Return to Transcripts main page
ANDERSON COOPER 360 DEGREES
Major Sponsor Drops Adrian Peterson; Top General: U.S. Ground Troops Possible in Iraq; Joan Rivers Death Investigation; Manhunt for State Trooper Killer; Major Sponsor Drops Adrian Peterson
Aired September 16, 2014 - 20:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN ANCHOR: Good evening. Thanks for joining us.
There is a lot happening tonight. Breaking news. This is a face you need to know, a person you need to be aware of. The search now on for him.
Take a look. He's a survivalist, accused of ambushing Pennsylvania Troopers, leaving one wounded, another dead. We'll have the latest on a very tense manhunt that is going on for him right now.
Also tonight more breaking news. A big sponsor drop to the Vikings' Adrian Peterson and this allegation that he abused a second child surfaced. The question hangs over his team and the league.
Is he being allowed to play this weekend because the team need to win and winning is everything?
Plus President Obama declaring war on Ebola in Africa. As many as 3,000 U.S. troops, hundreds of millions of dollars, but one big fear that the virus is already spreading too fast, too far to contain.
We begin, though, tonight with a report you'll only see here on the death of Joan Rivers. During what should have been a routine procedure at a New York outpatient medical center. Tonight we have new information about what allegedly happened inside that clinic including who's in the room, what they were doing, allegedly without authorization as well as what someone was doing that never should be done in any operating room.
There'll be plenty to talk about in a moment after we play this report. Here's what our Susan Candiotti has uncovered so far.
SUSAN CANDIOTTI, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): A source tells CNN investigators are learning this. An unauthorized procedure, a biopsy on Rivers' vocal chords was begun on the comedienne while she was sedated. Staffers told authorities they found no signed consent form from Rivers. If so, ethicist doctor, Arthur Caplan, says that's a red flag.
ARTHUR CAPLAN, MEDICAL ETHICIST, NYU LANGONE MEDICAL CENTER: Knowing exactly what's going to happen to you is crucial to any care interaction. CANDIOTTI: The morning began like this. Our source says Rivers was
undergoing a scheduled endoscopy by the clinic's gastroenterologist, Dr. Lawrence Cohen, inserting a tiny camera down her throat looking for possible digestive issues, when staffers say Cohen saw something.
While Rivers was still under anesthesia, staffers told authorities Rivers' personal ears, nose and throat specialist examined Rivers' vocal chords and began a biopsy. And in addition to the fact the procedure was unauthorized, our source says the ENT doctor was not certified to operate there.
CAPLAN: Even though you are a licensed physician you still should have, if you will, the checks and balances to get you approval to practice in a particular place.
CANDIOTTI: And there's more, in a statement, a clinic flatly says a biopsy of the vocal chords, quote, has never been performed at the clinic. While technically true, it doesn't appear to be the whole story. The ENT doctor may not have completed the biopsy but our source says it was started.
Our sources says as the unauthorized biopsy got under way, Rivers' vocal chords began to swell, cutting off her oxygen, putting her into cardiac arrest.
(On camera): Doctor, if there were oxygen deprivation to the brain, what particular impact might that have if someone is elderly, in this case 81 years old?
DR. HOWARD NEARMAN, ANESTHESIOLOGIST-IN-CHIEF, UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS: The effect of having no oxygen on the brain is damage to the nerve cells, which can precipitate as coma, paralysis. But in the elderly you have less reserve, you have less of a window to correct it.
CANDIOTTI (voice-over): When Rivers' heart stops beating seconds count.
It's 9:40 a.m. the clinic calls 911. The call gets the highest code. Five minutes later, New York Fire Rescue arrives, CPR is under way, a defibrillator is attached. A breathing tube inserted. Fire and Rescue takes over CPR. 9:47 a Mt. Sinai ambulance team arrives and joins the effort. A minute later, a second fire rescue unit arrives. By 9:50 a.m. 10 emergency personnel are on the scene.
And one week later, Joan Rivers is dead.
As New York's medical examiner and the state's Health Department continue to investigate that clinic announcing a shake-up in a statement saying Dr. Cohen, "is not currently performing procedures, nor is he currently serving as medical director."
At this time, a source says neither Dr. Cohen nor the ENT is being accused of wrongdoing. Citing federal privacy laws the clinic declines comment on whether Rivers' personal doctor was there and performed a biopsy.
CANDIOTTI: And now, Anderson, this head-shaking news, while Rivers was under anesthesia, staffers tell investigators the ENT, Rivers' personal doctor, was taking a selfie, not the kind of thing you might expect from a doctor -- Anderson.
