Return to Transcripts main page


`Blade Runner` Faces Murder Trial; Casey Anthony Insists Zanny the Nanny was Real

Aired February 28, 2014 - 19:00:00   ET


JANE VELEZ-MITCHELL, HOST: Tonight, the clocks ticks down to the blockbuster murder trial of Olympic hero Oscar Pistorius.

Good evening. I`m Jane Velez-Mitchell. Thank you for joining me.

The global superstar and national legend turned murder suspect is accused of gunning down his gorgeous model girlfriend on Valentine`s Day last year. Oscar Pistorius insists the deadly shooting was just one big tragic mistake.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The Olympic Blade Runner Oscar Pistorius has now been indicted for premeditated murder.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The Valentine`s Day murder case involving South African Olympic star Oscar Pistorius.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: When he walked into the court, he faced a wall, a barrage of cameras.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: In the blink of an eye, Pistorius would go from national hero to murder suspect. Pistorius`s girlfriend, 29-year-old model Reeva Steenkamp.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Today would have been Reeva Steenkamp`s 30th birthday.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Police believe Pistorius shot Steenkamp four times through a closed bathroom door.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Prosecutors say Oscar Pistorius is a violent guy with a very short temper, who intended to kill Reeva Steenkamp during a nasty argument at his home. But Oscar claim`s the shooting was just a tragic accident.

On that deadly night, Oscar says he walked through a pitch-black bedroom onto his balcony to get a fan. And when he walked back inside he says he heard somebody in the bathroom and saw an open window. He grabbed the pistol under his bed, fearing there were intruders in the bathroom.

Oscar says he thought Reeva was still lying in bed. Here`s Oscar`s account of what happened next, as read by an HLN producer.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I fired shots at the toilet door and shouted to Reeva to phone the police. She did not respond, and I moved backwards out of the bathroom, keeping my eyes on the bathroom entrance.

Everything was pitch dark in the bedroom. And I was still too scared to switch on a light. Reeva was not responding. When I reached the bed, I realized that Reeva was not in bed. That is when it dawned on me that it could have been Reeva who was in the toilet.

I returned to the bathroom calling her name. I tried to open the toilet door, but it was locked. I rushed back into the bedroom and opened the sliding door, entering onto the balcony, and screamed for help. I put on my prosthetic legs, ran back to the bathroom and tried to get the toilet door open.

I went back into the bedroom and grabbed my cricket bat to bash the door open. The panel or panels broke off and I found the key on the door and unlocked the door. Reeva was slumped over, but alive.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: He fired four times, striking Reeva in the head, the hip and the elbow. She died in Oscar`s arms.

Could the exceptionally high crime rate in South Africa be part of his defense? If you believe Oscar`s story, this was an accidental killing by a man paranoid about break-ins, who got death threats, had 24-hour security, and nine-foot exterior walls.

But prosecutors argue this was a cold, calculated murder by a man with a history of violence who was having an argument with his girlfriend.

Our Lion`s Den experts are ready to debate it. But I want to start with a very special guest who will be joining us throughout this trial, Jen Su, TV and radio personality out of Johannesburg, South Africa.

Jen, staying up late for us tonight, this is as big as the infamous O.J. Simpson trial was. Take us to South Africa. What`s the mood there? Is everybody on pins and needles? Is the country polarized and divided over this case?

JEN SU, TV AND RADIO PERSONALITY: Absolutely, Jane. They are on their edge of their seats. International media have all poured in. Local media is covering this like a hawk.

And this week, there was a court ruling that allowed for the court trial to be televised, which is a huge -- you know, it was absolutely amazing for the TV networks to have applied, for getting this coverage on television. Now there`s two 24-hour DSTV (ph) channels that are going to be devoted to this, because this is the trial of the century, certainly here in South Africa. But there is huge international interest, as well.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, you`re absolutely right. And we are among those networks hugely interested in this story. And we`re going to be covering it big-time, on this show, starting next week. So this is a preview of the case. So you know everything about it in time for when it starts up next week.

