Return to Transcripts main page

CNN TONIGHT

An American Jihadist; FBI Analyzing Audio Recording of Brown Shooting

Aired August 26, 2014 - 22:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.


DON LEMON, CNN ANCHOR: Good evening. This is CNN TONIGHT. I'm Don Lemon.

Tonight: born in the USA, fighting for ISIS. What turns an all- American named Douglas McAuthur McCain McCain into a violent jihadist for the most feared terrorists in the world? How many more are out there? And what will the president do about the threat from ISIS?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: America does not forget. Our reach is long. We are patient. Justice will be done. We have proved time and time again we will do what is necessary to capture those who harm Americans.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: The question is, are we on the verge of airstrikes on ISIS in Syria?

Also, this could be the best clue yet to exactly what happened when Michael Brown was killed, what sounds like gunshots caught on tape while a man was video chatting with a friend.

(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You are pretty. You are so fine. Just going over some of your videos. How could I forget?

(GUNSHOTS)

(END AUDIO CLIP)

LEMON: Will this tape answer the questions or raise even more?

We're going to begin, though, with the death of an American jihadi.

CNN's Evan Perez joins me now from Washington.

What do we know about American Douglas McCain and why he joined ISIS, Evan?

EVAN PEREZ, CNN JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Don, right now, there are still a lot of details that are not known. We know he is 33 years old. The FBI started investigating him several months ago when they

realized that he had probably gone to join the militants in Syria. Now we know that he was a member of ISIS, which is one of the more radical groups that is fighting in that civil war. And we know that he was killed over the weekend. Now, until today, really, they only knew in the United States that he had some minor scrapes with the law, and he converted to Islam about 10 years ago.

And his family said they last heard from him when hey went to Turkey a few months ago, Don.

LEMON: And how was he killed?

PEREZ: He was killed in a battle with rival militant groups. It's still a little foggy because there are so many groups that are fighting over there. One British human rights group that is monitoring the area says that they were fighting al-Nusra, which is an al Qaeda group.

The Free Syrian Army, which is a group that is backed by the United States, says that they were killed in a battle -- an ISIS battle with their group.

LEMON: And, Evan, we have been talking a lot about the numbers, about how many others could be out there. How many others could be out there doing the same thing?

PEREZ: We know about 100 Americans are believed to have gone to Syria and are fighting with these militant groups. We don't know how many have joined ISIS. The FBI is keeping close tabs on as many of them as they can. But, Don, as you know, it's really difficult. A lot of times, they only know that these people have joined these groups after they have gone over there.

LEMON: And the question is, what is the real fear of here in America? I understand that, you know, the threat of ISIS coming across our borders just sort of similar to people crossing our southern borders. It's porous. But that doesn't mean the minute, the moment they get here, that something will happen, correct?

PEREZ: Right. Right. That's exactly right.

I mean, one of the things we can see as from this battle that this gunship was involved in this weekend is that some of these people are going over there to join the fight there. Now, the fear is that eventually they're going to be trained and that they're going to come back here. They can obviously travel.

So what the FBI is doing, for instance, is putting them only watch lists so once they know they have gone over there, they are flagged as soon as they get on a plane to try to come back to this country. Today, the State Department even said that they can cancel their passports so that they can't travel anywhere. So that's how they're trying to deal with it.

LEMON: Evan Perez, thank you. Appreciate your reporting. How many American jihadists are out there, the same question I asked

Evan Perez, and what can we do about them?

Joining me is Rita Katz, the director the SITE Intelligence Group, also Juliette Kayyem, CNN national security analyst, and also Michael Weiss, who writes for "Foreign Policy" and "NOW Lebanon," a columnist for them.

Juliette, I want to start with you and the same question I asked Evan. I saw you earlier on CNN. You bring up a very good point when it says, what is the threat of ISIS coming to America, and you equated it to the southern borders.

JULIETTE KAYYEM, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: Right.

There is no question that dangerous people can get into this country either through border -- illegal border crossing, or if they have a passport or a visa, can get into this country. I just don't think that's right question.

Look, there is bad people in the world. There are sociopaths. There are people that join terrorist groups. And nothing about this should surprise us, you know, 12 years after September 11. I think the better question is, are these attacks imminent and should the average American care or be worried, change their behavior?

And I think everything we have seen, the FBI report, the FBI bulletins, the fact that McCain was already under surveillance is a good sign that we probably have some situational awareness of who is doing what should put people at ease, but understanding we're never going to get to zero. We're never going to get to perfect. What we try to do, given the terrorist threat, is it's a little bit of Whac-A- Mole here. And sometimes it's military missions abroad.

