zimmerman's face?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Please lower your voice. WEST: Do you?

JEANTEL: No, sir.


BURNETT: Martin Savidge is OUTFRONT at the courthouse in Sanford, Florida.

And, Martin, so you just heard Zimmerman's lawyer trying to get Rachel to open the door to Trayvon having been being the aggressor. How did she do?


BURNETT: In her reply.

SAVIDGE: I actually think Don West actually did a pretty good job there. That was a critical moment you isolated with that sound bite because he did two things there. Number one, he got her to admit that, well, maybe she didn't know as confidently as she thought she did the chain of events. The other thing was he also interjected there the defense's narration, in other words, that it was Trayvon Martin that was the aggressor here and that he was the one that socked him in the face right away, and that's what started all of this.

So Don West did that in one swipe. Unfortunately, it took him about five hours, as you point out, to reach that moment and there were a lot of times where it didn't appear the defense was on top of its game when it came to cross-examining her. And remember, you know, she's 19 years old. He's a veteran defense attorney. So her story suffered blows but it didn't completely collapse.

BURNETT: And I know there was some sympathy for her on social media as well today maybe because she seemed so -- you know, he was experienced and she's just 19.

Well, thanks to Martin who was there in the courtroom.

Jeantel, of course, is the prosecution's key witness so everything she does, every move she makes, every blink she makes is watched. According to Trayvon Martin's family, she's a reluctant witness. So perhaps just as important as what she said is how she's saying it. That's why you have to watch the body language.

And David Mattingly has looked at every one of those unspoken signals she could have sent to the jury. Here he is.


DAVID MATTINGLY, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): You can see it from the moment she takes the stand. Rachel Jeantel is not comfortable in the spotlight. She mumbles. She grumbles. But manages to speak volumes.

JEANTEL: Are you listening? MATTINGLY: Whenever she reacts.

(On camera): She's so demonstrative. What is she saying to the jury?

SUSAN CONSTANTINE, JURY CONSULTANT: She's sending mixed messages.

MATTINGLY (voice-over): Susan Constantine is a jury consultant and body language expert, finding plenty to read in this courtroom starting with the frequent head rolls.

CONSTANTINE: So there's this disdain. And you know, when she rolls, it's like, you just don't get it. You know? It's kind of like that nonverbal talking, you're just shrugging it off, you know. You don't get what I'm talking about.

MATTINGLY: But everyone knew what Jeantel was saying when she gave this look.

(On camera): That look she gives the defense attorney, the jury saw this.

CONSTANTINE: Exactly. And see, the thing is that she's not aware and not only that that but someone didn't do a really good job in doing the witness preparation because she needs to know that anything that she does, there's eyes all around her like a fly.

MATTINGLY (voice-over): One message is loud and clear. Watch this exchange at the end of testimony Wednesday.

JEANTEL: No. I'm leaving today.


JEANTEL: I'm leaving today. No.

MATTINGLY: Jeantel had had enough and a night to sleep on it didn't seem to help her mood.

WEST: Are you OK this morning?


WEST: You seem so different than yesterday. I'm just checking. Did someone talk with --

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Is that a question?

WEST: Yes. Did someone talk with you last night about your demeanor in court yesterday?

JEANTEL: No. I went to sleep.

MATTINGLY: Obviously irritated. But not necessarily dishonest. The online public seems to sympathize with Rachel Jeantel. Analysis of Twitter traffic shows just 33 positive tweets for Jeantel in the morning rising to 50 percent at midday.

(On camera): Her credibility is everything here.


MATTINGLY: Is she coming across as credible?

CONSTANTINE: She is coming across as credible and she's coming across believable. The problem is, is that there's so many pieces to the story that are just not fitting and she doesn't really find that, you know, some parts of it is really that important to remember, so she just kind of blows it off.

MATTINGLY (voice-over): And that could be the source of so much frustration. Spelled out in detail with every look and motion.


BURNETT: So, David, what do you think it is when you see at the beginning, you know, people -- there was no support and then you say by the end half the people were supporting her? What is it about her that's making people come to her side?

MATTINGLY: One of the things that people articulated most in those tweets was how she was standing up to the defense attorney. I mean, here's a 19-year-old, not very sophisticated, really a fish out of water in this courtroom, but she was giving the courtroom version of stand your ground. She wasn't backing down at all and people were responding to that.

BURNETT: And do you think there was sympathy, also, because as you point out, I mean, she is only 19 years old.

