Return to Transcripts main page


What's Donald Sterling's Next Move?; Sterling's Wife Versus Mistress; What's Next in the Sterling Racism Case?; Deadly Floods from Gulf Coast to Mid-Atlantic; Ships Headed to Possible Plane Wreckage

Aired April 30, 2014 - 19:00   ET


ERIN BURNETT, CNN HOST: Next, will Donald Sterling fight to the death? Could Oscar De La Hoya knock him out? I'm going to ask the boxing great tonight. He is my exclusive guest. Plus, Don Sterling's women, the rivalry and secret past.

And botched execution in Oklahoma. A witness tells us what went wrong. Let's go OUTFRONT.

Good evening, everyone. I'm Erin Burnett. OUTFRONT tonight, Sterling goes silent while scandal destroys his life. So far the Los Angeles Clippers owner refusing to break his silence about his racist rant, even after the NBA banned him for life. Even the president of the United States weighed in. Here is White House spokesman, Jay Carney.


JAY CARNEY, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: But as a both a basketball fan and as obviously someone who would be concerned about these issues, as so many of us are, he thinks they did the right thing.


BURNETT: The NBA is trying to force Sterling to sell his team. Will he go quietly? And who will pay him up to a billion dollars to do it? Tonight the list of people ready to pay Sterling big, big bucks, Oprah, entertainment mogul, David Geffen, and software billionaire, Larry Ellison. Also on the list boxers, Floyd Mayweather and Oscar De La Hoya. He will join me live in just a moment. But first, Jason Carroll is OUTFRONT with Sterling's next move.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Should we give away some of the Clipper girls?

JASON CARROLL, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Current L.A. Clippers owner, Donald Sterling, celebrating during better times. He may have to sell much more than that.

ADAM SILVER, NBA COMMISSIONER: I am banning Mr. Sterling for life.

CARROLL: NBA Commissioner Adam Silver praised for banning Sterling from the NBA for his racist comments and potentially forcing the sale of his team.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I'm very proud of the way he has acted and he hasn't wasted any time.

SHAQUILLE O'NEAL, FORMER NBA ALL-STAR: This issue transcends basketball. I think the punishment was just right.

CARROLL: But will Sterling go willingly?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I think everyone expects him to fight.

CARROLL (on camera): Article 13 of the NBA constitution does allow for termination of ownership or membership, but it requires a 3/4 vote from its owners. Silver says he already has the support from several of them. Sterling does have the right to try to convince any of the 29 other NBA owners to side with him.

RICK BARBY, RETIRED NBA PLAYER: Any owner who decides to side with Donald Sterling in this is a fool. In the court of public opinion, he will be just as guilty as Sterling.

CARROLL (voice-over): One legal expert says the chances of Sterling winning back his team are slim. But says the 80-year-old's family could ultimately benefit from sterling dragging out the legal process.

MICHAEL MCCANN, PROFESSOR AND COLUMNIST, SI.COM: If instead he holds on to the team and then passes away, he would pass it on to his family, who wouldn't have to pay a capital gains tax and would inherit the team at its present value.

CARROLL: A forced sell of the team could cost Sterling millions in taxes. The NBA's position on Sterling's family --

SILVER: There have been no decisions about other members of the Sterling family. And I should say that this ruling applies specifically to Donald Sterling, and Donald Sterling's conduct only.

CARROLL: As for the players' thoughts on a Sterling family member owning the team --

CHRIS PAUL, L.A. CLIPPERS: Luckily that's not up to us. The coach talked about it in the locker room. For us, it's tough. But I can't imagine how tough it is for that family.


CARROLL: Well, the vice president of the Players Association has already made it very clear it would not be acceptable to him or others on the team if Sterling's wife or Sterling's family members try to take the team over.

BURNETT: Certainly a possibility, but we'll see.

CARROLL: Either way there is going to be a fight.

BURNETT: There is going to be a fight. All right, well, Jason, thank you very much. And I want to bring in world champion boxer, Oscar De La Hoya OUTFRONT now. Oscar, you have said you're interested in buying the team. If he is forced to sell the Clippers, obviously for the price tag, we don't know. But we're hearing 700 million, maybe even a billion dollars. We looked up your net worth. 100 million, 200 million, I don't know what it is. Maybe you'll tell us. But the question is, can you afford it? Where would you get the money?

OSCAR DE LA HOYA, FORMER BOXING WORLD CHAMPION: Well, obviously, I have very influential, powerful with a lot of money friends that I would obviously get together. But, see, the important thing here is that the Clippers need a face. They need a face. And what better face than my face with a fighter, a fighter who has been in that ring, who has fought for his life, who has fought for those world championship titles.