LEMON: Can we get to -- let's talk about real quickly before I bring the other panelists in, Juliette, what drove American Douglas McCain and others like him to cause -- become -- to turn away from America and join a group like this?

KAYYEM: Well, to put it in historical perspective, unfortunately, every war that America has ever been in, we have had people side with the "enemy" -- in quotes -- right, with the over side. We saw this during World War II. This is not unique to our times.

And it is nonetheless scary, to the extent that people are getting radicalized. There is a number of reasons why. One is obviously the Internet. Another is a sense of isolation, unemployment. McCain didn't seem to have a strong linear narrative about school and then being employed. He may have been a bit of a drifter, even if he was a nice guy, as they often always are.

And they look for a sense of identity abroad. And, look, there are sociopaths in the world who say I'm going to join ISIS. They show up at ISIS. They show up in Syria. They get killed because they are joining something that is, you know, violent and ultimately got killed by U.S. forces. LEMON: People who become disenchanted for one reason or another.

Rita, you track jihadis online. What do you know about this case?

RITA KATZ, DIRECTOR, SEARCH FOR INTERNATIONAL TERRORIST ENTITIES: Well, we were this morning or actually last night, we saw a message on Twitter from groups that are fighting ISIS in Aleppo, free Syria now people.

And they reported about one of their latest battles that occurred in Aleppo in which they were able to successfully defeat ISIS fighters. And they reported that among their 40 something people that were killed, they found two Americans, two individuals, two ISIS fighters that had on them American passports. And so that was something that really triggered us into start looking into the profile of the individual.

And, again, it really didn't surprise me to see immediately his involvement on Twitter and part of the social media that ISIS is so investing, investing unbelievably amount of resources to recruit people like him. He himself had an active Twitter page that was communicating with other Western fighters in Syria and in Iraq and in English, obviously.

LEMON: I'm seeing a recurring theme here, Michael. I'm seeing the Internet, because, listen, these mostly men become radicalized. We have freedom of religion here. Is there anything that we can really do about it, short of stopping people going online?

MICHAEL WEISS, "FOREIGN POLICY": No, unfortunately I don't think so.

For the better part of a half-decade, we have been sort of obsessed in intelligence and national security circles with the so-called lone wolf attack, not that it would be an al Qaeda-style spectacular tantamount to 9/11, but things like Abdulmutallab, the guy who tried to blow up his underpants and subsequently an airliner above the skies of Detroit several Christmases ago.

These lone wolves have been inspired by al Qaeda clerics such as Anwar al-Awlaki, whom U.S. drones took out in Yemen several years ago. My concern is, yes, look, there is a threat posed by ISIS fighters returning from Syria, boarding a plane in Antakya, then Istanbul, and reaching anywhere in Europe and also the United States.

But, also, look, these guys are incredibly savvy at using social media such as Twitter, Facebook, other Web sites that most people hadn't even heard of until ISIS made them famous. They are also probably the most successful terrorist organization in history, at least Islamic terrorism. They far outmarshaled al Qaeda in terms of accomplishments. They now control an expansive territory that, according to "The Guardian," is slightly greater than the size of Great Britain.

What they're able to do is radicalize people already in the West. I mean, this guy, Mr. McCain, obviously went off to join ISIS with exactly that intent. He was living in the United States in Minnesota. There are other people who don't need to even go to Syria and fight with ISIS. They can be inspired by ISIS, by its ideological proclamation, by the sermons of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the self- declared caliph of the organization, and commit terrorist attacks here on our own soil.

(CROSSTALK)

LEMON: And it's much easier to do through social media, which has been the theme on.

I want to move on and talk about the search for the killer of James Foley, because it's really important. Everyone is focusing on the identity of the man that you see there in these videos. Was the ISIS killer's British accent of surprise to you, Rita?

KATZ: Oh, definitely not. Definitely not.

And two things that were very important to mention about the ISIS beheading video. One is the fact that the executer himself spoke English, and British accent, which is not a surprise, like I mentioned, because the number of British fighters in Syria/Iraq is very large.

It is actually illustrated by the fact that the British fighters in Syria have their own media organization, which is called Rayat al Tawheed, under the Banner of Tawheed. And through those -- their group, they disseminate for about two or three years a large amount of propaganda, videos, and audios and Twitter messages.

They created their own recruitment network on social media, through which they not only recruit, but even fund-raise and even call on other peoples to join. And, by the way, Douglas McCain himself was also in communication with that specific group.

In addition to the fact that it wasn't surprising, the fact that the executer himself, and that's again to this same message about the recruitment, the executer himself spoke English has a very important message here to everyone here in the West, is the fact that, you know, ISIS could have taken an Arabic speaker and fighter. And for sure, they have thousands of them, no doubt about it.