Neighbors, OK, the neighbors` testimony is absolutely crucial in this trial. Five of them heard arguing and screaming intermittent with the gunshots. Now, here`s what one of the prosecutors told NBC. Listen.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We heard gunshots, screams, gunshots, screams. It`s going to be hard for you to argue that he didn`t know that the person that was screaming was his girlfriend.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Straight out to "The Lion`s Den." If neighbors testified it was gunshot, scream, gunshot, scream, that could imply somehow that he did think that he was fighting with some intruder, even though he wasn`t. But if they hear an argument, and then a minute goes by, and then the gunshots, to me, and I`ll throw it to Wendy Murphy, former prosecutor, that says they were having an argument, he got angry and shot her.

WENDY MURPHY, FORMER PROSECUTOR: Well, yes. I mean, common sense dictates that the order of screaming and bullets is absolutely devastating evidence for the defense. But the defense will surely find some excuse. Well, you know, they weren`t really hearing things correctly. Maybe she was screaming because she was also afraid of the intruder.

You know, I don`t think the screaming, the order of bullets is going to make the case for the prosecution so much as the fact that he said he only shot into the bathroom, and they found bullet casings in the hallway. He was clearly running after her going boom, boom, boom.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: So you think that it`s case closed, that he was a guy with a violent temper who had an argument with his girlfriend. She locks herself in the bathroom. But there`s a fight that goes on, and it had nothing to do with intruders.

By the way, there were no intruders. That was his theory, but there were no intruders in the house whatsoever.

MURPHY: Jane, this was an execution. Domestic violence, very typical, very rageful, execution-style killing. The only thing this guy has going for him is that he has no legs. And we think it`s weird. We think, you know, people with no legs are sweet. But he was a hero. We don`t want to believe people like that are killers. Well, guess what? They are.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: OK, Kirby, take it away.

CLEMENTS: No, this man has two legs. I mean, he`s a double amputee. It`s the middle of the night. He wakes up. He`s confused. We can all sympathize with that concept of not being aware of your surroundings at the time. He fires into the place. This is a woman that he loved. But he thought it was an intruder. He`s paranoid. There are people making death threats, stalking him. If you`re a famous person, you understand you`ve got stalkers out there.

So he lived in a heightened state of fear. Plus he`s a double amputee. So he was really defenseless in this situation. So I would present it is not an execution.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Here`s what I have...

CLEMENTS: It`s the simple fact that he was defending himself.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: I have -- hold on. I have a problem with that. Because why would somebody break into your house, and then hide and lock themselves in the bathroom? I mean, what are they going for, the soap?

Wendy Walsh, there`s a certain, like, lack of common sense problem with this argument of his.

WENDY WALSH, PSYCHOLOGIST: Well, yes. I mean, Wendy Murphy describes it as a classic case of domestic violence. I will remind you that, when a woman gets murdered, it is a very large majority of cases, it is by her intimate partner. That`s first of all. It is because there`s a fine line between love and hate.

This is a man who, if you look at human mating strategy, would have considered -- been considered a low status mate because of his disability. However, he overcame that, getting an Olympic gold medal and then getting a high status 10, supermodel girl.

Now he risks potentially losing her. Everything he`s worked his whole life for was so that he could have this supermodel 10, high-status woman. So if it was a jealous rage, if she was breaking up with him, if he found out she`d been with another man, this could make him absolutely explode.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Jen Su, back in South Africa, joining us live from Johannesburg. We asked you this question. Do people give him a pass because he is the famous Oscar Pistorius? Because so many people in South Africa are proud of what he accomplished? And we`ve got judges, not jurors, judging this case. Is there political pressure on these jurors to give him a pass because, oh, South Africa`s proud of him?

SU: Well, the thing is in South Africa, there is no jury. So this is a very different case from the O.J. Simpson case. Trial by jury was basically taken away during apartheid in 1969. So there is no trial by jury. It is basically reliant on a judge. The judge is actually a 1998, she was selected as the second black woman in history to ascend the high courts.

Now this woman is quite hard line on crime issues against women. She also has sentenced a number of rapists to death. So she`s going to be hard line. Remember, now, with the televised crime, with the televised trial, I think that we are going to really see South African criminal justice system in the spotlights. They`re certainly going to be on their best behavior. They`re going to make sure that everything is right. And they say they`re not doing Oscar any favors.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Moments of violence that ended this beautiful woman`s death. On the other side of the break, we`re going to walk you through what happened. We`re also going to ask, does Oscar Pistorius have a dark side? Does he have toxic secrets? We`re going to ask a question about pornography. Stay right there.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You`ve got to stand by your friends. No matter what the story was, or what the truth is.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I think the instrument, he was the instrument. And to come around that is almost impossible. This will haunt him for the rest of his life.



UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I`ve known him for many years. I`ve never seen him show me an angry side. I`ve never seen him lose his temper. He`s an incredibly kind and gentle human being. That`s the way I know him.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: The two sides of Oscar Pistorius. You heard one side right there. But others are asking was Oscar leading a double life?

To the outside world, he was a golden boy, a handsome Olympic hero. He and Reeva were the Brad and Angelina of South Africa. But there are very dark stories out there about him and about Oscar`s nasty and sometimes allegedly violent temper.


MARCH BATCHELOR, SOCCER PLAYER: It`s like, well, we were waiting for something like this to happen, you know. He would have a trip switch, and you know, he`d get very violent and angry, and he`d fight with people and cause a lot of problems. And I mean, that`s -- the incident with me and him was because he was drunk at a party, and he started shouting and swearing on the phone.

GRAEME JOFFE, SOUTH AFRICAN SPORTS JOURNALIST: I saw something developing. And some of the things I even known about -- the guns and arms and ammunition, is something I didn`t even know about him. But it all pieces together that here, I think, you had a troubled athlete.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Jen Su, radio personality and TV personality, who is joining us from Johannesburg, South Africa, what do you know about these stories of a dark side? We hear that he always carried a gun. Then these allegations that he had a violent temper.

SU: Well, there were a number of allegations from various celebrities, even from his ex-girlfriends. But I really think that a lot of it has been blown out of proportion.

You know, the media really likes to sensationalize these things. There`s going to be 107 witnesses called in this trial. And the opening arguments, the closing arguments, the evidence is going to be put in there.

Oscar`s got a whole defense team including forensic geologists. He`s got a forensic animator who`s going to have -- describe the whole thing in animation, as well, from his deposition.

Now, also, it`s going to be very -- I think, really, you know, some of these stories that come out, and they`ve been coming out since day one, since the bail hearing, we have to actually look more objectively at this.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Let me jump in. Let me jump in a second.

SU: Because social media -- I think it`s blown out of proportion.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: I have a problem with Oscar`s claim that he thought Reeva was still lying in bed when he shoots through the bathroom. CNN`s Tom Foreman walks us through an amazing 3-D model of Oscar`s version of it.


TOM FOREMAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: From the early morning hours of Valentine`s Day, in the dark he and his girlfriend were asleep there. He got up to go out to the balcony to bring in a fan and close a window.

Unbeknownst to him, he says his girlfriend got up at the same time and went to the bathroom. So when he came back into the balcony, he insisted he was under the impression that she was still in the bed. So let`s fly inside and show you his point of view.

He says he goes into this darkened room. He doesn`t have his prosthetic legs on. He`s low to the ground. The room is very dark. He can`t see much and thinks she might be there. Then he hears a noise down this hallway.

There have been threats against his life. There have been break-ins in the neighborhood before. He gets his pistol from under the bed and goes down the hall to confront the intruder, sees an open window. That door to the toilet room is closed, and he hears noise behind it. He thinks that must be the intruder, so he starts yelling for the intruder to get out, yelling for his girlfriend to protect herself, and in a panic fires through the door.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Wendy Murphy, former prose prosecutor, do you buy Oscar`s version of events?

MURPHY: Not even a little. Yes, I was just trying to look up what a forensic geologist could possibly have to say. I think that it would be laughable.

One of the most important things to rebut what we just heard is the height at which the bullets went into the door, the proximity of the gun to the door, and the number of shots fired. If you think there`s a guy hiding in your toilet and you don`t have your prosthetic legs on, No. 1, the bullets are going to go in straight. His went in down.

He was right up next to the door. That makes no sense if you think it`s a monster that you`ve got to have a gun for. Why are you going to be up close? They could shoot you and blow you away. He`s right up next to it shooting down like this. His story makes no sense. He clearly had his legs on, was trying to kill her through the door.

And what kind of person puts their legs on, and takes the time to do that, if they`re so afraid of the intruder?

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Kirby. Kirby -- Kirby Clements, criminal defense attorney?

CLEMENTS: Well, simply put, in the stress of this moment, we`re trying to come up with a reason that makes sense to us now that we`re all sitting in the studios, relaxed and calm. This man still...

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Speak for yourself.