MATTINGLY: That's right. And we're looking at the reaction also in the courtroom from the jurors. They were listening to her very, very closely. There was some difficulty because she was very soft spoken and it was also difficult at times to figure out what she was trying to express there on the stand. But the jurors were paying attention. They will probably be able to look past all of those things that people are talking about out in public right now because the only thing that matters in this courtroom was, was she telling the truth and she was not appearing to be untruthful. Inconsistent, yes, but not untruthful.

BURNETT: Yes, inconsistency is one thing. And being a liar, a totally different one.

Thanks to David Mattingly.

And now criminal defense attorney Mark Nejame is OUTFRONT.

Mark, obviously another long day on the stand for Rachel Jeantel. I kind of love how the beginning when Zimmerman's attorney said to the judge, yes, this will take a few hours. She went, what, and covered her face? I mean, very naturally, like, are you kidding many he? I've got to sit here for hours? How did she acquit herself, when you look at this as an attorney? Because it sounds like between what Martin and David are saying, she may be inconsistent but she's kind of winning.

MARK NEJAME, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Well, I think that compared to the abysmal showing that she had yesterday, anything would look good and I really think that she ended up doing so poorly yesterday that any increase would be gauged in -- you know, monumental leaps.

The fact is, is that I still have a very hard time, as I think most do, believing her because she is an admitted liar. She said that on several occasions she's made up things, even when she was under oath, and now she's saying, believe me. And I do think that the key part is, who initiated this confrontation and then who kept it going, and can she really add anything to that, and can she be believed beyond a reasonable doubt?

Because remember, she really is the last person that was speaking to Trayvon and the issue is going to be, when it comes down to the judge giving an instruction to the jury, you have to find him guilty, if you do, beyond and to the exclusion of every reasonable doubt. Can she be -- can she meet that standard? And I just simply don't think she can.

And she does get a lot of passes because of her age but the fact is, she's 19 1/2 years old. She's almost 20 years old. We have people in and out of our court system every day who are at that age or younger, and they're held to the same truthful standard as everybody else.

BURNETT: Right. Well, it's a fair point. Maybe I guess it was just her being so soft spoken that -- you know, and seeming to be shy or something that conveyed an image of relative youth.

What about the one thing I want to ask you, Mark, when -- the defense attorney, Zimmerman's attorney, pressed her about the use of racially charged term that she said Trayvon Martin had used. It's a derogatory way to refer to white people apparently. Here's the word.


WEST: He described him as a creepy ass cracker?


WEST: So it was racial but it was because Trayvon Martin put race in this?


WEST: You don't think that's a racial comment?


(END VIDEO CLIP) BURNETT: So Mark, what do you think about that? Creepy ass cracker, I guess, is a derogatory way to refer to white people. She's saying Trayvon Martin used the word. Does that impact this at all?

NEJAME: I think it does in some ways, you know. We don't really -- we don't know the minds of the jurors but we have two women who were in their 30s, and as a I remembered two other women in their 40s or 50s and then two other in their 60s. You know, that is offensive to many people. And then she went on to say, you know, if you were to continue that, she went on to say that Trayvon Martin had said -- that she believed that Trayvon Martin indicated that it was a racial confrontation with a creepy, you know, cracker that was following him.

But there was no indication that Zimmerman had said anything to suggest that it was racial. I only bring that up because race is a big issue in this and I think that again goes to her credibility and I just think that the jury is going to have a hard time believing her beyond a reasonable doubt.

BURNETT: Reasonable doubt being the crucial marker here as always.

And thanks to Mark Nejame.

Still to come, the N word. Our own Don Lemon investigates why some people do things. It's the worst word ever.

And later in the show Germany's plan to conquer the world -- I mean moon.


BURNETT: Our fifth story OUTFRONT, the visceral reaction to the N word. It played a pivotal role in two of the biggest headlines this week, the George Zimmerman murder trial and the allegations around the celebrity chef Paula Deen. But what is it about that word that makes it so that when I'm sitting here you can only say N word. It makes it different from any other offensive slur.

Don Lemon is OUTFRONT.


DON LEMON, CNN ANCHOR/CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): This classic "Saturday Night Live" sketch ran unbleeped in 1975.





LEMON: But it probably wouldn't run today. Why? Have we lost our sense of humor? TIM WISE, ANTI-RACISM ACTIVIST: What was so profound about that sketch wasn't just that they got away with using let's say the N word and a lot of other racial slurs but what that sketch really demonstrated was that certain slurs, there are simply no trump cards for and the N word is one of them.