(CROSSTALK)

LEMON: The reason they took an English speaker is...

KATZ: They chose to take an English speaker. And the reason is for recruitment.

LEMON: Right.

KATZ: And when we're talking about recruitment online, if you had seen the reactions a few minutes after the video was released, the cheerful reactions, the celebrations of -- it had more than the element of intimidation.

LEMON: I got to go, Rita. KATZ: It had the element of recruitment.

LEMON: All right, thank you very much, Rita. Thank you, Michael. Thank you, Juliette.

KATZ: Thank you.

LEMON: And when we come right back, the tale of the tapes. What will it take to identify the ISIS terrorist who beheaded James Foley? Will his voice betray him and what will the White House do to capture him?

Also, alleged audio from the moment Michael Brown was killed captured while a man was video chatting with a friend.

(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You are pretty. You are so fine. Just going over some of your videos. How could I forget?

(GUNSHOTS)

(END AUDIO CLIP)

LEMON: Will this tape raise more questions than answers?

Plus, a bucket challenge with a difference. We will explain coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: Welcome back to CNN TONIGHT.

While President Barack Obama has given the go-ahead for U.S. reconnaissance flights over Syria, the White House insists he has not authorized airstrikes against ISIS targets there.

So, I'm joined now to talk with General, Major General James "Spider" Marks, CNN military analyst and former commanding general of the U.S. Army Intelligence Center. Peter Beinart is a CNN political commentator and columnist at "Haaretz." And also back with us now is Michael Weiss, foreign policy and "NOW Lebanon" columnist.

General, you first. Should the U.S. bomb in Syria?

BRIG. GEN. JAMES "SPIDER" MARKS (RET.), CNN MILITARY ANALYST: It sure should, and it should without asking permission.

Look, we have great intelligence. Intelligence collection is a matter of routine. The fact that the president has authorized reconnaissance flights, all that really means is they want to get a little more precise targeting on the already existing target folders that have already been put in front of them and the combatant commander can go ahead and release those things at any time.

So, really, that's a final step. It's not an absolutely essential final step. But, absolutely, the United States should go after those targets as quickly as possible.

LEMON: But, General...

MARKS: But it's only going to give them a tactical advantage. It's only going to give the U.S. a tactical advantage.

LEMON: But isn't the president in an awkward position trying to stop ISIS without getting pulled into a conflict that he's long tried to avoid?

MARKS: Sure.

LEMON: How does he accomplish that?

MARKS: Well, the first thing, Don, is, you need to create a strategy. And the president and his administration has failed to do that. That's step one, because if what the United States chooses to do and rolls into a strategy of chasing ISIS and tactically going after ISIS as targets on the battlefield, we don't know what right looks like. We don't know what the conclusion, what the horizon needs to look like.

We need to take a step back and establish a strategy, but, simultaneously, we have to be able to go after them in this large ungoverned space so that we can hold them where they are and stop their progress.

LEMON: Michael, I want to play something. This is the Pentagon secretary, John Kirby. He had this to say about U.S. surveillance over Syria. Here it is.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REAR ADM. JOHN KIRBY, PENTAGON PRESS SECRETARY: The president has been clear about this. Secretary Hagel has been clear about this. This is a serious threat from a serious group of terrorists.

And we need to stay mindful of doing what we need to do to protect American citizens at home and abroad. And it's been stated before. We're not going to hold ourselves to geographic boundaries in order to accomplish that job. So, without getting into international law, for which I would be ill-educated to speak to, I can tell you we will do what we need to do to protect Americans.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: A serious threat at home and abroad. Is ISIS a serious threat to our homeland? Do we need to take them on abroad?

WEISS: I think so. And Admiral Kirby referred to geographical boundaries.

Well, there are no geographical boundaries with respect to ISIS. The boundary between Syria and Iraq has been erased, for all intents and purposes. Look, you cannot fight ISIS in just one so-called country that is left of Levant and Mesopotamia. What we're doing now in Iraq is good. It's prevented the genocide of Yazidis.

I hear just now on Twitter that we might be doing airlifts to protect another minority population there. But, as the general said, this is a tactical sort of initiative. It's not going to defeat or even contain ISIS. When they are blown up or shot at in Iraq, they have an easy command center in Raqqa province of Syria, to which they can repair.

For all the talk we're hearing now that we should be partnering with the Assad regime, let us not forget that until June of this year, when ISIS marched into Mosul, an event that nobody seemed to have foreseen, the Bashar al-Assad regime in Syria did not drop barrel bombs or chlorine bombs on ISIS in Raqqa province.