CLEMENTS: Well, I understand. But still has the threat on his life and the like. He`s going through -- his story makes perfect sense. He actually leaves the room. He thinks she`s still in the bed. I`ve done that myself, left my room, thinking my wife had gotten up, until I went back into bag and was, like, "Hey, where are you."

So his story makes sense when you break it down. It may be something nobody wants to believe.


CLEMENTS: I`m sorry.


CLEMENTS: No, I didn`t kill anyone, and I`m a big guy. So I don`t have to use a gun.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: What does the fact that he has these prosthetic legs, how does that factor in, in terms of his psychology? Does it make him feel like he needs to dominate in other ways, perhaps? I don`t want to make up something that`s not there. But what do you think?

WENDY WALSH, PSYCHOLOGIST: Well, I`m going to say something politically incorrect, Jane. This is like a huge -- a huge short man`s complex, if you will. He`s trying to compensate; he`s trying to make up.

Remember I said he wanted to have this supermodel girl, this high- status woman, and in order to get her, he had to compensate in a huge way, becoming a great athlete to show that he`s as good as anyone else. But lurking behind it is this fear that he`s vulnerable, that he`s smaller, that he crawls along on the floor without his legs. And this may have created sort of a heightened paranoia in him, if you will.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, this is a fascinating case. I`m excited that Jen Su is going to be joining us for the entire trial from Johannesburg, South Africa, live.

Thank you, Jen, for your incredible insights.

And panel, stay right there, because speaking of another high-profile crazy case, Casey Anthony, she`s at it again. She`s back in court, under oath, swearing -- you won`t believe what she swears under oath this time around. Unbelievable.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: As to count one, we, the jury, find the defendant not guilty. Verdict as to count two, we, the jury, find the defendant not guilty. Verdict as to count three, we, the jury, find the defendant not guilty.

CASEY ANTHONY, ACQUITTED OF KILLING DAUGHTER: I`m not going to give the media anything when I get out of here. It sucks for them, because I have nothing to say.




UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Who has her? Do you have a name?

ANTHONY: Her name is Zenaida Fernandez Gonzalez.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Who took her at that point?

ANTHONY: Zanny did.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Why didn`t you call a few days ago?

ANTHONY: I`ve been looking for her and going through other resources to try to find her.

My entire life has been taken from me. They already said they`re going to pin this on me if they don`t find Caylee.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: As to count one, we, the jury, find the defendant not guilty.

ANTHONY: I`m not going to give the media anything when I get out of here. It sucks for them, because I have nothing to say.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Fireworks tonight as Casey Anthony is put under oath and grilled about a woman who says Casey ruined her life. Zenaida Gonzalez who says she got pegged as the infamous Zanny the nanny, and her life went into a downward spiral.

But Casey is still insisting, in this just-released deposition, that Zanny the nanny is a real person. Listen to what Casey said, as read by HLN producer.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Was there ever a Zenaida Gonzalez or Zenaida Fernandez Gonzalez that you actually knew?


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You told the police that Zenaida Gonzalez had Caylee, am I right?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I told law enforcement that a Zenaida Fernandez Gonzalez had my daughter, yes.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You told them that a Zenaida Fernandez Gonzalez was a regular babysitter for Caylee. Am I right?




UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Was this lady you claim existed, that was named Zenaida Fernandez Gonzalez, that babysat one time, you claim she had Caylee?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I`m not going to answer that, sir.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: OK. But she`s saying there`s a real person named Zenaida Gonzalez that babysat for her once. Even though Casey`s filing for bankruptcy. That`s right, she`s totally broke. Zenaida Gonzalez isn`t giving up. She`s suing her for defamation.

When Casey`s 2-year-old daughter, little Caylee, first went missing, Casey said her nanny, Zenaida Gonzalez, kidnapped the child. And then on the day of the murder trial, Casey`s attorney, Jose Baez dropped a bombshell, saying, "Oh, no, that didn`t happen. Zanny was totally imaginary." Remember, the child was found by George, Casey`s dad, he claims, in a swimming pool, and Casey, well, she made that whole Zanny thing up.


JOSE BAEZ, CASEY`S DEFENSE ATTORNEY: You hear stories of this Zanny the nanny. It`s true, for two years, she pretended she had a job and pretended she had a nanny. Is that normal? Is that what normal people do?