LEMON: All of the words, Paula Deen is losing her TV job and millions in endorsement money.

PAULA DEEN, COOKING SHOW HOST: Inappropriate, hurtful language is totally, totally unacceptable.

LEMON: And the prosecution in the George Zimmerman murder trial could lose credibility all because of the words a witness says Martin used to describe the man who shot him.

WEST: Creepy ass cracker?


WEST: So it was racial but it was Trayvon Martin who put race in this?


WEST: You don't think that's a racial comment?


LEMON: You don't think that creepy ass cracker is a racial comment?


LEMON: Is there really a difference between witness Rachel Jeantel and Paula Deen's racism denials?

WISE: The difference is a difference of about 47 years. You know --

LEMON: Anti-racism activist Tim Wise.

WISE: I think to expect a 19-year-old to know the history of a term like cracker as opposed to a 66-year-old knowing the history of the N word is just a ridiculous comparison obviously.

LEMON: And did Martin bring race into it by using that term?

WISE: The problem with that argument is that, first of all, it's comparing, you know, to be on point with this case, it's like comparing Skittles and a handgun. They simply don't have the same power.

LEMON: Is he right? We took the words to the people on the street. UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They're both derogatory, they're both racist but it's just not -- the feeling I get inside from when I hear that word, and when I hear the word, is different. It's got some psychological thing.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: If someone were to call me a honky or cracker, I don't think it would offend me as much as this word offends other people and from my experience.

LEMON (on camera): And if you hear other people saying this word or this word as opposed to that word, this still offends you more?


LEMON: Even if it's a black person calling a white person that -- those words?


LEMON: Someone saying the N word offensively --

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I'm being completely honest, yes.

LEMON (voice-over): Honesty might just be the answer, according to Columbia University professor Marc Lamont Hill, who says we shouldn't be censoring this "SNL" clip.





MARC LAMONT HILL, PROFESSOR, COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY: I think we hurt ourselves as a community, as a country, as a group of people really trying to improve the racial circumstances in this nation by running from these words, by simply censoring these words, and by simply throwing people away as soon as they use them.


BURNETT: And Don Lemon is here. He's brought his index cards.


BURNETT: Now you just heard 1975 --

LEMON: Right.

BURNETT: Chevy Chase used the N word. People react horribly to it. Nobody wants to say it. You have actually said that word.

LEMON: I have.

BURNETT: On the air.

LEMON: On the air.

BURNETT: And you feel strongly about, why?

LEMON: Well, I -- let's -- let me just preface by saying I don't like the word.


LEMON: But I think it's necessary to say the word when you're reporting it, if it's pertinent to what you're talking about because otherwise you sanitize it. Think about in the courtroom if they had said she called him -- you know, he said a creepy ass C. You'd be like what? It was sanitizing. Say the word cracker. So on the air when I'm reporting, if someone says it, I say they said the word nigger. That is the word. I don't go around calling people that word and I don't like it when I hear it.


LEMON: But I think it needs to be said.

BURNETT: You know, it's interesting when you said it because even when you said it.


BURNETT: And I knew you were going to say it.

LEMON: You flinched.

BURNETT: But I flinched.


BURNETT: And I actually didn't realize it, but you probably noticed that I did.


BURNETT: Because there is something about this word people just aren't able to handle. I mean, do you think -- and again, within the context you're saying, you're not just saying it just to say it.


BURNETT: But if you say it when people are talking about it, and you put it out there, will that make it something people are able to handle more, to deal with more, to put -- to not have be this giant, giant thing and problem?

LEMON: I think yes, and I think if -- if the situation had been reversed and someone in the courtroom had said the N word, I would imagine that most networks and that we would have bleeped it and we would not have let people hear -- (CROSSTALK)

BURNETT: Interesting point.

LEMON: That's just showed you how toxic that word is. And so I didn't even want to say it to people on the street, but when I did, I can see it in their eyes, they flinched and I almost whispered it. And so I took the queue cards and I put words up, you know, I took -- put a couple of words up and the words I did, the three that we talked about the most were this word.


LEMON: This is the N word.


LEMON: This word which was talked about in court today and this word. And so when I put these two words up, most people just kind of snickered and said it's a joke because when you hear this word as Marc Lamont Hill told me today, when you hear those two words, it's almost like someone is going to say, come on, jive turkey, it so 1970s.


LEMON: When you hear this word or you see this word --

BURNETT: This word has the whole history of a country.