I can be the guy because if the team does go on the market, I was born here in Los Angeles. I was born and raised. I know the players. They're fighters. They just want to be champions. I can bring that championship spirit back to Los Angeles.

BURNETT: And let me ask you this, Oscar. Sterling lost the team because of something he said, that he thought he said privately. Everyone has things in their past they have said or done they're ashamed of or not proud of. Would you want that kind of scrutiny if you owned a team?

DE LA HOYA: Well, absolutely not. First of all, he said something that he should have never have said. I mean, look, those words that he mentioned or that he talked about, they're just -- you just don't do that. You don't feel that as human being, why do you feel that? It's not right. And, you know, it is what it is. He said what he said. And now he is paying for it. And yes, I commend the commissioner for banning him for life because not only did he hurt a lot of people, he hurt himself. But he hurt his team. And, you know, it was wrong for him to do even feel and say that.

BURNETT: Another person who wants to buy this team or has expressed interest is Floyd Mayweather Jr. and he said this, quote. I wanted to read to you, Oscar, especially what you just said about Donald Sterling. He said of Mr. Sterling, he has always treated me with utmost respect. He has invited me to games always. He always told me, Floyd, I want you to sit right next to me and my wife. What is your reaction to that comment coming from someone who is black?

DE LA HOYA: Well, I totally respect his comments. There is nothing that I can say about it. Obviously, you know, do I feel that Mr. Sterling is racist? I don't know. I've never spoken to the man. But what he said and what is on record, it's just a no-no. It's not going to wow the world with the public and he has to pay the consequences. It's unfortunate, but he has to pay the consequences. If he even feels and says that, it was wrong.

BURNETT: So where, though, do you stop, Oscar? The Orlando Magic owner, a guy named Richard DeVos has spoken out against same-sex marriage. He has donated money to causes that would oppose same-sex marriage. Should the NBA apply the same standards to DeVos as it did for Sterling and say look, if there is ever any evidence of you making a comment that is slightly homophobic, we're going to ban you for life, force you to sell your team and submit you to public humiliation?

DE LA HOYA: Well, the commissioner made a ruling and it's up to the commissioner to make that ruling. And do I believe that he made the proper ruling? I believe so, absolutely because that in today's world, you just don't feel that and say that. There is no room for that. And me being a minority here, me being a Latino, I think if we can have the proper, the proper face to that organization and get that fighting spirit and that winning spirit back to L.A., I think it's a win-win for everybody.

BURNETT: Because you think that face should be a minority?

DE LA HOYA: No, I don't think should it be a minority, but it would definitely be -- it would definitely be something different for the league. Look, the commissioner mentioned we would want more minorities involved in the NBA, whether it's ownership, whether it's more players, whether it's on the management side. You know, we want more minorities. And I'm stepping up to the plate and I'm letting the world know that I'm obviously interested in being part of that group and behind the team, if it ever goes up for sale.

BURNETT: All right, Oscar, thank you very much for taking the time tonight. We continue our coverage now with the love triangle that may have brought down Donald Sterling.

Plus, ships now headed to the Bay of Bengal in search of Flight 370.

And breaking news, deadly flooding in Florida tonight. Tens of thousands without power. You're looking at double-digits, more than 20 inches of rain in some places. We're going to go live.


BURNETT: Donald Sterling and his two women. On the same day, the owner of the L.A. Clippers was banned from the NBA for life, his former mistress, the woman who may have brought him down with audio recordings of his racist rant was seen teasing the paparazzi, telling them she is going to run for president of the United States. Sterling's wife, Rochelle, also loves the cameras, attending the team's play-off games in the midst of the scandal.

Deborah Feyerick is with me along expert, Steve Adubato and our legal analyst, Sunny Hostin. We are going to talk about this mysterious love triangle. But let me start with you because you've been reporting on these women and what have you found out?

DEBORAH FEYERICK, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Both are very strong personalities. No question that. Rochelle Sterling who could have crawled into a hole and died after the humiliation she suffered from her husband instead, said, guess what, Mistress, I'm going to sue you. I'm going to sue you for $2.5 million and anything else my husband may have given you because that was my money as well.

BURNETT: And those anything else includes possibly Ferraris and a whole lot of --

FEYERICK: A Range Rover. Just two Bentleys. Exactly. So, you know, but it's very interesting. And also, you know, when you think about it, now the mistress is backing away, or the alleged mistress. Now we're calling her the alleged mistress is backing away from any sexual relationship which is clearly spelled out in the court papers.

BURNETT: Although on the audio recording she said to Donald Sterling, well, you love me and I'm a minority. So she used that word, which may not have come with sex.

STEVE ADUBATO, AUTHOR, "YOU ARE THE GRAND": It may or may not have. I will say --

BURNETT: I'm just saying.