COOPER: Wait a minute. Taking a selfie with Joan Rivers?
CANDIOTTI: While she was in the room under anesthesia.
COOPER: So, wait a minute, this is bizarre. The personal doctor was taking a photo of himself with Joan Rivers unconscious in the background?
CANDIOTTI: In this case, we believe the doctor, a female, was in fact doing that with her on the background. That's what staffers have told investigators.
COOPER: Wow. Susan, appreciate the reporting. Thanks very much.
With me now is Arthur Caplan, who you saw in Susan's report. He's founding director of the Division of Bioethics in New York University Langone Medical Center. And in Washington, senior legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin.
First of all, taking a selfie during -- I mean, an operation like this? I have never heard of that.
CAPLAN: Yes. So you can take pictures of your patients, with your patients, but you need their permission. You shouldn't be doing it inside the clinical setting because even with consent you're going to try to please your doctor. I mean, how many people are going to say no, I don't think so, but you go ahead and operate on me. To do it without consent, without permission, absolute violation of privacy.
COOPER: What do you make of this idea of doing a procedure that has not been pre-authorized, that the patient hasn't said yes, OK, if you find something you go ahead and biopsy it?
CAPLAN: So, Anderson, this is really not uncommon situation where somebody says, I'm going to go in here and look around but if I see something, since I'm in and you're under anesthesia, maybe we'll just continue, and I'll biopsy, either take it out, do whatever we're going to do, you should have a consent that goes exactly in that manner. So you should expect -- sometimes when I investigate something, I'm going to find something. And then I'm going to do something.
You want to consent that all the way through it. It's a little odd if that didn't happen here, why that wouldn't happen here.
COOPER: That there's not an actual written form?
CAPLAN: Yes, to sort of say all the way through, look, I sign up, you have my permission, examine me, and if we find something, then don't do anything, wake me up and we'll talk about what to do, or do what you need to do. Biopsy a growth or whatever you find. That's fine, too.
COOPER: And Jeff, what do you make of this? I mean, how much trouble could those doctors, the clinic itself, be in?
JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Well, certainly all of this is -- good reason for the Rivers family to hire a malpractice lawyer. But I have to say I think it's important that we not try and convict these doctors based on what we've seen.
As Art said, you know, it is not uncommon that when one procedure is done the doctors decide to do something else and -- you know, while they are inside. That doesn't seem like an outrageous thing. And the precise wording of the consent form, I don't know what the custom is. You know, same thing with the other doctor in the room.
I mean, it is possible that this doctor, you know, shouldn't have been there. But I mean, this does appear to have been a real doctor who was doing something that was seemingly reasonable under the circumstances. So, you know, it seems like this was not handled in the best way, but whether, you know, Joan Rivers was killed by medical malpractice that seems like a long, long stretch from what's been proved so far.
COOPER: And Jeff, the selfie?
TOOBIN: The selfie is just a terrible thing. And certainly if this thing ever went to a courtroom you can be sure that the defense would not want that in front of -- in front of the jury. It's embarrassing, it's stupid, and it's unprofessional.
COOPER: I find it hard to believe. I mean, I know this comes from staffers who were there. But if this was her personal doctor I'm sure that doctor would had plenty of opportunity to get a selfie with Joan Rivers, I don't know why she would need to get one with Joan Rivers sedated.
TOOBIN: People behave weirdly around celebrities. I -- frankly, it doesn't seem out of the question to me. Whether it compromised her care, besides being unprofessional, that's a separate question.
COOPER: Art, the idea that this doctor wasn't cleared to perform this in that particular setting, doesn't mean this doctor is not able to perform this properly.
CAPLAN: Hundred percent right. And Jeff is right, you know, we don't know exactly what the credential and status and so on. But I will say this. You know, when you make this small deviations from protocol, and say, well, you come in here, it's true you're not supposed to be licensed to practice here, but you're a licensed physician, you know what you're doing, come in and help out. Well, we're going to do something additional that was not on the consent form.
When you get a death, and I'll let Jeff confirm this for me, all of that is used against you in a malpractice situation and it really starts to stack up. A bad outcome, you look back and say didn't do this, didn't do this, wrong guy, wrong place, unapproved, that's trouble.
COOPER: Jeff, obviously, there is investigations by authorities. You're saying also the possibility of a civil lawsuit by the family.