LEMON: People get a creepy different -- right.

BURNETT: This word is -- right. And you have other -- you have some other words there, too, which is interesting.

LEMON: Yes. BURNETT: Because when we're talking about -- we're talking about African-Americans, but when you talk about gay people, words that used to be clear, used to be --

LEMON: Took this word --

BURNETT: That used to be a swear word.

LEMON: Yes. So now it's -- we're here and we get used to it. So I took the word back.


LEMON: But -- and then there's this word. I don't know if you can take that word as pretty toxic.

BURNETT: There is that word.

LEMON: I'm not sure if you can take this --

BURNETT: That word is a toxic word. LEMON: But people have tried to take the N word back, but it is such a powder keg that word that you have to really change it in order to take it back. So it's nigger instead of nigger. Right? So, you know, I hate saying that but that's how -- that's how you --


LEMON: You can't take that -- the word back in its true form.

BURNETT: Do you think there's any way ever to take it back? Because when you talk about people taking it back, I mean, I'm thinking of -- you know --


BURNETT: Rap songs.

LEMON: No. No.

BURNETT: That's the only place that you ever hear that word.

LEMON: I think this is the most derogatory, toxic, offensive word in the English language.


LEMON: There are a few that are second to that, one describes women with a C, the other is this word, I think.


LEMON: Or the long form of this word.


LEMON: But I think I don't think you can take the N word back. I think because of the history and the power behind it. Yes.

BURNETT: It's an evil word.


BURNETT: All right. Well, Don Lemon, thank you very much.

LEMON: Thank you. Great discussion. I liked talking to you about this.

BURNETT: All right. It was great to have you.


BURNETT: You're going to have a special on that N word coming up also on CNN.

OUTFRONT next, imagine if you can recharge your cell phone in just 30 seconds. Talk about miraculous. A teenage inventor, a teenager is making it possible.


BURNETT: When natural disasters strike, cell phones are invaluable. Often the only resource people have so what if you could charge your phone in under 30 seconds? Well, that would make a huge difference in the storm. You'd need -- still need power but only a quick hit.

Tonight Dan Simon reports on a young woman who's figured out how to do it.


DAN SIMON, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Every so often we meet someone who you just know is destined for big things.

EESHA KHARE, LYNBROOK HIGH SCHOOL: I am really interested in energy storage and nano materials for energy storage.

SIMON: Not something you typically hear out of an 18-year-old's mouth.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: From Saratoga, California, Eesha Khare.

SIMON: Eesha is a senior at San Jose's Lynbrook High School. She came to our attention after winning an Intel Young Scientist Award beating out more than 1600 students from around the world.

(On camera): Did you think you were going to win?

KHARE: No, I actually didn't. So only when the confetti actually came up did I realize that I'm one of these three.

SIMON (voice-over): Eesha created what's called a super capacitor. A tiny version of one, anyway. The idea for it came from something we all experience.

KHARE: Many teenagers nowadays have cell phones and I have a cell phone, too, and my cell phone battery often died out on me.

SIMON: The dead cell phone, Eesha's breakthrough could one day make charging it super fast, 20 to 30 seconds fast.

KHARE: There was capacitors, batteries and super capacitors, and just I think super sounded really cool to me and I never heard of it before so I decided to go and see what that is.

SIMON: The judges were impressed and noted that her technology has wide implications.

KHARE: Energy storage is a really big field so it could be used in green energy like wind turbines, it could be used in electric cars. There's a lot of different energy storage applications for this new technology. SIMON: Born and raised in Silicon Valley Eesha says she was constantly inspired by those around her but not just to pursue her goals.

KHARE: Right now like I am a girl in science and that's great, and a lot more girls are getting into science, but I think there is a lot of stigma surrounding like being a girl and being a woman in science, and I really want to try to break that in the field of science.

SIMON (on camera): Besides having a perfect grade point average and being a class valedictorian, Eesha also is a member of the school's varsity field hockey team. She's also an accomplished dancer. Not surprisingly she had a few choices when it came to picking a college.

Can you tell me what schools, what colleges you applied to?

KHARE: OK. I was applied to and was accepted to Harvard, Stanford, MIT, Yale and Cal Tech, and a lot of -- all UCs I applied to. I ended up selecting Harvard.

SIMON (voice-over): Eesha's takeaway from Intel, $50,000. Money that she says will help pay for college.

Dan Simon, CNN, San Jose, California.


BURNETT: "AC 360" starts right now.