Return to Transcripts main page


Was Ashley Fallis` Death a Suicide or Murder?; Judge to Killer: `I Hope You Die in Prison`

Aired April 18, 2014 - 19:00:00   ET


JANE VELEZ-MITCHELL, HOST: Tonight breaking news. Public outrage as a Colorado family claims their daughter`s brutal murder is at the center of a massive cover-up. Investigators originally ruled her death was a suicide. But now the family claims the dead woman`s cop husband used his police connections to tamper with evidence.

So was it suicide, or was it cold-blooded murder?

Good evening. I`m Jane Velez-Mitchell.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It`s been a long 24 hours for Jenna FOX and Joel Raguindin.

JOEL RAGUINDIN, FATHER OF ASHLEY FALLIS: We had been on an emotional roller coaster.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: But it`s been even longer waiting for justice for their daughter, Ashley. New evidence in the investigation into their daughter`s death.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Late last week I received new information regarding the case.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The case will get a fresh look by a new agency who will interview witnesses like Nick Glover.

NICK GLOVER, WITNESS: It`s pretty hard to forget, hearing somebody confess their murder and getting away with it.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Investigators originally concluded beautiful 28-year- old Ashley Fallis committed suicide on New Year`s Day by shooting herself with a gun right after holding a New Year`s Eve party at her house.

But Ashley`s family said, please, she wasn`t suicidal and claims there`s clear evidence it was murder.


DANIEL REICHT, ATTORNEY FOR ASHLEY FALLIS` FAMILY: One nightmare was over, because they never thought their daughter committed suicide, but they still have a dead daughter. And that dead daughter`s -- the person that killed that dead daughter has not been brought to justice yet.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Ashley`s family thinks it was her husband -- there`s his photo right there -- a county corrections deputy, Tom Fallis, who shot her to death. They also believe that a detective investigating the case helped cover up the crime by allegedly changing or omitting statements in evidence.

The family points to the 6-year-old daughter`s statement, saying, well, it was completely thrown out, even though she told cops, quote, "I saw Daddy getting the gun ready." And she also allegedly said, quote, "I saw Daddy shoot Mommy."

And the 6-year-old wasn`t the only witness. Reports claim a neighbor came forward to say Ashley`s husband outright confessed.


GLOVER: Pretty hard to forget hearing somebody confess to a murder and then getting away with it.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: We want to stress the husband, Tom Fallis, has not been charged with anything. Police have not named him as a suspect.

We tried repeatedly but were unable to reach him. He`s invited on our show anytime. We want to be fair, and we want to give both sides.

Meanwhile, cops have now reopened the case. So who`s telling the truth? Is this a massive cover up of a brutal murder or is it suicide?

We`ve got a fantastic Lion`s Den debate panel ready to fight it out tonight. But first I`m delighted to be joined by the attorney for the dead woman`s family, Ashley Fallis`s family.

Thank you for joining us, sir. One of the things that popped out at me right away, Daniel Reicht, is that there are reports claiming there was evidence of a struggle in the bedroom. Tell us about that.

REICHT (via phone): That is absolutely true.

Let`s keep in mind that the husband said that this was a suicide and that he didn`t know anything until he heard a gunshot. But Ashley had wounds on her indicative of a physical fight. The husband, Tom Fallis, had wounds on him indicative of a fight.

Their bedroom was in total disarray, with art on the floor, art hanging crookedly on the walls, all indicative of a physical altercation where people were thrown against the wall.

And there`s more. You know, this party ended at their house, because Tom Fallis, the husband, was in a rage. That`s undisputed evidence. And then, shortly thereafter, the call about her having been shot.

And there`s more than that. As you said, the 6-year-old child specifically said -- and it isn`t -- it isn`t undisputed that she said she saw Daddy shoot Mommy. It`s in the police reports. Why they apparently discounted -- and shouldn`t have, but why they apparently did -- was because she said she thought Daddy shot Mommy three times when, in fact, Ashley was only shot once.

But having been doing these -- these kind of murder cases for years, I have, at a minimum the child should have been brought to a forensic psychologist to talk further about what she saw, and that never happened.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, let`s push -- let`s push pause. Oh, OK. Let`s ask you to pause for one second. You`ve got so much great information, Daniel. But I want to bring in our panel.

Wendy Murphy, former prosecutor, should the child`s statement that she saw Daddy shoot Mommy be discounted because she got the number of shots wrong? She`s 6 years old.