ADUBATO: I know you're just saying, but I'm just saying that you said Deborah, that Rochelle Sterling could have backed away. She should have backed away. I think what she miscalculated. Doc Rivers asked when she said can I come to the game? He said sure, because you did nothing wrong. She is the wife who clearly has been hurt here and she is so innocent. Except it doesn't take much to go into those court papers, the federal substitute suit that went against the Sterlings, she is in there. She said some things. They own those apartments. They allegedly discriminated against -- she has a PR problem herself.

SUNNY HOSTIN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: There are significant allegations that she also uttered a lot of racial epithets, that she posed as a health inspector and was writing down ethnicities. I agree. The fact that she by herself is sort of litigious is unbelievable.

And so I agree. I mean, the fact that she by herself is sort of litigious is just unbelievable.

And I have been looking at this lawsuit, and what is fascinating is she says that V. Stiviano, you know, (inaudible) says that --

BURNETT: Currently known as V. Stiviano.

HOSTIN: She alleges that she befriended and seduced and enticed and cajoled Mr. Sterling.

And I think what is fascinating about that is instead of -- I think her anger is misplaced, right? Instead of being angry at her husband, she's angry at this other woman, who I believe she did a service to everyone.

She is not a noble character in this, but wow, did she do a service to our country.

BURNETT: But what about the fact that the two women now turn on each other? Why were they both with this guy who -- I mean -- and then they turn on each other? Why is this always the story?

FEYERICK: There are very different circumstances. Look, you cannot dismiss what was a 60-year relationship between Sterling and his wife. They grew up together. They created a life together.

ADUBATO: She knew him.

FEYERICK: They had businesses together.

HOSTIN: She knew him.

ADUBATO: And knew everything about him.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: And that's the point.

FEYERICK: And she chose -- she arguably chose the lifestyle. She chose to stay. She chose to have what she was entitled to.

And, look, I know a lot of rich men. Absolutely.

ADUBATO: And let's not kid ourselves. I Googled the whole question of younger women. I imagine this woman is about 30.

BURNETT: 31, I think, yeah.

ADUBATO: Well, I can't tell with the thing she has on. But here is the thing, Erin. If you Google 30-year-old women with 80-ish-year-old men who don't have a lot of money, you don't find a lot of those relationships. Isn't that shocking?

So I'm sitting there going, let me get this straight. The guy has got $1.8 billion. He is the owner of the Clippers. She gets to sit courtside, L.A. Clippers with Magic Johnson and others. OK. The two Bentleys, the Ferrari, the Range Rover.

HOSTIN: Well, it's about money and power and influence.

ADUBATO: Of course it is.

HOSTIN: Of course that's what it's about, and that's not unusual. We see that over and over and over again. We see the older man with the arm candy, right?

But I think, again, the issue isn't V. Stiviano. The issue isn't his wife. The issue isn't sort of this tension between the two.

The issue is that they were both with just a terrible, terrible man because he had money, because don't tell me that Mrs. Sterling, having been married for 57 years didn't know that he was racist, didn't know the way he operated, didn't acquiesce to that operation.

BURNETT: To the point that you all were making, though, that she may have agreed with those things. She may have been on board with those things.

ADUBATO: There's things you can't even say that she said in the court deposition. We can't say it on CNN. FEYERICK: There are a lot of things in a lot of relationships that people learn to ignore in their spouse. That's why relationships last not because you adopt the -- but also to go to your point, there are no ugly rich men. And so who knows?

ADUBATO: I love that line.

But, Deborah, listen, respectfully, we're talking about a federal suit that they settled. The Sterlings settled it for $2.8 million. She's named in the suit. She's named in depositions.

BURNETT: As an actor.

ADUBATO: As an actor. But she never negates or never says she didn't say, listen, we can't even say what she said about blacks and Hispanics.

FEYERICK: I just want to set the record straight on this. First of all, none of them pled guilty to this.

HOSTIN: They're allegations.

FEYERICK: They paid to settle the allegations. So right there, there was no actual acknowledgment of guilt.

There was another thing. One thing that she is alleged to have said, which is so offensive, and you know what the term is, I don't have to repeat it nor would I.

But the person who made the allegation said that she said it under her breath, and he had to read her lips in order to hear what she was saying.

ADUBATO: Those people will not perjure themselves with the federal government. All I'm saying is this. This is not an innocent, scorned woman.

I don't know her, but I would say this. From a p.r. point of view, you should have kept your mouth shut you.

You should have stayed out of this, because you have now put yourself in the media spotlight, and now she becomes a target, and everything she has done or allegedly done before this becomes media fodder.

BURNETT: I have one other big question. A lot of people have been wondering this, sort of talking, right. The mistress, the one who goes by the name V. for "visor."

Did she leak this herself, right? TMZ Sports says she was archiving her conversations with Sterling, and that's why she would be legally OK to put it out in the public eye because he had agreed to the taping.