Anything Casey could do to protect her child, she did. Including living a lie. Making up a nanny.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Now, almost three years after Casey was acquitted of murder and walked out, right there, she`s admitting, no, there wasn`t any kidnapping, but she`s still insisting there`s a real nanny who babysat her deceased daughter, Caylee, once, OK? Does Casey still believe her own lies? Is she still a pathological liar?

Out to Matt Morgan, attorney for a very real Zenaida Gonzalez, who is suing Casey, saying she ruined her life.

You know, Matt, I`ve got to ask you: Zenaida is asking for damages of more than $15,000. But Casey is broke. People are like, let it go already. This woman has no money. It`s like what the heck do we have to dredge up this horror story over and over again for? Why is Zenaida still suing Casey?

MATT MORGAN, ATTORNEY FOR ZENAIDA GONZALEZ (via phone): Well, for Zenaida, I can tell you, it`s all about justice. It`s all about accountability. It`s holding Casey Anthony accountable for her actions, just like everybody else would be under the law.

So this case, while monetary relief is the request that we`re asking the court to provide us with, that`s not what the case is about. This case is about accountability.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: All right. So it`s not about the money. Do you think that Casey ever will have money? I mean, everybody said, well, oh, book deal, movie deal. Nobody needs her side of the story, because we know the whole story. We were there. I was there in court.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: So where is she going to make money? I mean, she`d have to go to triple-X to make some money, in a lot of people`s opinion.

MORGAN: Well, I`ll tell you. You hear all these types of rumors on the Internet, but I think it`s entirely possible, that at some point in the future she could sell her story, she could give an exclusive interview. Who knows? I think it`s entirely possible that at some point in the future she will stand to profit as a result of all this.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: And Wendy Murphy, Zenaida Gonzalez wants to be there. Do you think that Casey Anthony is ever going to make a dime, and if so, how?

MURPHY: I don`t know if she will make a dime. But I think this lawsuit is silly. It`s a distraction. It`s irrelevant.

You know, a baby was killed. It was brutal. The country was riveted because of the circumstances. They`re really not interested that somebody named Zenaida Gonzalez felt offended, because she had the same name.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Hold on a second.

MURPHY: You know, what if there was a murderer accusing somebody called Jane Velez-Mitchell and it wasn`t you. Would you sue because it was your name? No.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: There`s a difference. And I`ll throw it to Kirby Clements. This Zenaida Fernandez Gonzalez had to fill out a form at the very same apartment complex where Casey Anthony claims she last dropped her little daughter before she was kidnapped. So there`s a real connection there. People have never been able to figure out how Casey Anthony made that connection, whether she snuck in there and looked at the book or something. But this woman has a real connection. She`s just not one of a million Zenaida Gonzalez`s out there.

CLEMENTS: And that certainly is true, that there is a connection there. And she may think that that snowballed and made her life -- you know, made her life horrible. But I have to say that what happened in this deposition is that Ms. Anthony has done a very good job of basically saying, "I`m not talking about this woman that`s suing me." And if that`s her defense, the plaintiff has no case anyway.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, I don`t know. You know, this woman is like the abominable snowman. We have not seen her, except for maybe once. She popped up at a diner once or twice since her acquittal in 2011. What is she doing? Where is she? Is she still a pathological liar? You decide. You heard it here. She says there is still a real Zanny the nanny.

On the other side, a beautiful bride killed on her wedding night, right after her wedding reception, and her husband is charged. It`s a crazy story. And that`s just the start of it.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I can`t imagine that. I know that they are a very strong family. I know they are -- they have a lot of faith. And I think they`ll pull right through it, because they know -- they know their daughter.




UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Quinton told investigators he swerved to avoid hitting a dog in the road.

RYAN QUINTON, CHARGED WITH KILLING BRIDE: I couldn`t even see her. She was invisible.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Trapping Kali underneath. They saw Quinton stumbling along the side of the road and called 911.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He was shaking up. He wasn`t making a whole lot of sense. He was hysterical.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I couldn`t even imagine that.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They still had their bridesmaids` gowns on.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Tonight, breaking news: devastation and outrage, a groom accused of killing his bride just minutes after leaving their wedding. Cops say this newlywed drove away from his reception drunk, swerved off the road and killed his brand-new wife. Should he do hard time or should he get a break now that the love of his life is dead?