I have seen so many arguments in the last few weeks that state a very simple and longstanding truth, which is Assad himself is responsible for the rise of this transnational terrorist army. And the general is also quite right. We do not need his permission to go in and bomb them. In fact, the abortive rescue mission that was conducted for James Foley earlier this summer proves that you can send in manned aircraft. You can send in surveillance drones.

You can even send in special forces into eastern Syria without the permission or the knowledge of Damascus. I think we absolutely have a moral and strategic objective to meet.

LEMON: And continuing that, I'm wondering why, Peter, you wrote in "The Atlantic," you said that if the U.S. doesn't act against ISIS, no one else will. Do you really believe that? Why did you write that?

PETER BEINART, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Well, no, I don't -- I think it's true. I don't think there is anybody else with the capacity to try to act effectively against ISIS right now.

But the question that I also wrote about in that piece is, who are our allies on the ground? I think we can hurt ISIS from the air, but we can't take territory from ISIS from the air. Whenever we have had successful efforts like this, whether it was in Kosovo, in Afghanistan when we defeated the Taliban originally, we had allies on the ground, the Kurds in Iraq.

So the question I think is who are our allies on the ground in Syria? And we have this irony that the Obama administration spent the last couple years basically saying that the moderate nationalist non- jihadist rebels in Syria aren't really worth very much. They're too disorganized. They're not strong on the ground. We can't even really tell them apart. So...

(CROSSTALK)

LEMON: So, then who are we fighting for?

BEINART: So, who are we fighting for? That's the question that I think -- that's the $10,000 question here.

LEMON: Who are we fighting for then? BEINART: My fear is that the Obama administration itself has

repeatedly told us they don't believe that we have allies on the ground strong enough or reliable enough, in fact, to be worth partnering with.

And so it's a really remarkable about-face. I really would love to believe that we have learned something about the Free Syrian Army and non-jihadist rebels in Syria that has changed the Obama administration's mind. But I don't know what it is.

LEMON: You're not sure who -- who are we fighting for? That's probably a better way of putting it.

General, how does Bashar al-Assad play into this? You heard what Michael said. He believes that it's really -- this is Bashar al- Assad's doing.

MARKS: Sure.

Well, you know, Don, certainly, as everybody has indicated, frankly, this is a little bit more than irony. The United States has a very delicate mission it's going to prosecute. At least I would imagine they're going to prosecute, which means if they're very aggressive against these targets and ISIS -- against ISIS targets in Syria, Assad certainly would gain. And now we are supporting Assad, an individual and a regime we have been trying to collapse and crush for many years.

And if we are imprecise in some of our targeting, which can happen as well, we run the risk obviously of invalidating Assad a little bit. Therefore, ISIS gains. So this really is a sword that is going to cut both ways for the United States, unless they do it very, very well. But I think they still have the obligation to do so.

(CROSSTALK)

LEMON: You think airstrikes could end up empowering Assad?

MARKS: Well, they could, absolutely, if it's not done as -- there are unintended consequences. Any time you exercise kinetic power, there will be unintended consequences. The short answer, Don, is, yes, that's a scenario I know the Joint Chiefs and the combatant commander has gone through in great detail.

That doesn't obviate the requirement to go after them.

LEMON: All right, thank you very much. I appreciate you, gentlemen. I appreciate all of you joining us here on CNN.

We don't know yet if the alleged audio recording of the gunshots that killed Michael Brown is authentic. But CNN asked a forensic audio expert to examine it. And up next, you're going to hear what he has to say about what is going on in this recording.

(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You are pretty. You are so fine. I'm just going over some of your videos. How could I forget?

(GUNSHOTS)

(END AUDIO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: Welcome back to CNN TONIGHT, everyone.

The FBI is analyzing that audio recording that CNN TONIGHT uncovered in Ferguson, Missouri. It allegedly contains sounds of the gunshots that killed Michael Brown. CNN cannot independently verify the authenticity of the same tape.

Here is CNN's Jason Carroll with more now.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

JASON CARROLL, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Could this be the sound of the shots officer Darren Wilson fired at Michael Brown? The alleged audio of the incident captured by an unidentified man during a video chat believed to be at the time of the shooting.

(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You are pretty. You are so fine. I'm just going over some of your videos. How could I forget?

(GUNSHOTS)

(END AUDIO CLIP)

CARROLL: CNN has not independently verified its authenticity, but the audio already has the attention of the FBI and forensic audio expert Frank Piazza.

FRANK PIAZZA, FORENSIC AUDIO EXPERT: The boldness of the orange is reflecting either volume or mike proximity. So he is closer to the microphone.

CARROLL: Piazza first analyzed the audio using spectrographic imagery, which in short helps one see the content of sound, particular interest here, spikes in the images.