But do you a motive why she would have leaked this for herself?

HOSTIN: Absolutely. One, you have got this lawsuit, right? She is being sued for almost -- over $2 million --

ADUBATO: By the wife.

HOSTIN: -- by the wife, and so she is thinking, you know, I'm going to get you back.

But I also think what is interesting is that if she leaks it and she is now saying that he consented to it, that could be a defense, because California, like many states, is a two-party consent state.

So you can't have a conversation with someone and then tape it unless they have consented, and they know about it. Now she says, well, he of course consented to this.

BURNETT: If he picked her as his archivist --

HOSTIN: That's a bunch of baloney. Come on.

FEYERICK: That's what she says. She says --

ADUBATO: What is that supposed to mean?

BURNETT: That's what I'm asking.

ADUBATO: What is an archivist?

FEYERICK: Because basically the reason that she was taping, it's a legitimate reason, according to her lawyer, is that because Donald -- David --

ADUBATO: Donald Sterling.

FEYERICK: Donald Sterling.

ADUBATO: We got it. Donald Sterling.

FEYERICK: Mr. Sterling, that he asked her to tape record these conversations.

The question is, will there be any sort of written proof that that was the case, or was this something that she was doing, you know, to cover herself?

Because she could say we agreed and then --

ADUBATO: Say there is not written proof. I did not hear and there could still be on the tape where visor lady asks him, hey, Donald, just want to make sure, I'm taping you. You good with that

I didn't hear that. So neither is there the audiotape nor is there the paper trail.

HOSTIN: But it doesn't really even matter, right? Because bottom line is, what are you going to do, sue her? The damage is done.

ADUBATO: He's toast. BURNETT: The only person it would impact is her.

ADUBATO: He's toast and he should be.

HOSTIN: The damage has been done.

BURNETT: All right, and of course there are reports that there could be a hundred more hours of this stuff.

All right, thanks very much to all three of you.

Still to come, more on the increasingly bizarre behavior from Donald Sterling's mistress.

Plus, deadly flooding in Florida tonight, we're going to go live to the scene.

And a witness to a botched execution that has sparked outrage around the world.


BURNETT: Breaking new, deadly floods washing out roads, bridges, trapping hundreds, the torrential rains have caused a landslide in Baltimore just a short time ago.

This was a road. It just suddenly collapsed. You can see cars there teetering along the edge. All homes in the area have now been evacuated due to that landslide.

Less than 24 hours after a deadly tornado swept through the Southeast, claiming at least 36 lives, this is the same storm system now causing the worst flooding in a generation.

A dramatic rescue was caught on tape in Alabama after a resident was trapped in rising floodwaters as you can see there. They're dropping under the trees. He ended up surviving.

And let me show you the scene in Pensacola. Eighteen inches of rain fell in just 24 hours. It's truly a biblical kind of proportion.

Ed Lavandera is there tonight. And, Ed, it does sound biblical.

ED LAVANDERA, CNN CORRESPONDENT: It was a stunning sight to see in the evening hours.

We spoke with one resident tonight, Erin, who said about 3:00 in the morning he started seeing big chunks of the roadway in front of his house start to flop onto his front lawn, and that's when he knew things were going terribly wrong.


LAVANDERA: It was a relentless rainstorm that for most people between Mobile, Alabama, and Pensacola, Florida, rivaled the most vicious of hurricanes. DAVID ZIMMERMAN, PENSACOLA RESIDENT: I've lived here 20 years. I've never seen this happen anywhere in the city like this.

LAVANDERA: And that's saying something seeing the powerful tropical storms this stretch of the Gulf Coast has seen.

The floodwaters washed away massive chunks of the city's scenic highway, leaving massive craters. Many neighborhoods drowned in hours and hours of rainfall. Some neighborhoods were filled with five feet of water.

Florida's governor says as many as 300 people had to be rescued from their homes. And this man was dramatically rescued from a tree in Alabama.

So what was it like last night watching this water?



PARADIS: Scary. I've never been through anything like this.

LAVANDERA: The asphalt of Indra Paradis' street was diced up into chunks that floated away. The floodwaters overwhelmed the neighborhood drainage system, and Piedmont Road looked like a raging river.

This is what Indra's front yard looked like yesterday. This is what the entrance to her house looks like now.

This is your swimming pool, my goodness.

ZIMMERMAN: It was surreal.

LAVANDERA: David Zimmerman's prized Volkswagen Beetle was no match for this storm.

How high was the water where we're standing here?

ZIMMERMAN: It was up to actually right -- to almost to the doorjamb, but this car was on the driveway, and it was literally that high. And it kind of lifted the car up and flipped it over.

LAVANDERA: Indra Paradis says she felt helpless all night long.