WENDY MURPHY, FORMER PROSECUTOR: Well, I mean, maybe if the jury wants to think that`s a reason to disbelieve her. Let a jury figure it out.

But what you do when you have a 6-year-old is bring her in to see whether she is a competent and capable and smart 6-year-old. Not all 6- year-olds are the same. I`ve had 6-year-olds on the stand. They`re excellent witnesses, because they`re terrible liars, which makes them really good on the stand.

You compare what the child said to what everybody else is saying. In other words, if there is a little bit of a weakness to the child`s statement, because there weren`t three shots, let`s see. Does it get corroborated by other eyewitness statements who heard Daddy confess? Is it corroborated by the forensic evidence? Does the child`s statement "I saw Daddy shoot Mommy" make more sense to consider that as evidence, rather than discounting it because she got the numbers wrong, when everything else points to yes, Daddy did shoot Mommy?

You don`t just dismiss a statement because it was a kid. That`s silly.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Yes. Dr. Jenn Berman, a 6-year-old child is capable of being a witness, I believe.

DR. JENN BERMAN, PSYCHOTHERAPIST: Absolutely. No question about it. And look, this isn`t the kind of thing that kids make up. This is not, "Oh, I didn`t eat the cookie." This is "I saw Daddy shoot Mommy." This is not stuff kids lie about. And I think that this has to be taken into account, and it`s ridiculous that it`s not.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Now, Daniel Reicht, again, the attorney for Ashley Fallis`s family, the dead woman`s family, I have so many questions. OK. First of all, who throws a New Year`s Eve party and then kills themself? Right? I mean, that`s -- that`s an odd sequence of events right there.

REICHT: Right.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Secondly, did they test the husband`s hands for gunshot residue? Did they test his clothes or parts of his body at all for blood spatter?

REICHT: No. See, what`s incredible -- and I agree with Wendy and Dr. Berman. What`s incredible here is that he was never even a target of the investigation. This was called a suicide within very few days -- three, four, five days -- of the death. And then it was over. Nobody investigated any further.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: But let me jump in, Daniel. You would do that test right away, because three and four days later there wouldn`t be the gunshot residue if you were sitting in a hot shower or something. That could be - he was there. He`s not disputing he was there, right?

REICHT: No. He says he walked in and hears the shot. He walked in, and there she was with the shot in her head, and then he called 911.

I couldn`t agree more. The fact that they didn`t check for gunshot residue on his hands is outrageous.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Lisa Lockwood, one of the nation`s premiere investigators, author of "Undercover Angel," what might they have -- in other words, what should they have done in investigating this case?

LISA LOCKWOOD, INVESTIGATORS: Yes. And that was -- that`s cursory to go ahead and look at the husband as a suspect, as a prime suspect. He was there. He was on the scene. The house was in complete disarray. Photographs would have been taken of her, the body, of him. And they would have brought him in for intensive questioning initially and have him tested. Why that was overlooked, why that wasn`t done is completely ludicrous.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Now, even though Ashley and Tom seemed like the perfect couple, with a house and three kids, Ashley`s family says their marriage wasn`t what it seemed.


RAGUINDIN: The amount of pain and suffering and the nightmares that we have in the back of our heads every night is draining beyond explanation.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Ashley`s parents say she had divorce papers prepared and thought that Tom might be having an affair.

Now, Dr. Tiffanie Davis-Henry, HLN contributor, psychotherapist, I could see that going either way. It could point to him wanting her out of the way. But it could also point to her getting depressed over the end of the marriage and the end of the love relationship, if she was in love with him.

DR. TIFFANIE DAVIS-HENRY, HLN CONTRIBUTOR: Sure. And the bottom line is he hasn`t been charged with a crime yet. And I don`t know -- you know, we don`t know what new evidence is going to come out of this investigation and what he will be charged with.

But you`re right, Jane. This could go either way. If she really was depressed, that wouldn`t be uncommon for someone who`s contemplating filing for divorce, for them to be a little sad about the situation and sad that the marriage is ending. It wouldn`t be unpromised (ph).