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He was shaken up. He wasn`t making a whole lot of sense. He was hysterical.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I said, "Come here, buddy." I didn`t know his name. And I just held him and I said, "Let`s pray." And we prayed.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Cops say the newlywed couple drove off from their wedding reception on December 29, just before 8:30 in the evening, but minutes later the happy celebration came to a horrible tragic deadly end. The groom, 27-year-old Ryan Quinton, was driving his Pontiac Firebird and told cops he swerved to miss a dog. He says he lost control. Well, we know the car flipped over and flew down this steep cliff.

Investigators say the bride Kali Dobson was not wearing her a seatbelt. She was ejected from the car. Cops say the car landed right on top of the bride, completely crushing her. Cops took Ryan`s blood alcohol level and he came in at a whopping 0.114, way over the legal limit of 0.08.

Tonight, Ryan`s out on bond. But the dead bride`s family says they believe their brand-new son-in-law has suffered enough and they don`t want him to go to jail.

Straight out to the "Lion`s Den", should Ryan get time for killing his new bride, even though her family thinks he has suffered enough? We`ll start with Wendy Murphy.

WENDY MURPHY, FORMER PROSECUTOR: You know, this just seems so easy to me. You don`t get a discount, because you killed somebody you love. I mean if he did exactly the same thing and crushed a stranger instead of his wife, would he get a discount? You don`t give people benefits because they hurt somebody they love. If anything, you give them extra punishment.


MURPHY: In fact they should have been extra careful. They should have been extra careful.

CLEMENTS: It`s not a benefit. They`re just recognizing the fact that this man killed, was responsible for the death of his just brand-new bride and that he`s suffered enough. The purpose of prison is to punish someone. This man is going to be in a prison for the rest of his natural life because he knows he`s responsible. And the family, the ones who raised this woman from birth until death have said he doesn`t need to go to jail. Society should respect that.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, you`re saying he could go to jail for the rest of his natural life.

MURPHY: Excuse me.

CLEMENTS: I said he`s going to be in prison in his mind and his heart because he killed -- I`m saying his emotions --

MURPHY: Oh, so wait a minute now, victims get to dictate to the court what a prison sentence should be?

CLEMENTS: They do all the time. Prosecutors do it all the time.

MURPHY: Ok, so if the victim said --

VELEZ-MITCHELL: One at a time. One at a time.

MURPHY: If a victim said send him away for 35 years, you`d say, listen to the victim?

CLEMENTS: You`d say listen to the victims if you say they should be in jail forever.

MURPHY: You know that`s not true. Who cares what they --

VELEZ-MITCHELL: All right. Listen --

MURPHY: -- listen --


VELEZ-MITCHELL: I want to -- I want to go to Jon Leiberman Just a second. I want to go to Jon Leiberman. What exactly is he facing and what could he do in terms of time? This is the author of "Whitey on Trial" -- Jon Leiberman?

JON LEIBERMAN, HLN CONTRIBUTOR (via telephone): Well, Jane, that`s a great question. Really, there are two issues here. You know, the first was, should he have been charged with a crime? Absolutely. Police and prosecutors deal with evidence, and the evidence in this case was that he blew a 0.11, and he was drunk.

Now, in Georgia, it`s very interesting, first-degree homicide by vehicle in Georgia, to be guilty, the perpetrator does not have to have intent to kill. Clearly he didn`t go out and intend to kill his new bride.

But Jane, in terms of time, he`s looking at 3 to 15 years if convicted. And in Georgia, if you get sentenced on first-degree homicide by vehicle, the first year is guaranteed no parole, meaning you have to serve at least one year of hard time if convicted of that crime. But he could serve up to 15.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Up to 15 years. The only witness to the accident besides the groom himself, described the bride, Kali`s death, as too terrible to even witness. Check this out.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I couldn`t even see her. She was invisible. I`m thankful I didn`t see anything other than the car.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: She was trapped under the car, crushed by the car right after leaving her wedding reception.

Howard Samuels, addiction specialist, the groom blew a 0.114. Way above the legal limit. First of all, I wonder, why did the people at the reception allow them to leave when they had to have known, it`s a wedding reception, people drink? I mean, somebody had to have known he had something to drink? At least something? But this -- how drunk are you with 0.114?

HOWARD SAMUELS, ADDICTION SPECIALIST: Well, Jane, you`re very drunk. And obviously the lights were on, and no one was home with the wedding group. Or with anybody that really had any care and concern about this couple.