(on camera): But you almost count one, two, three, four, five, six.

PIAZZA: Let's see if you are right.

One, two, three, four, five, six. Yes, you got it.

CARROLL (voice-over): Six spikes perhaps equaling six shots, then a break.

(on camera): And then again, there, two, three, four.

(voice-over): In summary, six shots, a short break, then apparently four more, 10 in all. Piazza turns to another screen which focuses on the timeline and amplitude of the audio. He takes a closer look at measuring that short break.

PIAZZA: So it looks like the last gunshot ends right about here.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You're so fine. So fine. So fine. I'm just going over some your videos.

PIAZZA: And it seems to pick up there again. So the area is approximately 2.7 seconds. So, you can say 2.5 to three seconds is the area of the pause before you hear the gunshots pick up again.

CARROLL: A little less than three seconds, but enough time potentially to support allegations Officer Wilson fired on Brown when he had his hands up, or that Wilson fired in defense after Brown allegedly turned and charged at him.

MARK O'MARA, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: It doesn't really contradict or fit in to any of the narratives that have been created so far.

CARROLL: Mark O'Mara knows all too well about the importance of audio evidence. He represented George Zimmerman in the Trayvon Martin trial, during which much was made of who screamed during a 911 call made during the fatal altercation between Zimmerman and a Martin.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Do you think he's yelling help?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: What is your...

CARROLL: In the end, FBI analysis of that 911 audio was inconclusive. Who screamed for help, Martin or Zimmerman, still a debate.

O'Mara says maybe the audio from Ferguson will be difficult.

O'MARA: It could, for example, have Mike Brown saying something like "I give up." It could have the officer saying, "Freeze, stop, drop to the ground," whatever may have been said.

So though we haven't heard it, there are some audio analysts out there who may be able to drag out some more information from that tape.

CARROLL: Experts say those answers could be a while in coming. The FBI will need all the electronic information about who recorded the video chat and who was on the other end. And any other clues that may be buried on the audio recording.

Jason Carroll, CNN, New York.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

LEMON: Joining me now, Janet Johnson, criminal defense attorney; Alex Ferrer, the former police officer and a former Florida circuit judge and host of television's "Judge Alex"; and Sunny Hostin, CNN legal analyst, who is a former federal prosecutor herself. I had forgotten about the George Zimmerman audio. I had forgotten

about that.

You know, Janet, before now we had no video or audio of the actual shooting. I mean, is the discovery of this audio, if it is indeed the audio, is it a game changer?

JANET JOHNSON, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: You know, I don't think it is. And I think it's the defense. They could easily spin this that the criticism of Officer Wilson was "Why didn't he shoot to disable him."

As the defense lawyer I'm already getting my story together where I can argue he was shooting to disable him. And then he thought he was disabled, and he lunged at him, and that's when he had the kill shot. That's what that gap.

So I think both sides can spin it. And when that happens, the defense can argue this is reasonable doubt when both sides are equal.

LEMON: Sunny, who do you think this supports? Does it support the witness, Dorian Johnson? Does is support the police officer side of the story? Because we heard in that recording at least ten shots, and then there was a quick series -- you know, quick series of shots followed by a pause and another succession of shots.

SUNNY HOSTIN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Well, I don't think we really know what the police officer's story is, because we hadn't heard from him firsthand, Don. And even the police incident report that's been released is so heavily redacted. You really don't know, I think.

LEMON: Initially we did hear from Ferguson Police, where they said, you know, there was a struggle at the car. Remember that?

HOSTIN: Yes, but I just don't think we really know his account.

But I think in terms of the five eyewitnesses that I've -- their testimony or rather their depiction of the events that I've reviewed, I think the pause in the shots actually corroborates their version of events. It's very clear to me that every single one of them say that there were these shots, and then Michael Brown stopped, turned around and put his hands up.

I think then that this is extremely significant, you know, evidence for the prosecution. I think that jurors who listen to evidence, quite frankly, usually don't take their common-sense hat off. And the notion, the argument that somehow someone that's being shot, continues -- somehow, an unarmed person charges at an armed police officer just doesn't really make a lot of sense.

LEMON: Go ahead.

JOHNSON: Sunny, they say that all -- as a defense lawyer, I hear that all the time. Officers say that my clients, after getting Tased have superhuman strength. Now whether those how they perceive it or whether it's true, I don't know. But officers say that all the time. ALEX FERRER, HOST, "JUDGE ALEX": Not to mention that perpetrators do

things all the time you wouldn't anticipate. I can't tell you the number of times as a police officer I had somebody in the back of the police car handcuffed, taking them to the jail, and looked over at the car next to me and saw a family horrified, because the perpetrator was smashing his head on the cage.