But you would think that, if her family knew that she was filing for divorce, knew that she thought that he was cheating, knew that she was unhappy in the marriage, that they might know, you know what? She`s kind of depressed and maybe even suicidal. So things just don`t add up here.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Yes, and one of the things, Wendy Murphy, that we all know, and we`ve said this so many times, is that, according to statistics, it`s rare for women to kill themselves by shooting them in the -- shooting themselves in the area of the face. And she apparently had one gunshot wound to the head. Because women are culturally, intrinsically concerned about their appearance.

MURPHY: That`s interesting. And there may be studies that support that. Still, it`s possible.

For a woman or a man, if you want to kill yourself with a gun, one bullet to the head is quick. But it clearly does not look like a suicide. She had three little kids. You would have to hate your children to kill yourself, because you`re getting divorced. You don`t get divorce papers if you`re bummed out about getting divorced. That is an indication that you`re actually looking forward to it. That`s why you got the papers. If you`re planning suicide why get the papers?

There is no indication to me that this is a suicide. And when you have doubts about whether it`s a suicide, you don`t wrap up the investigation in three days and dump the file.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, Daniel Reicht, attorney for the family, I don`t want -- we`re not mentioning the name of the detective that the family is suggesting did, at the very least, I guess, sloppy police work, but you`re saying it`s more than that. But my understanding is that that person was not friends with the cop husband. So what`s his motive?

REICH: You know, I`m not saying -- I don`t know if it was sloppy. I don`t know if it was intentional. At a minimum it was negligent and they - - he knew that this guy, the husband, was a cop. And so, at a minimum, he was you know -- he was slanting the evidence towards him, let`s say.

And this guy was saying, the husband was saying it was a suicide. And from the get-go, before this detective even got involved, the small-town police department, the Evans Police Department, were looking at this as a suicide.

I mean, the husband was allowed to stand outside with his family while they investigated the scene, as if he had nothing to do with anything.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Unbelievable. And let me say this...

REICHT: The motive of that detective, I don`t know. But...

VELEZ-MITCHELL: We`re just getting started. Sorry to interrupt you, Daniel, but on the other side of the break, we`re going to talk about perhaps the most outrageous aspect of this case. And that`s the family`s three little kids. Where are they tonight?


GLOVER: Pretty hard to forget hearing somebody confess their murder and then getting away with it.



RAGUINDIN: That`s the hard part of this, is that, even though this is something we`ve been praying for and hoping for for a long time, it doesn`t bring her back.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Ashley Fallis`s death was originally ruled a suicide. Look at this beautiful woman. It wasn`t until recently that cops decided to reopen the case after pressure from the family and a local report from a news station.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Late last week I received new information regarding the case. It was brought to my attention by a FOX 31 reporter.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: All right. Now, during that time, Ashley`s husband packed up their three kids and moved them all the way from Colorado to Indiana to live with his father.

Now, the family of the victim says they`re scared for those kids` safety and they are doing everything they can to get custody. And they say they`re especially worried for the young daughter who reportedly claimed she witnessed Daddy shooting Mommy.

So let`s go into the Lion`s Den. Adam Thompson, criminal defense attorney, should authorities take the kids away from the father until the case is closed and he`s completely exonerated or something else?

ADAM THOMPSON, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Well, the court is supposed to always do what`s in the best interests of the child and put their safety and their needs first. Unfortunately, in a case like this, when the police department already investigated and basically cleared the father, there`s no grounds to really take the kids away.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: But they`ve reopened the investigation now, based on new evidence.

THOMPSON: Reopening -- but reopening it isn`t putting any blame on the father yet or making him a suspect. All the facts point that way, and I think an arrest should be made. I think it`s a travesty what`s happened here. But until they formally charge him, then they have the grounds to do it. Until then, not much to do.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Dr. Jenn Berman, is the daughter, who was then 6, and now, I guess approximately 8, experiencing, do you think, stress and anxiety because of what she claims she saw...

BERMAN: Absolutely.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: ... living with the dad?

BERMAN: Of course, of course. I`m all for keeping kids with the surviving spouse except when the child is saying that person murdered my Mommy. Absolutely not. This is ridiculous.

I can`t even imagine how unsafe this poor child must feel. She lost her mother. She is reporting she witnessed her father killing her. And now she`s stuck in a house with him where he also can influence her.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, we have to say -- we have to say "allegedly." In fact, he has not been named a suspect.

I mean, Daniel Reicht, you`re the attorney for the family. He has not been named a suspect. He has not been named a person of interest. There are no charges filed against him.