And you're using the towel to try to keep the water out?

PARADIS: Yes, blankets, towels, everything.

LAVANDERA: It didn't work.

PARADIS: No. No. Everything.

LAVANDERA: No way it could work.

PARADIS: Oh, my gosh. I don't know where to start. LAVANDERA: The floodwaters left a thick layer of muddy filth inside her house.

PARADIS: In an hour, everything gushes in. It was the strangest thing. It was weird. It start coming in the house. You couldn't do anything.

LAVANDERA: How heartbreaking is this for you?

PARADIS: Heartbreaking, because I don't have flood insurance. I'm alive. It could have been worse, you know. I still got a roof over my head and food on the table.


BURNETT: How high is the water level now? That's incredible when you were looking at that Bug and how it went up to the doorjamb.

LAVANDERA: Well, where we're standing here, we're told by residents it's probably about waist high at its worst point. And it started to recede about 6:00 in the morning.

The good news is that a lot of the water levels have gone down. And you're seeing what is left, so people are able to get inside their homes.

We were in one neighborhood today northwest of Pensacola that looked to have about five feet of water at one point, and that water had already receded and that cleanup process begins.

But it's going to take a long time. So many of the roadways have to be repaired, as you saw that scenic highway, which is very popular thoroughfare here through a portion of Pensacola, is going to take months to fix.

BURNETT: Ed, thank you very much. Incredible how Pensacola and Baltimore, you see the water just break up the asphalt. It shows you it's not just water calmly rising. It's aggressive and fast flowing.

Still to come, an Australian company says it found a plane in the Bay of Bengal. Investigators tonight are heading to the scene.

And officials in Oklahoma accused of cruel and unusual punishment, a witness to a botched execution is "OutFront."

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) BURNETT: At this moment, ships en route to check out an Australian company's claim, that it may have found Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 in the Bay of Bengal. They say there is a plane there that could be this one. Two Bangladeshi navy ships are now on route to the location, which is 118 miles off the coast, thousands of miles away from the current underwater search area. Malaysian officials are investigating the claim.

These are the images. And as you can see, they're shaped like a plane. The man in charge of the search in the southern Indian Ocean also says it should be checked out. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ANGUS HOUSTON, CHIEF COORDINATOR, JOINT AGENCY COORDINATION CENTRE: I think any sort of -- any sort of information that comes forth needs to be investigated.


BURNETT: Anna Coren joins me now from Adelaide, Australia, where GeoResonance, it's the company that found these images and has put this claim forth is based.

And, Anna, you had a chance to talk to them. How sound is the technology?

ANNA COREN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Erin, the company, as you say, GeoResonance, is standing by its science and its findings. As we know, there are a bunch of analysts and experts who come on CNN saying that this isn't possible. That this technology does not work underwater, let alone a thousand meters deep which is where the company claims the plane is.

The problem is that GeoResonance is refusing to divulge its technology because it claims this is an intellectual property. All they're asking is that authorities investigate to find out whether or not this is in fact MH370.


COREN (voice-over): GeoResonance is convinced through its high tech spectral imaging gathered from satellites and planes, it has found the remains of an aircraft in the Bay of Bengal, 190 kilometers off the coast of Bangladesh.

DAVID POPE, DIRECTOR, GEORESONANCE: Amazement isn't quite the word. It was totally incredible when we saw the results that we believe to be the wreckage of an aircraft. Yes, incredible.

COREN: The search began four days after the plane's disappearance, testing to elements such as aluminum, titanium and copper found in a Boeing 777. Working off the plane's last radar detection, they searched the northern corridor, covering over 2 million square kilometers until they found the match.

Some analysts are skeptical of the technology.

KEITH J. MASBACK, UNITED STATES GEOSPATIAL INTELLIGENCE FOUNDATION: I think the most fundamental reason for the skepticism is they talk about multispectral imaging. There is no multispectral imager of anyone I've talked to that I'm aware of is going to penetrate a thousand meters under the ocean.

COREN: Director David Pope says he stands by their findings, but is not prepared to divulge their methodology.

POPE: There is a lot of valuable I.T. built up over the last 30 years and it's intellectual property and we plan on keeping it private.

COREN: No one at GeoResonance is claiming this is in fact MH370. But the imaging of the same area conducted three days before the plane disappeared turned up none of the elements.

Their final report was sent two weeks ago to Malaysian Airlines and all countries involved in the search. But despite repeated efforts to make contact, no one responded.


COREN: But, Erin, as we know, authorities are now taking these claims a little more seriously. As you mentioned in your introduction, two naval vessels from Bangladesh are on their way to the exact coordinates that GeoResonance has given authorities. Malaysia Airlines and the government are also looking much more closely. You know, the company says we are not saying that this is in fact MH370. But they feel that it is their moral obligation to the families of the victims of the 239 people on board that Boeing 777 -- Erin.