And yet when you get in court, the lawyers look at a jury and, "Oh, come on. The guy smashed his own head on the cage?" Yes, they do that.

HOSTIN: Alex, I mean, you know, that may be the case, but you have so many eyewitnesses, quite frankly, that...

LEMON: Sunny, can I say this?

HOSTIN: ... are not saying that. They're saying something that's different.

LEMON: Well, the eyewitnesses -- those are the eyewitnesses -- eyewitnesses, excuse me, we know of.

FERRER: Of course.

LEMON: Because some of the eyewitnesses that we are hearing from sources, there are at least a handful or maybe a dozen eyewitnesses who are corroborating the police officer's side of the story, but they don't want to be part of the media spectacle. They don't want their names out there.

FERRER: That is true. And I think that this...

HOSTIN: Well, I haven't -- I haven't heard from any witnesses like that. Perhaps other people have. But, again, from what we know at this point, I think that the pause in the shots, quite frankly, corroborate a lot of the evidence or depictions, at least at this point.

FERRER: I totally -- I totally disagree. I totally disagree.

JOHNSON: Yes, I'm with Alex.

FERRER: The pause in the shooting is going to be spun by both sides.

People form their opinions originally based on their own life perceptions. The people who feel this was an unjustified shooting are going to say that pause gave the officer time to premeditate the shooting. The people who feel it's a justified shooting are going to say he shot him and stopped, and since he was still coming, he shot some more.

And the reality is that the harm is not that people form their opinions immediately. The harm is that people formed fixed opinions. And then when facts like this come in, they're not willing to change their mind. They're willing to form it into their story or say, "Oh, it's not credible; it's not believable." That's the problem. JOHNSON: And it's a reasonable officer too. I mean, it's a

reasonable person standard. So it comes from the officer's testimony. And the officer, unfortunately, is the only person who's alive between the two of them.

LEMON: But there are reports out there, as well.

FERRER: No, we're going to have other forensics. We're going to have other forensics, and we're going to have other witnesses. We just have to wait for all that to come in.

And I'm not a big believer that the police should be letting out all their evidence. Because when they do, this is why police say, "An investigation is pending. We can't comment." Because when they let out the evidence they have, people come out of the woodworks with stories that fit into that evidence.

HOSTIN: But let's...

(CROSSTALK)

LEMON: Stand by. Hold that thought. We'll get into it. I'm going to let you guys -- I'm going to let you finish. But there are, you know, there are reports that people are fitting their testimony to what they hear witnesses on television saying. We're going to talk about that.

And also, if it is authentic, how would the audio compare with others aspects of this case that we already know about? That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: Welcome back, everyone. We're talking about the alleged recording of Michael Brown's shooting. CNN cannot independently confirm whether or the shots heard were from the Brown incident. But the recording raises a whole lot of questions.

I'm back now with my panel. Sunny, you were raring to get in here.

HOSTIN: Well, you know, I was just going to say the suggestion somehow that the police shouldn't be providing public information to the media, to the public, and that that is something that is never done really just flies in the face of what we see every day.

The bottom line is we see every day that police officers, captains, chiefs of police, they hold press conferences and tell you what they know about a potential case, what they know about a potential crime, what they know about a suspect.

And let's not forget that in this case, although they have not released the police incident report, unredacted, they haven't really allowed this officer to speak, they did find it appropriate to release video of this alleged strong-arm robbery. They have found it appropriate to dribble out information about Michael Brown in this case. And so I think the suggestion that somehow that this is a case that is

being run transparently and being run the same way that every other case is being run is just not correct.

FERRER: I didn't say it doesn't happen. I was saying I'm not a fan of it. I don't think it should happen.

JOHNSON: Well, you know...

FERRER: I think it's an ongoing criminal investigation, and you taint it by having other witnesses to have information that they otherwise wouldn't have.

JOHNSON: Well, there's that, but guys, isn't there also that there's no narrative? I mean, you know, even in Zimmerman, you know, Angela Corey, who's the prosecutor here where I practice in Florida, like her or not, she had a narrative. She had a theme when she took over.

We don't have anybody putting forth what their theme is. In fact, McCulloch says he's going to the grand jury piecemeal. That's no way to present a case to the grand jury.

LEMON: Can we get back to the audio, though? I want to get back to this audio, because this is -- we're getting a little far afield here. I mean, I think a lot of that has been debated. And we're going to find out about McCulloch and whether the -- you know, the governor is saying he's going to stay there.

So let's get back to the audio here and to the authenticity. Again, CNN cannot verify -- has not verified it yet. But the FBI is taking it seriously.