REICHT: That`s absolutely right. On the other hand, and as you`ve been saying, this whole case has now been reopened two years later. And it`s with a new, much more sophisticated police department, the Fort Collins Police Department. Fort Collins, Colorado, is a town of some size and substance and has a well-respected police department.

So I`m confident but don`t know and don`t have a crystal ball that he will be charged.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, yes. We can`t look into the future, any of us. Now, there`s an infamous case, however, where a former cop killed his wife; tried to make it look like a suicide. And even set her body on fire.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: That is full -- full of evidence that proves beyond a reasonable doubt that Brett Seacat committed these murders. He`s had statements. He`s had testimony. He has had an answer for everything. Now it`s time to give the defendant your answer. Find him guilty as charged.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: And a jury did find him guilty as charged. Brett Seacat behind bars for the rest of his life for murdering his wife, Vashti, after she filed for divorce. And as we mentioned, he tried to set the house on fire to cover up the crime.

Now Lisa Lockwood, there`s got to be some forensic difference between somebody putting a gun to their own head, OK, and shooting themselves in the head and somebody else doing it for them. There`s got to be an angle. There`s got to be something that distinguishes those two.

LOCKWOOD: And that`s the crucial part of the puzzle. And we`re not going to be able to get that evidence, because it`s way too late after the fact that that evidence was not collected at the scene.

Is it possible that he held the gun to her head and had her hand holding it, as well? Was she passed out on the scene? She had injuries on her body. That`s part of it. She was knocked out, he placed her hand on the gun, placed his on top of it in order to fire? Absolutely possible. Why was not that -- why was that evidence not taken?

VELEZ-MITCHELL: You know what? It`s a very, very strange story. But we`re going to stay on top of it.

Next, a woman convicted of killing her boyfriend laughs in court and mocks the victim`s family members. And the judge goes off. And when I say off I mean off.


JUDGE JOHN MCBAIN, PRESIDING OVER CAMIA GAMET TRIAL: Well, I hope -- I agree with the family. I hope you die in prison, as well. You know, if this was a death penalty state, you`d be getting the chair.




MCBAIN: Stabbed him no less than 12 times. You gutted him like a fish in that apartment. You stabbed, you stabbed, you stabbed, you stabbed until he was dead. I hope you die in prison.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Tonight a wild outburst in court from the bench. Cameras were rolling as a judge verbally tears apart a stone-cold killer, who had yawned and smirked her way through the sentencing hearing.

Camia Gamet was convicted in the brutal -- and I mean brutal -- slaying of her boyfriend. She crushed his skull with a frying pan. She stabbed him at least a dozen times. The judge said she filleted him.

Right after the victim`s aunt finished her emotional statement in court the killer blurted out, "Is that it?" Yes, just like that. "Is that is?" That pushed the judge, John McBain, right over the edge. He then threatened to duct tape her mouth shut. Listen to him go off.


MCBAIN: If you end up probably in some kind of domestic, ultimately hit him in the head so hard with a pan that you actually caved in the front of his skull and then you stabbed him no less than 12 times. You know what? I`m the only one in the courtroom that knew what kind of knife it was. It was a big old long filet knife. Because I used to filet pike and muskie and salmon. And I tell you, you gutted him like a fish in that apartment. You were relentless. You stabbed, you stabbed, you stabbed, you stabbed, you stabbed until he was dead.

You didn`t think he was an intruder. Maybe one stab wound, OK. Maybe that`s self-defense. You put in 11 more to make sure he was good and dead.

Well, I hope -- I agree with the family. I hope you die in prison, as well. If this was a death penalty state you`d be getting the chair.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Straight out to the Lion`s Den. Did he go too far? My Lion`s Den panel ready to debate it.

Come on. We`re used to judges being buttoned up, under control, dispassionate. Not this guy. Was this diatribe something to applaud or was it over the line and unprofessional, starting with Eric Guster, criminal defense attorney?

ERIC GUSTER, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: This is a case that was horrible. And this man, he`s able to do this. I don`t see a problem with it.

If a person beats someone`s head in, bashed their head in, stabbed them a dozen times, they need to die in prison. I mean, this is a person who never needs to see the light of day. And the judge has the right to make that statement. I`ve had judges make that statement about -- similar statements about all types of cases. And this judge...

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Wendy Murphy, he sounded to me like a prosecutor, not a judge.