TOOBIN: Oh, I would think that's the biggest possibility of all the -- of all the possibilities that are out there. Of course, we don't know what Joan Rivers' condition was. You know, she was an 81-year-old woman. As we all know she'd had lots of plastic surgery. I don't know precisely what her health was in those circumstances.
I mean, unfortunately, you know, 81-year-old people, people at -- at any age sometimes go into cardiac arrest and die. And it's not necessarily a doctor's fault. But certainly there does seem to be the basis for further investigation.
COOPER: And Art, I mean, anybody at that age doing something in an outpatient procedure that's got to be extra complications, extra concerns.
CAPLAN: Absolutely, just by being 81, you know, we all looked at her and thought, hmm, maybe she's not that old. She's had a lot of plastic surgery, but when you're 81, one of the physicians earlier in the setup piece said, you have a problem, you don't have enough reserve. That's due to age. And the risk of the anesthesia and so much higher when you're an older person.
The other thing we've got going on here, Anderson, is, did the facility have the equipment or what they need to resuscitate her? We're seeing all these e-mails arrived, we're seeing all kind of personnel come in, who was on staff. Who was supposed to be there, I'm sure that's going to come up as a question, too. Why do we need all the outsiders? Why don't we have the defibrillator here and somebody to run it?
TOOBIN: You know, just one more thing that strikes me about this. You know, celebrity changes so much. The fact that she was a celebrity might have -- meant that they brought in different doctors. You know, when you start changing the rules for celebrities it often hurts the celebrities themselves and maybe that's what happened here.
COOPER: All right, Jeff Toobin, appreciate it. Art Caplan, great to have you here.
A quick reminder, make sure you set your DVR, you can watch us anytime you like.
Coming up next, the breaking news, accused of killing a state trooper, this man is, and wounding another. Police have found his car, shell casings, camouflage, makeup, but they have not yet found him.
We'll have the latest on the manhunt going on right now.
COOPER: Well, as we told you about the breaking news tonight, the manhunt is now underway for an alleged cop killer. This man, 31-year- old Eric Matthew Frein. Authorities in rural northeastern Pennsylvania calling him armed and very dangerous, and ideally suited to surviving on the run out in the wild. That means if you see him do not approach him. Get someplace safe and call authorities.
Jason Carroll is out where the manhunt is in full swing. He joins us tonight.
What are police saying, Jason?
JASON CARROLL, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, first of all, Anderson, roadblocks have been set up in the area. Police warning people to be very cautious and on the lookout for this man. This is a man who police say obviously very clearly had a grudge against law enforcement and took out his anger on Friday against those two state troopers.
Police say he killed Byron Dickson. A private ceremony, was held for him today. Also a flag-raising ceremony held for Dixon today. Also they say he badly injured Alex Douglass. We are told Douglass came out of surgery on Monday and is said to be doing much, much better.
This shooting happened not too far from where we are, but Frein actually lived about an hour away and when police got to his house they said that his father said that two firearms were missing from the house. An AK-47 and also a rifle.
And here's what's interesting, Anderson. In terms of what was found in the suspect's bedroom, a book titled "Sniper Training and Employment." A little earlier today, police held a press conference where they gave a little bit more insight into what the motive may have been.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
FRANK NOONAN, PENNSYLVANIA STATE POLICE COMMISSIONER: This fellow is extremely dangerous. We have no idea where he is in the community. He has been described as a survivalist. He has a lot of training in that particular area. He has made statements about wanting to kill law enforcement officers and also to commit massive acts of murder.
What his reasons are, we don't know. But he has very strong feelings about law enforcement and he seems to be very angry with a lot of things that go on in our society.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
CARROLL: Frein's father also telling police that his son was well- trained, grew up with guns. And in fact, at one point when he was in high school he was a member of the rifle club. And when asked about his son's shooting abilities he said when he shoots he never misses -- Anderson.
COOPER: And I understand they found this guy's car in a pond about two miles from the barracks. Was there anything inside?
CARROLL: Right, about two and a half miles from the barracks where shooting took place, that green Jeep -- Cherokee apparently belonged to his parents but he had been driving it for about two years. And inside there, forensics teams were able to find a number of things. His driver's license, a Social Security card, also spent casings, a camouflage paint and also military gear.
And we should also tell you that state police have confirmed that they are working with the FBI, Anderson. And one other point. They also had a message for this suspect. They said we will find you.
COOPER: And, Jason, do we know that area where the car was found? I mean, is it very residential? Are there woods? Do we know?