BURNETT: Thank you very much, Anna.

And joining me now are aviation experts Miles O'Brien and Arthur Rosenberg, and 777 pilot Les Abend.

All right. Arthur, let me start with you.

These Bangladesh ships appear to be -- they are heading out there at this moment. They could be there right now for all we know, close by. But they're appearing at this point to be looking on the surface, which is from what experts say pretty much a moot point. If there is a plane there, they're not going to see any evidence on the surface.

So, should there be an investment in checking this out for real or is it cursory we looked, fine.

ARTHUR ROSENBERG, CNN AVIATION ANALYST: There is no question that we belong investigating this. First of all, the science of spectral imagery is solid. What we've been talking about, what our experts have been talking about is the technology of this company. We don't know the technology because they're not going to disclose it. But I would remind everyone that Inmarsat used proprietary technology.

BURNETT: Which they have never disclosed.

ROSENBERG: Which they have never disclosed. And we banked all our hopes on that. And the ping data also is being used outside the box.

And we know how we've turned up at this point. We've searched our best place, there is no airplane.

So, the bottom line here is, you bring a ship out from the southern shore of Bangladesh, it's only 115 miles out according to GeoResonance.

BURNETT: Take a look. ROSENBERG: You take a look. You drop a side ping sonar device in the water. You scan it. We'll show very shortly what the story is. No harm, no foul.

In the meantime, the Aussies and the Malaysians can continue to scratch their head and tweak the Inmarsat data and the ping data and continue to search down there.

And if it turns up empty, OK. Now we know the plane is not there. And on a chance that they hit gold, it's a wonderful thing for the families.

BURNETT: Miles, Rosa Flores, a reporter, of course, here at CNN, reports that the technology can be used to see things near to the surface of the ocean, right? Obviously, it wouldn't see it at the bottom of the ocean. But these photos were taken a couple of days after the plane went missing. So, the plane may not at that point been at the bottom of the ocean. That's the logic there.

I mean, do you think they should take a look? I know you don't think it's there. But do you think they should take a look.

MILES O'BRIEN, CNN AVIATION ANALYST: So, you're saying it took a couple of days to sink down to the bottom? Is that what you're suggesting?

BURNETT: I'm not -- I don't know the physics of it. But I'm saying --

O'BRIEN: Listen, this technology does not exist. I have asked every expert in the world of satellite imagery that I can find, and no one knows of any capability that makes it possible from a satellite to detect something as small as an aircraft in the bottom of the ocean a couple of thousand feet down.

So, this is a complete red herring. And worse, it is what appears to be a company seeking some attention and playing on the emotions of these poor families. So, yes, send the ship out. But it's a cruel thing that they've done.

BURNETT: All right. Let me ask you, Les. This scenario involves an intact plane, OK, because that's what the images would show. And because there's no debris -- that's what it would have involved. Now, there was no debris found in this location originally.

No matter where the plane is, though, whether it's here or in the southern Indian Ocean isn't the point. The point is a lot of people are talking very seriously, very intelligent, educated people about the fact that this plane could be intact.

So, let me just ask you this question. How hard would it be to land a plane if you were piloting it on the ocean? Intact?

LES ABEND, CNN AVIATION ANALYST: Intact, it would be a difficult task, especially in high seas. I don't know the conditions in that area of the world. But it would -- it just doesn't seem likely. And as you and have I discussed on previous occasions, the mechanical aspect if we go that direction, that airplane would be fractured in a lot of pieces, at least with the scenario that I'm thinking. So, having an image that looks like a Boeing 777, that in and of itself --

BURNETT: That makes you feel suspect.


BURNETT: What about, though, any scenario -- and again, not even talk about the specific pictures here, but wherever the plane may be. Is there any scenario you see where the plane may be intact right now that is not by human design as in it ran out of fuel? Sort of fell backwards, and start going to ocean. Is there any situation it would be intact?

ABEND: I really don't. Not unless it was a totally planned ditching, even if there was somebody at the controls --


ABEND: -- at the time of fuel exhaustion, I don't see them landing that airplane without it fracturing into some form of pieces. Not like the image you see there.

BURNETT: Not just these images into question, but, of course, also the search in the southern Indian Ocean where there has been no debris at this point either.

ROSENBERG: I actually don't agree with les on that point. I think it really depends on the attitude of the airplane as it approached the water. It depends on the speed of the airplane as it approached the water. I think there are a myriad of ways that this airplane could have landed largely intact. Could have broken into big pieces and sunk.

You know, short of something nosing in at 500 miles per hour and ending up in a thousand pieces.


ABEND: But not with the image that's shown on that screen.