GUSTER: Well, he was sentencing.

MURPHY: He sounded like -- he sounded to me like he was off his meds. Are you kidding? I think he`s auditioning for his own TV show.


MURPHY: This is Judge Crybaby from the Anna Nicole Smith case. This is so inappropriate. Look, I have no doubt that a prosecutor and a victim`s family feels that way and has the right to say those things, even in a court of law, but the judge is supposed to be on nobody`s side, much less acting like a cartoon character.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, Adam Thompson, criminal defense attorney, go ahead, Adam.

THOMPSON: I`ve got to agree with Wendy on this. I`ve been defending cases for 25 years. I think a judge should always maintain an appearance of impropriety [SIC], you know where he`s staying away from both sides or slants or favoritism.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Let me ask you this question. Let me ask you this question.

THOMPSON: There`s nothing wrong with him chastising the defendant for saying that inappropriate comment. He was right to put her in her place for that. But to say, "I hope you die in prison." His job is to lay down a fair sentence based on the law and move on. I think it goes a little bit too far when he starts commenting in that nature. I don`t think...

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, first of all, let me make a couple of points here. One, "I hope you die in prison." Apparently she will die in prison because he sentenced her to life in prison without the possibility of parole. So "I hope you die in prison" is kind of a misnomer. It doesn`t really make sense.

GUSTER: He didn`t say, "I hope you get stabbed tomorrow." He`s saying, "I want you to die in prison."

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Here`s the thing. They`re going to appeal. Can they use this as grounds for appeal and argue the judge was biased from the get- go, Wendy?

GUSTER: Now, that`s a consideration.

MURPHY: They can and they will. This is going to be exhibit one in the argument on appeal that she should get an entirely new trial.

Now, the prosecution is going to say it would be one thing if you were arguing for a new sentence, because he was crazy during sentencing. But there`s no evidence that he was crazy during the trial. I don`t know enough about whether the judge was a nut during the trial part of the case, too. I just don`t know.

GUSTER: She was found guilty.

MURPHY: But...

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Hold on one second.

MURPHY: This reveals a kind of bias that needs investigation. If he was biased against her, she is entitled to a new trial.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Dr. Tiff, somebody doesn`t become biased like that and suddenly have -- this is something clearly that was building throughout the course of the trial. He made references to the evidence and to the facts of the case.

So I think that this was something possibly that was building up throughout the entire course of the trial. An attorney could argue that.

DAVIS-HENRY: Yes. I think if he listened to the testimony and listened to the victim impact statements and everything else, that it certainly tugged on his heartstrings. He got a little emotional and probably a little too emotionally involved.

I agree with Wendy. I think that personally he had every right to feel the way that he felt. Professionally, there`s a level of that anger that he has to keep inside so that, when it does come up on appeal -- because she`s going to try and appeal it...


DAVIS-HENRY: ... that it can be thrown out. You don`t want that sentence to be thrown out.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: All right. Listen, I want to play it again. Hold it. I want to play it again. I want to play it again so that we can listen to it carefully, now that we`ve kind of set the stage about all the issues that are involved and then analyze it from a psychological perspective, too. Let`s play it again.


MCBAIN: You end up in probably some kind of a domestic and ultimately hit him in the head so hard with a pan that you actually cave in the front of his skull. And then you stabbed him no less than 12 times. You know what? I`m the only one in the courtroom who knew what kind of knife that was. And it was a big old long filet knife. Because I use it to filet pike and muskie and salmon. And I`ll tell you, you gutted him like a fish in that apartment, too. You were relentless. You stabbed, you stabbed, you stabbed, you stabbed, you stabbed.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: You know, Dr. Tiff, I`m not being flip here, but maybe he`s had a bad day. You know? Because he`s talking a lot about himself, about his fishing. And I don`t know. It feels all over the map.

DAVIS-HENRY: Yes. It feels like he kind of turned it around a little bit and put it on him and put it in his every-day life.

He`s pissed at this lady. I think she was disrespectful in the courtroom; disrespectful to him and disrespectful to the victim and the victim`s family. And he made sure he let her know that was not happening in his courtroom.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Yes, but you know what -- a judge is supposed to be - -

DAVIS-HENRY: Impartial.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: The representative of our justice system being blind. They are supposed to be dispassionate. If you let judges start acting like this what is next -- them exploding during the trial? Them yelling at the defendant when they have taken the stand?