And there`s no question, if you drink and you drive, you have to face the consequences. He killed somebody. He has to serve the consequences of going to prison. There`s no question about that.

I have worked with numerous clients that have killed people in drunken accidents and they have all served time, and gone to rehab in order to deal with the trauma and the guilt and the shame that they have to live with for the rest of their life. In fact them serving a prison time helped them feel that at least they paid society`s debt for the (inaudible) of the time.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, we`re going to stay on top of this. Thank you Howard and find out whether or not he does any time because sometimes people get on probation. It`s happened before.

David Arquette, one of the biggest stars in Hollywood, joins me next. You`ve seen him in the "Scream" movies. Now well, now he`s a serial killer. You won`t believe what he has to say about one of the worst serial killers ever.


DAVID ARQUETTE, ACTOR: How about this? I gave you $20, so you could buy formula for your baby, and you get out of my truck.



VELEZ-MITCHELL: Cops surround and chase down an alleged thief. Not just any suspect, the guy is accused of stealing a jarful of cash from Girl Scouts who were trying to raise money for troops overseas. Police were at the house to serve an unrelated warrant, and wow, they came through for the Girl Scouts. Don`t mess with those scouts.



ARQUETTE: I enjoyed watching them die.

Every now and then I get urges.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The person who did this is still out there.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Be careful out there.

ARQUETTE: I may be closer than you think.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Tonight David Arquette, a Hollywood star, known for his roles in the quirky horror movies "Scream" and for "Dancing with the Stars". But in his latest role, David Arquette taps into his dark -- and I mean dark side to play one of the most hauntingly notorious serial killers in U.S. history.

David Arquette is here with me baring all the secret details about his chilling new Lifetime movie, "The Happy Face Killer". That`s right. You`ll find out how he brought out his dark evil qualities when I talk to him in a second.

The story -- true story of Keith Jesperson, a husband and father who led a secret double life. He was a truck driver who traveled across the country brutally raping and killing at least eight women over five years. He got the nickname "Happy Face Killer", because he taunted cops by leaving chilling confessions signed with a happy face.

His last victim was his own girlfriend. Watch this from Lifetime.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Are you going to pay me or not, you freak?


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Straight out to actor and star of the Lifetime movie "Happy Face Killer", David Arquette. So delighted to have you here. This is some really sick, sick, sick stuff. So I`ve got to ask you, what attracted you to this evil sadistic role? How did you play this guy? It`s like the opposite of you.

ARQUETTE: I don`t know. I`ve always been sort of fascinated with serial killers, in a way. I read a book called "Whoever Fights Monsters" by Robert Ressler. And that was really informative. So it just -- I don`t know.

It`s part of our human, you know, experience. And they`re out there. And there`s something to exploring it, and portraying it. I don`t get to play roles like that usually, so it`s also an opportunity for me to show people a different side of myself.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: A very dark side, indeed. Keith Jesperson earned his nickname "The Happy Face Killer" -- ironic -- because he drew creepy happy faces on the many chilling confession letters he sent to cops and journalists. He described his horrific crimes.

Here`s another clip from Lifetime.


ARQUETTE: Are you going to arrest? Because if not, I`ve got to get back out there -- got to make a living.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: No, you`re not under arrest. Not yet.

ARQUETTE: I didn`t write that letter.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: David, I actually watched you on "Dancing with the Stars". you were adorable. You smiled, you seemed just so really harmless and happy. How did -- what toll did it take on you emotionally, psychologically to bring up the evil, sadistic side of yourself to the surface?

ARQUETTE: Well, the hardest part really is playing a character, a person who actually exists, who`s in jail right now, who killed eight women. And, you know, they`re real people. They were victims. And there`s families that are still out there that are still missing their family members.

You know, it was interesting things, that he never showed violence toward his family which -- except for maybe like torturing animals in front of them which is a form of abuse.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, they all start by torturing animals. They all start --


VELEZ-MITCHELL: -- all these serial killers torture animals. That`s why when I see somebody torturing an animal, I say, serial killer.

ARQUETTE: He was bullied a lot as a kid. And I think that had an effect on feeling like an outcast and just kind of needing to find power.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: I want to thank you. Everybody, watch this. It scares the wits out of you.

You are fabulous. Go back to "Dancing with the Stars", too. I had such fun watching you there.