CARROLL: Very wooded area. And in fact if it was lighter here you can see from, you know, the area where we are, it's densely wooded and would be very easy for someone with survivalist skills like this man has been described in order to blend in, if you will, and hide in this area. That's why police out here are so deeply concerned about trying to find him before he hurts somebody else.
COOPER: Yes, and the shootings occurred on Friday.
Jason, appreciate that.
Let's dig deeper now, I want to bring in Kris Mohandie, he's a former LAPD psychologist, also our law enforcement analyst, Tom Fuentes, a former FBI deputy director.
So, Tom, the police saying they have no idea where he is. As Jason is saying, this is a wooded area. Where does a manhunt like this even begin? Because we all think -- the suspect would want to get as far away as possible. But in the past we've seen sometimes they actually stay very close.
TOM FUENTES, CNN LAW ENFORCEMENT ANALYST: That's right, Anderson, and you'll recall two years ago the Christopher Dorner case in Los Angeles, the LA police officer who was fired and then killed multiple people, family members of the police, and ambushed two Riverside police officers.
He abandoned his car in the mountainous wooded area in San Bernardino County. And they thought this guy has fled the area. He could be in Mexico within a day or two. And it turns out when he's located a week later he's within a few hundred yards of the police barracks in that particular -- you know, the San Bernardino County Sheriffs.
The big fear you have in a case like this is a person is going to need shelter, they're going to need food, water and transportation, if he plans on getting out of the area. And the best way for him to do that is to do a home invasion. So the public that have residential homes in the area, or cabins or shacks, they're vulnerable to that, of this guy coming in to their home, taking them hostage, possibly killing them, and taking their vehicles.
And the statement that he's just after law enforcement, you know, the other statement saw that he has general hatred sounds like for everybody. And that makes him as dangerous to the public as he is to the police.
COOPER: Also, Kris, I imagine what one says they want to do, killing law enforcement and what one actually does when cornered are two very different things. And the fact that this person is talking about, in general, committing mass murder, that's got to become the worst possible scenario.
KRIS MOHANDIE, FORMER LAPD PSYCHOLOGIST: That's right. I mean, this is a man who does not necessarily have one target in mind but the world at large can be that which he inflicts his vendetta against. He's made it clear. He's made these kinds of statements. And I think you have to take those seriously. So exactly what Tom was saying is anybody that comes into contact with him should stay clear of him. Notify the authorities. And anybody in that region should be very concerned and very vigilant.
COOPER: Because I think back -- I mean, Tom mentioned the Chris Dorner situation. He had a grudge against the LAPD but he also ended up shooting police officers from Riverside.
MOHANDIE: That's right. It ended up getting generalized to other law enforcement in general. And we don't know the specifics of if there is a certain law enforcement agency, this particular guy has a vendetta against. It doesn't sound like it. It sounds like he has a thirst for blood of any sorts. And a lot of anger and animosity that he's seeking to inflict upon the world and need to prove himself is likely here.
And, you know, the fact that he's departed to the woods in that area apparently means that anybody in that vicinity needs to be very extremely cautious.
COOPER: You know, Tom, I mean, just from a law enforcement perspective, having somebody who has experience in the woods, searching the wooded area is a whole different thing than what police normally do searching a residential area, or operating in a residential environment. I mean, do they bring in specialists in the woods? How does that work?
FUENTES: Well, normally for that kind of a search they would be trying to use helicopters with forward-looking infrared that would look down and be heat-seeking for, you know, an animal or a person moving around. Unfortunately, with those types of equipment they often find deer and bear and, you know, other wild animals running around in the woods.
And you know, they're often used, if a lost child is being searched for or something like that, so there is a lot of technical equipment that can be in. The police are going to have to go door-to-door. And they're going to have to keep one other thing in mind. The FBI had a case in 2010 involving the Hutaree militia in Michigan where their intent was to kill one police officer and ambush hundreds who attended the police funeral parade later. And that's going to happen soon for this diseased officer.
COOPER: Yes. Tom Fuentes, appreciate you being on. Kris Mohandie as well. Thank you so much.
MOHANDIE: Thank you.
COOPER: As always you can find out more on this story and others on CNN.com where obviously we'll be following this throughout the evening.
Coming up next, the Vikings' Adrian Peterson, breaking news on a major sponsor, cutting ties with him, and the larger question of celebrity treatments, star treatments, who use allegations against him. He only had one game-expense now even Minnesota's governor is weighing in. Details ahead.