ROSENBERG: But the image that they're showing on the screen, that's a filtered image based on an elemental analysis of titanium, of aluminum. They overlaid a planned view of a 777 --

O'BRIEN: Arthur, Arthur --

ROSENBERG: -- just to say that that field was big enough. All I'm saying is it's worth a look. It's worth a look.

O'BRIEN: Arthur, take a look at the titanium image. The Boeing 777 is 7 percent titanium. Take a look at this image. It shows a lot more than 7 percent. And also, it shows a lot of fuel neatly in two wings in the fuel tanks.

The whole thing has so many holes in it. Look. If this technology really works, aim that satellite at a known ditching site. There was a plane that ditched off of St. Croix in 1970, a DC-9. It's sitting there in 5,000 feet of water.

We know the latitude and longitude. Aim the satellite at this thing and prove to me that you can see it. I don't believe it.

And why, why haven't they aimed their satellite, if it's so good, at the search site in the southern Indian Ocean? And if nothing else, to disprove that the wreck is there?

BURNETT: It's a fair point, although again it gets to the question of, and I hear Miles loud and clear on how quickly it would have sunk. But it gets to the point of now for sure it is at the bottom but when they took the pictures perhaps it wasn't.

ROSENBERG: Look, I have simple answer to this. Miles, the bottom line here is in the time it would take to do what you suggest, we are going to know if there is any plane or something else at the bottom of the Bay of Bengal 3,000 feet down. It's simple.


O'BRIEN: You can turn the satellite around right now and we don't have to wait for that navy ship from Bangladesh to go out. Listen. If the Bangladesh navy wants to do a training mission throughout and see what they can do with their sonar, so be it.

ROSENBERG: Who cares?

O'BRIEN: Here's the thing -- there are human beings, family members who are hanging on every little fact in this. And I think it's really wrong to give them false hope.

BURNETT: Although I will say, if they end up being wrong, any publicity is not going to help this company. The company is going to go out of business.

All right. Thanks to all of you.

OUTFRONT next, people all around the world horrified by reports of a botched execution in Oklahoma. That man's lawyer comes OUTFRONT.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Wanted to hurry up and get it done with as little transparency as possible.


BURNETT: Tonight, the botched execution heard around the world. The man convicted of heinous crimes, murder, rape, burying a woman alive was killed last night in Oklahoma. But it is the way he died that has the world talking. Officials tried a new cocktail of three drugs to put 33-year-old Clayton Lockett to death. It was supposed to kill him in a few moments, but it took 43. Lockett ended up dying of a heart attack.

OUTFRONT tonight, two people who witnessed this execution, Chelsea Washington from CNN affiliate KOKH and Clayton Lockett's lawyer, David Autry, also here, forensic scientist Larry Kobilinsky.

All right. Great to have all of you with us.

Chelsea, let me start with you. I know this was your first time witnessing an execution. What happened?

CHELSEA WASHINGTON, KOKH: It was my first time. When I got there, I didn't know if I was going to get a chance to watch or not. Because it was a later to even get chosen to watch it. But I was picked.

We loaded up into a bus and were taken to where the inmates are kept on death row. It was kind of a stale room. There were windows in front of us, clear windows. And that's when Lockett was brought in on a gurney with a white sheet covering him. There were four state officials in the room with him. And already, you can see that the medication was being seeped into his body.

So, at 6:30, he was still conscious. At 6:33, they revealed he was unconscious, but his eyes were still open, he was licking his lips. His shoulders were still moving and so was his legs.

At 6:39, he was convulsing, he was shaking, he was muttering, you can tell things were not going the way they were planned. That is when they closed the curtain to us.

You could see the DOC director, Robert Patton, pacing back and forth. He was on the phone with the governor. About 10 minutes later he came back in and said he decided to stop the execution due to vein trouble, or due to vein failure.

And at that point, we just kind of sat there. And I remember the woman next to me saying we were witnessing history and we really were. And there was nothing like it because you could see he was in pain, just visibly convulsing and shaking, something you would remember forever.

BURNETT: I'm sure you will. David, I mean, you knew Clayton Lockett for 11 years as his lawyer. What went through your mind as you watched, what Chelsea just described, as you watched him suffer and die?

DAVID AUTRY, CLAYTON LOCKETT'S ATTORNEY: Well, it was terribly distressing and a surreal experience, obviously, to see the execution botched in a manner as that one was botched. And I think what we witnessed to put it succinctly as possible, last night was a clear violation of the Eighth Amendment ban against cruel and unusual punishment, because Mr. Lockett's botched execution was clearly cruel and unusual punishment. BURNETT: Larry, why did this execution go so wrong? I mean, obviously they were drugs bought from a European companies. They don't have a death penalty there. They don't want to sell them anymore. So, these were new cocktails.