I mean you are opening a Pandora`s box. I think bad move, your honor.

The stars of a popular reality show are now about to appear in a new sex tape. And get this, the network is backing this sexy quote/unquote "Side Project" 100 percent. It is a shocker next.



UNIDENTIFIED MALE: More sex tape shame.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Is it possible that this is some kind of publicity stunt?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: They are definitely making the money.

KIM KARDASHIAN, REALITY STAR: It`s not all just, "How can I look sexy." It`s not about that -- it is all about just feeling your best inside.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: These people continue to take overexposure to remarkable new lows.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: They`re going to release it to the public.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Tonight, a shocking new reality star with a sex tape scandal. Yes, another one. This one starring VH 1`s "Love and Hip Hop" couple, Mimi Faust and boyfriend Nikko Smith. They pressed "record" and then they got down and dirty -- and I mean dirty.

As you can probably guess the private sex tape mysteriously -- mysteriously leaked. And now TMZ is reporting they signed an agreement with Vivid Entertainment to release their steamy porno to the public. Here are some of the ads of Mimi and Nikko scandal in Atlanta straight from Vivid`s Web site. Plus it`s going to be a major story line in the new season of the VH-1 hit show.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Everything we have done on that camera has been exposed. If we do a deal you guys stand to make a lot of money.

MIMI FAUST, REALITY STAR: I have a daughter.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You know you are a porn star now.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: She went from tears and I would say a very real concern about her young daughter to allegedly cashing in. At least we know it is going up.

Straight out to the "Lion`s Den". Blog Xilla, senior entertainment editor,, how on earth can you be worried about the impact on your kids one minute and then purportedly making a deal as it goes global the next.

BLOG XILLA, SENIOR ENTERTAINMENT EDITOR, GLOBALGRIND.COM: I can see it being leaked. And then it`s out there -- you want to cash in on it. But I mean -- was his roommate home or something because someone was holding the camera. That is not a leaked private sex tape. That is an official porno.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Yes. I mean this is a porno. Wendy Murphy, you see her there crying going "I`ve got kids." Yes, honey, you`ve got kids.

WENDY MURPHY, FORMER PROSECUTOR: Well, pretty much that is how you get kids by doing what is in the porno. I`m just saying.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: You are not shocked or outraged about this?

MURPHY: You know for people who voluntarily want to put their vaginas and penises on television and wherever (EXPLETIVE DELETED) -- you know, oh my God, we have seen (EXPLETIVE DELETED). I think the only thing that is potentially newsworthy about this kind of stuff is when it is made secretly, usually against the will of the woman because that is a crime and it`s a very serious crime.

For people who want to take pictures I don`t care. It is not exciting anymore. We can all take pictures of having sex, press a button on our phone and, boom, the world gets to see. It`s not exciting anymore.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, just promise me you are not going to do a sex tape any time soon, Wendy Murphy.

MURPHY: My lips are sealed.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: From the looks of the VH-1 previews -- what?

MURPHY: I said my lips are sealed.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well then it would be hard to make a sex tape. From the looks of the VH-1 previews for the new season of "Love and Hip Hop" this sex tape is going to be a major story line.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You made a sex tape.

FAUST: No, no.

NIKKO SMITH: I absolutely like it and we turn out when that red dot came on.

FAUST: I am in such a different place. I didn`t even realize that that camera is on.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: That means you want to document it.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Let`s bring our shrinks into this conversation. Whenever one of these sex tape leaks, critics always blame the women. It`s always why would she do this. There`s really -- anybody bashing the guy. But they are both involved. They both made the choice.

You know, she had a message -- Mimi did -- for those criticizing. And her Instagram page read "If you don`t pay my bills, hush."

I want to ask you do you think these sex tapes, Dr. Tiff, are a step back for women? Or could they be the ultimate liberation?

DAVIS-HENRY: Well, I think that we all as women have every right to our sexual freedoms, to our sexual -- being able to express our sexuality in whatever way we want to. But when it comes with a price tag, when you`re doing something for someone else against your will and certainly for a network or a television show and it`s not necessarily what you would want to do or would come up with that idea on your own then that is when I have a problem with it. And so in that way it does --


VELEZ-MITCHELL: But wait, wait -- let`s stick to this story. Let`s stick to this story. I don`t think she did this against her will. I don`t think --

DAVIS-HENRY: If the question is just making a sex tape, there are plenty of women who make it for their man, not because it is what they want to do or their idea but because my guy wants me to do it so yes, ok I will do it. That is fine.