ARQUETTE: Thank you so much, Jane.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Time for Pet of the Day, send your pet pics to

Shelby -- you are ready for your close-up. And Minnie, she says, "I`m a little bit of a hippie and I like to have fun." And Bear says, "Well, I`ll do it the old-fashioned way, running on the grass." But Pocco says, "Hey, every day is Christmas for me."


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Hey, tonight, Little Foxy, critics are asking is Florida becoming the new capital of cruelty as plans are underway for yet another laboratory monkey breeding facility. Animal Defenders International broke the story nationally on our show claiming they have learned a business that operates in Mauritius off the coast of Africa is set to supply monkeys captured from the wild to this proposed Florida facility.

ADI`s undercover investigation discovered what they say is unimaginable cruelty from the moment these highly intelligent and social primates are captured through transportation and when they end up in a laboratory or as breeders.

ADI says its hidden camera investigation shows what appears to be workers swinging screaming monkeys by their tails. Monkeys tattooed while conscious and babies ripped from their screaming, panicked mothers` arms. Watch.

Now this video you`re looking at is from a monkey lab in the United Kingdom. This is what monkey experimentation looks like. These are highly intelligent beings who experience terror, loneliness, anxieties, much like humans. ADI says this cruelty is just par for the course. Look at that little arm.

If these plans go through, this will be the third monkey breeding facility in Hendry County, Florida. Now there`s a movement to stop it from being built. Joining me now, Don Anthony from the Animal Rights Foundation of Florida. You claim these facilities have virtually no government oversight, even though the USDA says, yes, it monitors it. Explain.

DON ANTHONY, ANIMAL RIGHTS FOUNDATION OF FLORIDA: Well, there is virtually no oversight because the USDA -- because of budget cuts there are very few USDA inspectors. Let me tell you that if you think that your food is inspected it really not. There`s only one percent of your food that`s ever inspected. The other 99 percent is never inspected at all.

So don`t let the USDA or anybody else fool you into thinking that they have tons of money, funding and that they have a lot of these inspectors who are able to go around and inspect what goes at all these different breeding and --

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Do you want to stop this?

ANTHONY: Of course, we do. Of course we do. We asked the Hendry County Commission for a public hearing because of animal welfare concerns and because of concerns about the environment. And they said that there was really no public hearing necessary because the land was already zoned for agriculture. This comes under agriculture, if you can believe it or not.

Now keep in mind that there is no municipal water supply. And even worse than that, there`s no sewage treatment there. So what`s going to happen when you house 3,000 to 4,000 of these monkeys in a facility like this out in the middle of the Everglades, right above the water table that supplies fresh water to one-third of the state of Florida? Where is all that sewage going to go?

VELEZ-MITCHELL: We called all the parties involved, haven`t heard back from them. We reached out to these county commissioners you`re talking about. No response. No response from these county commissioners.

We would love to hear from you people. Give us a call. We want to put you on. We have questions to ask you. We did get a statement from U.S. Senator Bill Nelson. He tells us quote, "The Department of Defense uses animals to train military health care providers for life saving medical procedures." He says they`re actively working to develop non- animal models for medical training which he supports. He also says he supports protecting all animals from undue cruelty and increase funding to improve the enforcement of our country`s animal welfare laws.

What`s your response to that statement? And by the way, you`re looking at video, I got to point out, you`re looking at video that was leaked from another facility in Florida a few years ago. NBC Miami says the president of the company admitted these pictures were real and taken at his facility, a different facility. And he reportedly said these animals attacked each other and that`s how they got these injuries and claimed that they all went back to being healthy.

Again, your reaction to all this?

ANTHONY: Well, we`ve heard for as many years, for decades actually that they`re looking for alternatives. There are alternatives. We don`t need to go back to the 1800s and use Dr. Frankenstein methodology of taking live animals that are terrified and feel pain, strapping them down, restraining them and then cutting their heads open, shooting them, ripping them open or giving them enough toxic chemicals so that they can convulse and die a horrific death.

That`s what happens to these animals. And it`s not science. It`s not science at all. We would like people to move into the 21st century, there are clinical studies, tissue cultures, computer models, there are cadavers to work on, there`s all kinds of --


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Don, we`re going to stay on top of this story. Thank you for your involvement. We want to hear from those commissioners, come on our show, you`re invited. We have been trying to reach you.

Nancy next.