But one reason people say that they believe it is because this guy is doing something personal with a friend, right. And he does not appear to be disturbed by gunshots at all. What do you?

FERRER: Yes, well, that was my thought when I first heard the sound recording. I thought this guy is so into this woman, or man -- I don't know who he's flirting with -- that even gunshots do not derail -- even gunshots.

LEMON: It was a young woman, Judge Alex. I mean a woman, excuse me.

FERRER: Even gunshots don't derail his flirting. I mean, that's a man on a mission here.

JOHNSON: Or -- or, Alex, Judge, that might be how dangerous this neighborhood is. Maybe gunshot isn't that unusual to hear.

FERRER: Could be.

LEMON: Let's listen in and then we'll talk. Let's listen again.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You are pretty. You're so fine. Just going over some of your videos. How can I forget?

(GUNSHOTS)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: I mean, he never stops. He kept talking right through it.

HOSTIN: He sure did. But we don't know the circumstances of how he was...

LEMON: He could have headphones on. Right.

HOSTIN: He could have headphones on. But I...

FERRER: Don, are you speaking from experience?

JOHNSON: Those are good headphones.

HOSTIN: But I've got to tell you, when I first heard the audio, and of course, I've listened to it several times, I thought that the -- sort of the context of the chat made it more authentic.

LEMON: Right.

HOSTIN: Because who would want to release this kind of information? I mean, he's clearly in some sort of, like, sexy chat on a video chat. He's talking about watching someone's videos.

LEMON: What's wrong with that, though? He's an adult.

HOSTIN: Nothing is wrong with it, but it could be embarrassing.

FERRER: Well, I mean, as long as it's legal -- as long as it's legal to record conversations in that state.

HOSTIN: And it is.

FERRER: And we believe it is.

HOSTIN: And it is.

FERRER: Yes. So as long as it is, then there's no problem. If it was illegal, then it would raise all kinds of issues. Because most of the states that ban recording a conversation like that without both parties' consent also ban it being used in court for any purpose whatsoever.

HOSTIN: Sure.

LEMON: Yes.

FERRER: So that's...

LEMON: I do have to say last night when I was -- when we were trying to get this verified, to get it on the air, and speaking to him and to her, -- her meaning his attorney, he did not want to be identified. And he did not want media attention.

And when someone approaches us, and not wanting media attention, not want to be identified, that usually authenticates their story. Because if you're just looking for attention, you want to get your face out there. He didn't want any of that.

HOSTIN: Sure.

FERRER: Very good point. Very good point.

LEMON: Yes. Sunny. I'm surprised. Sunny, you don't have anything to say?

HOSTIN: Oh, I always have something to say, Don Lemon.

LEMON: That's a first: 10:45 Eastern Time. Sunny Hostin.

HOSTIN: I always have something to say. But...

FERRER: Write it down.

HOSTIN: I think certainly it does, again, inure to the notion that -- I think it's probably an authentic recording.

And I think what we should also mention is the FBI is certainly interested in it. We know that the FBI has interviewed this man. They have -- they're investigating the recording. And they're the best in the business, quite frankly...

LEMON: So why does...

HOSTIN: The FBI agents. And I believe they're the best in the business.

LEMON: Janet, when you hear the number of shots, right, 10, I thought I heard 11. But they said that was probably an echo that I was hearing in the recording. Police are trained to shoot. Why shoot to kill? Why shoot to -- and usually to unload their gun.

FERRER: That's what they're shot [SIC] to go. I mean, they're...

JOHNSON: Right. But my defense would be, if I'm defending the officer, Officer Wilson, my defense would be first of all, he's not that experienced. I don't know how good a shot he is, because they're bullets that we can't find. Or maybe they have found them, and we don't know it. But my defense would be he wasn't going to kill him. He was shooting him in his arms shooting. He was shooting him in a way that would just disable him.

FERRER: Don -- Don, this is -- I heard Ben Carson say something the other day, and I couldn't believe how wrong he was. He said one of the things we have to find out is police officers are shot [SIC] to stop and they're shot [SIC] to kill. Why did he choose to shoot to kill? And that's just flat-out wrong.

Police officers are taught to shoot to stop, and they shoot for center of mass. That's what they shoot for. Because you don't shoot for hands or feet or legs, because those move. And that's how you kill bystanders behind. You shoot for the center of mass. That's where the organs are and that's what's most likely to put something down. That's what all police officers are taught.

HOSTIN: But you know what I think we need to...

FERRER: Now, the other thing that you have to know is that you're not taught to -- it's not like television. You know, everybody sees, like, 007 go tap-tap, and the person goes down. That's not the way it is. In the situation where you're afraid for your life and you pull your gun to shoot, you're shooting. And a lot of times what people do is when they pull the trigger, they push the barrel of the gun in this direction. And that's why possibly he was getting the right arm.