But when it ends up in a place that you had no -- you really didn`t fathom or you didn`t want it out there but now it is and I`m getting money for it so I might as well be ok with it. That`s where we -- I tend to have a problem.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Ok. Well Blog Xilla, the way Dr. Tiff describing it is she did the private sex tape. Somehow it got stolen and it ends up in the hands of Vivid Entertainment. And then they say we have the sex tape. Now, let`s make a deal. Is that really how it went down, do you think? I mean how much money is she making off of this?

XILLA: I highly, highly doubt that that is how it went down. First of all, it is not like back in the day. There are no cameras with actual tapes in there -- like it`s all a digital file. How could you lose a digital file? So for Vivid to get it -- they are getting a check, "Love and Hip Hop" is getting a cut, the producer is getting a cut, her manager is getting a cut. Everybody is getting the cut.

I really wonder how much money Mimi is actually pocketing in this whole sex tape deal. I mean if she did it for her man, she did it for the (inaudible) or she did it for the show, she did it for ratings. She needed to go to fame school. She is all doing it all for attention. It is a little bit (inaudible) and I really do feel bad for her daughter.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Yes, Dr. Jenn Berman, psychotherapist, her daughter can view this at some point in time. I don`t know exactly how old her daughter is. But at some point she`s going to be able to access this and look at this. What impact is that going to have on her daughter emotionally and psychologically?

DR. JENN BERMAN, PSYCHOTHERAPIST: I think it`s going to be very difficult for her and I think it`s going to be very difficult for her when she has friends who are old enough to watch it, as well. And I think it`s an unfortunate world that we live in where a woman can make more doing a sex tape than she can teaching kindergarten, and being a nurse, doing something that gives back to society. And I think that that`s very, very unfortunate.

And I also think that a lot of the time whether this is consensual or not with the deal with Vivid Entertainment but I think that a lot of the times women in particular don`t realize the emotional impact that a tape like this will have down the line not just for themselves but also for them socially, for their children and for everyone around them.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, I will tell you that I took a quick look at the tape. I thought about it and then I thought well, if I`m going to talk about it I`m going to take a quick look at it. I watched it for five seconds literally and I turned it off.

I will tell you my reaction on the other side.




UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Just pretend like you`re pulling.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: That`s one of the stars of "Real Housewives of Atlanta" joking about the shower curtain rod scene. Blog Xilla, what are they talking about?

XILLA: During the sex tape Mimi was swinging from the shower rod like a Gabby Douglas, like Dominique Dawes, like a U.S.A gymnast while taping the D from her boyfriend Nikko. It`s hot. It`s amazing. I highly enjoyed it. I can`t wait for the tape to come out. I am going to be watching it closely.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, I have to say I did turn it on for five minutes as a preview there. And I thought -- I thought about it. I said should I do this? Am I getting in trouble for doing this? But if I am going to talk about it for this length of time -- I should see at least a little bit. And I turned it off after five seconds.

I have to say that it felt bad for me. I felt bad like this is not something that somebody else should be watching. I think that the cameras are corrupting us in some way morally. And I sound like a horrible prude and I don`t mean to be. I`m not a prude normally. I don`t believe like if a sex scene is romantic in a movie that there something is wrong with it.

But Dr. Tiff, that felt wrong to be watching.

DAVIS-HENRY: Yes. And quite frankly, Jane, that video was not for you. You are not the target audience.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: That is true.

DAVIS-HENRY: You are not the target audience so you should have felt bad, Jane. But certainly, who knows what their goal was in putting this out. They are making money from the tape. Maybe it is starting buzz about the reality show. Maybe they were in jeopardy of being kicked off the show -- who knows?

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Got to leave it right there. Judge for yourself.


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

Zoey and Frankie, you`re smelling like flowers. Marley -- what a look, tres chic with the bow tie. Charity -- you bless us all with your presence. And Leo says I`m a kitchen cat. I like to hang out in the kitchen, yes I do.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Tonight, a bloody war on wolves, as Idaho announces a deadly campaign to kill these innocent animals. I warn you, the video is graphic. Some, we can`t even show it on TV. Dog like my little Foxy here, and your dogs at home count the wolves as their ancestors. Wolves like the ones you see here being ruthlessly hunted and killed.



UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: That sucker -- we got a dead wolf, folks.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: Yes, they`re laughing. Idaho Governor C.L. Otter just signed what they euphemistically called a Wolf Control Bill, creating a board of people who oversee the slaughter of wolves using hundreds of thousands of tax dollars. The board is stacked with ranchers and hunters who want to get rid of the wolves once and for all.

But there`s nobody on the board who represents conservationists or wolf advocate. Who is speaking up for these defenseless creatures who cannot speak for themselves? This group is a hit squad. They aim to demonize wolves, describing them as vermin, trying to terrify people in order to justify the killing.

Three years ago, wolves were taken off the endangered species list. And since then 1,600 wolves have been slaughtered in hunts in Idaho and Montana alone. Today only about 650 wolves remain. But for how much longer?

Look at these beautiful creatures. Instead of killing wolves, why not use nonlethal options like fencing or range riders to separate cattle from these natural predators? Critics ask why are tax dollars being used to protect the private cattle industry?

Straight out to Don Barry, senior vice president, conservation programs for Defenders of Wildlife. Don, describe the horror of what`s happening now to these wolves.

DON BARRY, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT, DEFENDERS OF WILDLIFE: Well, as you said, Idaho has launched a war on wolves and it`s one of the most reckless and irresponsible wildlife management programs I`ve seen in the last 40 years.

When wolves were delisted, Idaho promised (inaudible) serves two things. One, that they would manage wolves exactly the way they manage other wildlife and that they would keep the populations healthy and large - - around the 500, 600, 700 range.

What`s happened though now is that under Butch Otter`s new -- what I call the Wolf Extermination Board, their goal is to drive wolves all the way on down to about 150 -- an 80 percent reduction in the number of wolves in the state of Idaho. This is just unbelievable.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: It`s disgusting. Now, we reached out to Governor Otter for comment -- have not heard back. Critics of the bill continue to fight for wolves. Many are facing road blocks from the folks who live there. That`s the governor who is in charge of all this. Listen to this.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: It is really a way of life. You look up the definition of murder -- it`s defined in human terms. Not in animal terms.


VELEZ-MITCHELL: I don`t think killing should be a way of life. Critics who say those who want to wipe out these wolves are basically upset that wolves prey on elk, and they`d rather have the elk alive so they can shoot and kill them themselves. So, they are slaughtering the wolves so they can turn around and kill the elk, too. That`s a lot of killing. What can we do to stop it?

BARRY: Well, there are a number of things people can do to stop this I think. One is to, for people to contact Butch Otter in the state of Idaho and let them know that they strongly disagree with this policy.

More importantly though, I think we need to start putting additional pressure on federal officials like Tom Vilsack, the Secretary of the Department of Agriculture. He oversees this one obscure federal agency called Wildlife Services, which basically provides the hired gunmen, or the hired hitmen for the state of Idaho. So what you have are federal employees that are hired out to the state of Idaho, go in an aerial gunning, from helicopters shoot wolves in the wintertime. They had one secret group of Wildlife Service agents come in a couple months ago, into Idaho from Montana and they ended up killing 23 wolves.

The other thing you need to know is that a lot of these wolf packs, most of these wolf packs have collared animals in them and so it`s very easy for a gunman, federal gunman or a state gunman, to track the wolves because they just follow the collared wolves in the pack and they kill them.

The other thing that`s really tragic about this is that wolves have very complex pack structures. And so if you kill the dominant breeding female or male, you have really destroyed the integrity of the pack. And what Idaho has done just in the last few years is reduce the number of breeding pairs in Idaho by close to 59 percent, 60 percent. Just in the last year, they reduced the number of breeding pairs by 43 percent.

So what this is doing is setting in motion a freefall in the population of wolves. So, in addition to --

VELEZ-MITCHELL: These animals cannot speak for themselves. Where`s the Obama administration on this? Why does Wildlife Services even exist anymore? It`s a hit squad that`s wiping out wildlife all across the American West, I mean, it`s unnecessary. Why -- why create an endangered species act and introduce these wolves in the first place and put collars on them and spend all this taxpayer money reintroducing them if you`re just going to slaughter them and commit an extermination of these animals a couple of years later?

Thank you. Join Get involved. These wolves can`t speak for themselves.

Nancy`s next.