LAWRENCE KOBILINSKY, FORENSIC SCIENTIST: Well, there was nothing per se wrong each drug I think. The first drug is midazolam. It's meant to put the person to sleep. It's an anesthetic. The second drug is really used to stop respiration. They use curarec type of compound. That blocks the muscles and the third drug really stops the heart.

BURNETT: So, it's the way -- the amount they did is the way they did it. The drugs themselves, you don't think are a problem?

KOBILINSKY: I think the problem was the delivery of those drugs. I think the vein failed. And instead of going into the circulatory system I think it was infusing the tissue around the vein. And I think that's what caused the convulsions, and it took that long until he died. He presumably from the KCL, the potassium chloride, which is what it's supposed to do.

BURNETT: Now, David, you just mentioned the issue you see here is cruel and unusual punishment and that is a question for the court obviously to decide. You know, but there are some watching who will say let's just remind ourselves why Clayton Lockett was there last night. He had raped women, he had murdered a women, kidnapped, he had buried a woman alive.

Some might say his death was far less cruel than that of his victims.

AUTRY: Well, if that is going to be the attitude, then we might as well abolish the Eighth Amendment. Mr. Lockett was unquestionably guilty of a horrific murder and another series of crimes that you just mentioned. But the Constitution, which we all claimed to revere, says that no one, regardless of what they've done, regardless of how horrible the crime, can be subjected in this country to cruel and unusual punishment. That's what supposedly makes us a civilized society.

And taking the argument to its logical conclusion, we should not be in a position of treating the murderers, the way the murderer treats the murder victim. Otherwise, we're little, if any better, than the murderer himself.

BURNETT: And before we go, Chelsea, let me ask you this, since you covered it. Will you ever attend an execution?

WASHINGTON: I will, that is an important part of my job. I take opinion out of it and you simply observe the events in front of you.

BURNETT: All right. Thanks very much to all three of you.

OUTFRONT next, Donald Sterling's mistress, detail that's more bizarre. Jeanne Moos is next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) BURNETT: It's the most famous head wear in the world right now, perched the top of the head of the Donald Sterling's mistress.

Here's Jeanne Moos.


JEANNE MOOS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: It's been the elephant in the room. Make that the elephant on Donald Sterling's alleged girlfriend's face.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Just trying to walk my dog.

MOOS: In masks?

We can't see through it with you we can certainly marvel at it. Stylish visor or eyesore?


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: That visor is the (INAUDIBLE) and you know it. Am I the only one who loves this visor? It is the ultimate in privacy, are you kidding?

MOOS: One blog called it paparazzi kryptonite, able to block the shot of any photographer.

REPORTER: So, are we going to get to see the face tonight, V?

MOOS: Not tonight.

V. Stiviano has been compared to a welder's mark, or what serial murderer Dexter wears to protect from blood spatter.

Folks are having a ball equating it to "Space Balls".


MOOS (on camera): You know what this thing really needs? Windshield wipers.

(voice-over): On a rainy day, not especially suited to something called a solar shield, New Yorkers did no best to pay me no mind. But there was the occasional double take -- the lingering stare.

It's believe the solar shield was first popularized by women in China, worried about sunburning their skin.

(on camera): Do you think it's a good look, or not a good look.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: No, it's not a good look. It looked weird.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's not a good look.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's a little strange.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I think (INAUDIBLE). Daft Punk. MOOS (voice-over): We were lucky enough to get our solar shield overnighted from Amazon for $29 plus shipping.

(on camera): One size fits most.

(voice-over): Even a colleague was confused.

UNIDENTIFEID MALE: Yes, is that a spit guard?

MOOS: V. Stiviano joins other celebrities who chose to cover their heads from Shia LaBeouf to his "I'm not famous anymore" bag, to the unknown comic from the old com show.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I took my dog to a free circus, he stole the show.

MOOS: That's Woody Harrelson hiding from the paparazzi. Lady Gaga has always covered in something. And Michael Jackson didn't just cover himself, he covered his kids.

As for V. Stiviano, we don't know if she is planning to drop her very own visor line, as this tweet suggested.

(on camera): Not recommended for driving.

(voice-over): Yet there she is in her Ferrari.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Right now, you're bigger than Angelina Jolie.

MOOS: At least the headband can expand when she gets a swollen head. Once she gets bored with the visor? We recommend this.

Jeanne Moos, CNN --

STIVIANO: Trying to walk my dog.

MOOS: -- New York.


BURNETT: Now, she said she wants to run for president. So, we'll see how the visor works for that. I want to find that guy, hope you're watching, who you are, walking outside Time Warner, give the side ways look at Jeanne. Oh, that was priceless.

Thanks so much for joining us. We'll see you again tomorrow night.

"AC360" starts now.