HOSTIN: But I think we need to address the conversation of whether or not the shooting, the use of deadly force, was appropriate. By most witnesses...

FERRER: It may have been completely inappropriate. It may be unjustified.

HOSTIN: The witnesses that I've heard from, and again, Don, maybe there are more, maybe there are others. But when you have someone that is fleeing, right, perhaps there was an assault. If you have this fleeing felon, you can't just shoot to kill, right? You have to either be -- this person has to be a threat to you or a threat to others in the community.

FERRER: That is -- that is -- OK, that is not true. That is not true.

HOSTIN: That is true.

FERRER: That is not true. No.

JOHNSON: Not if he's a felon. It just has to be...

HOSTIN: The Supreme Court has found that. That is absolutely true.

FERRER: I know -- I know the case you're referring to.

HOSTIN: We all do. Garner.

FERRER: And that is not true.

LEMON: OK.

FERRER: If it is a fleeing felon from a violent felony, if you believe the story, because we don't have the officer's story, and as I said, this may be a completely unjustified shooting.

LEMON: OK.

FERRER: But if the officer's story is he fractured the orbit of his eye, he could shoot him. HOSTIN: That is not true.

(CROSSTALK)

HOSTIN: It's in Garner.

LEMON: I let you guys because it's such an a intriguing conversation.

HOSTIN: And I don't want...

LEMON: But unfortunately -- conversation, but unfortunately, I have to end it here. Thank you, guys.

HOSTIN: That is not true, Alex.

LEMON: We'll debate it another time.

We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: Welcome back, everyone. We have more on that audio that may -- and I emphasize "may" -- have captured the gunshots that ended Michael Brown's life. CNN cannot independently verify the authenticity of the tape, but it definitely raises a whole heck of a lot of questions.

Joining me is CNN's Ted Rowlands, live on the streets of Ferguson. Ted, just a week ago we would have seen hundreds of protesters. Fairly quiet and peaceful there tonight, I would imagine.

TED ROWLANDS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Don. The second night in a row it's been extremely quiet here. There's literally a handful, maybe 15, 20 people just hanging out. But very peaceful. Just literally standing around talking in the same area where there were hundreds of people.

So a much different scene on the streets of Ferguson. And the family really asked for that yesterday. Today it's unclear if the -- because there was a planned march today. It was so bad. The rain came down so hard and it was so hot that I think maybe the weather really did turn people away. Not a lot of folks showed up to that. And now there literally aren't many people out here at all.

LEMON: Hey, Ted, I've got to ask you this, because we had the video. We showed it here on CNN TONIGHT last night exclusively. Now other people are starting to get hold of the video.

But I left Ferguson today before I had a chance to really gauge the reaction. What are people saying, if anything, about the new release of this audio, this possible audio of the shooting?

ROWLANDS: Well, I think it depends on what side you are on, if you will, Don. And people that believe in the eyewitness accounts, they believe that this audio supports that there was a three-second delay there where there were two separate incidents, if you will, where there were shots fired, a delay, and then more shots fired. Many of the eyewitnesses say that.

On the other side of the coin, people that support Officer Wilson that his side of the story, which we've only gotten through a friend on that radio show, we didn't really have that verified, but they say that it still works, even though there are a couple differences. If you hear that side of the story, there's supposedly a single gunshot inside the vehicle. And you don't hear that on the recording.

Now, obviously, the recording could have started after that took place. And then there's no mention of a delay of two separate, if you will, shootings during the time when we were led to believe that Officer Wilson said that he was being approached.

So -- but that said, those people say that the recording also supports their side, if you will.

It's funny that no matter where you stand on this, any bit of new evidence seems in people's a minds to just bolster that side. So it really hasn't been definitive one way or another.

LEMON: To corroborate the side that you are on. All right. Thank you very much, Ted Rowlands. We appreciate that.

ROWLANDS: Right.

LEMON: We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: We have a tragic story out of Arizona to report to you. A 9- year-old girl accidentally shot and killed her instructor at an outdoor shooting range on Monday.

The girl was learning to shoot an Uzi when the recoil sent the gun over her head, and the instructor was shot. He died later at the University Medical Center in Las Vegas.

Cell-phone video released by authorities today shows the moments before the fatal shots were fired. CNN affiliate KLAS reported a website of Bullets and Burgers at the shooting range where the accident happened says children between the ages of 8 and 17 can shoot, if accompanied by a parent or a guardian.

We're going have much more on that next hour right here on CNN TONIGHT.