COOPER: Breaking news tonight, Minnesota Vikings running back Adrian Peterson has lost one of his big endorsement deals. Castrol, the motor oil company, just announced they are dropping him in the wake of his felony child abuse charge. Yesterday the hotel chain Radisson dropped its sponsorship of the Vikings over the indictment.
And today, rumblings from a huge NFL sponsor, Anheuser-Busch, which said in a statement, "We're disappointed and increasingly concerned. We are not yet satisfied with the league's handling of behaviors that so clearly go against our own company culture and moral code."
The governor of Minnesota is now calling for Peterson's suspension. As you know, the Vikings reinstated him after suspending him for one game, a game the Vikings lost 30-7 without their star player. He is expected to play this Sunday in the Vikings' next game.
We'll have more on that in a moment. But first, a second allegation of child abuse by Peterson involving a different child is raising new questions.
Ed Lavandera has that.
ED LAVANDERA, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): A new string of text messages obtained by Houston TV station KHOU details another alleged incident of abuse involving Adrian Peterson, this time with a different son.
The alleged incident happened last summer. The station reports Peterson allegedly sent a picture of one of his boys to the child's mother. The little boy had a bandage on his head. According to the KHOU report, the mother responded, "What happened to his head?" Peterson responds, "hit his head on the car seat." "How did this happen? He got a whooping in the car?" "Yes."
The mother writes, "Why?" Peterson, "I felt so bad but he did it his self." "What did you hit him with," the mom writes. "Be still and take your whooping, he would have saved the scar, he is all right."
(On camera): Adrian Peterson's attorney says the allegations that there is a second child abuse investigation is simply not true. The attorney says that it was an accusation that was unsubstantiated and shopped around to authorities in two different states over a year ago and that nothing came of it. The attorney also says there was an adult witness who insisted Peterson did nothing wrong.
(Voice-over): In the final text messages with that unidentified mother last year, she writes, "I'm real sensitive about my baby and him being hit," to which Peterson allegedly responds, "You trip him, if you want him, come get him. I'm not about to be getting questioned down like you CPS."
NICK WRIGHT, SPORTSRADIO 610: I was incredibly sad and I was, to be honest, somewhat horrified.
LAVANDERA: SportsRadio talk show host Nick Wright is familiar with the full details of the police report from the other incident involving Peterson's 4-year-old son that led to the football star's indictment last week. He says in the report it's clear Peterson believes in tough discipline, although Texas investigators say this incident crossed the line into child abuse.
WRIGHT: This did not have the feeling of, you know, dad comes home from work, looking for someone to hit. It was -- it appeared to me that this was -- this is how dad was raised if not that dad was raised more harshly and that this is how he believes you raise young men, you know, in America.
LAVANDERA (voice-over): To many, that is a gross justification. Minnesota's governor called Peterson an embarrassment to the Viking's Football Organization and called for the star runningback to be suspended until the legal process is complete. Ed Lavandera, CNN, Dallas.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST: And even casual football watchers likely heard of Adrian Peterson, but unless you're a Vikings fan you probably never heard of AJ Jefferson, Aaron Henderson, Chris Cook, Caleb King, each of those player suspended by the Vikings in recent years, soon after being arrested but before a court ruling of guilt or innocence.
It seems a different set of rules apply in Peterson's case. Unlike most of those players Peterson has not been cut nor is no longer suspended and will play this Sunday. The Vikings defended the decision saying it is right for him to go through the process legally.
A.J. Jefferson, Aaron Henderson, Chris Cook, Caleb King would have liked to have had that right. So there are two different sets of rules, one for stars, and one for everyone stars?
Joining us, Rachel Nichols, host of CNN's "UNGUARDED," also CNN legal analyst and former federal prosecutor, Sunny Hostin and Roger Cossack, legal analyst for ESPN and a law professor at Pepperdine University.
Rachel, the Vikings moved quickly to distance themselves from these other players who is on trouble with the law. Not Peterson, their star player, is there a double standard?
RACHEL NICHOLS, CNN HOST, "UNGUARDED": I don't think there is any question there is a double standard. Chris Cook was being investigated on felony domestic abuse charges. He didn't play for ten games during that stretch. Adrian Peterson missed one game and he is supposed to be back on the field this weekend.
And as for the details of these cases emerge, the accusations in the second case that Ed went over with the text messages, there is a lot of people in the state of Minnesota who are getting increasingly upset.
We talked about these cases where possibly disciplining your child crosses over to child abuse. And the standard is whether it violates the standards of the community.
Well, you're dealing with two different communities here, which is what we are seeing play out right now. You have the Texas community where the allegations are that the incident occurred and then you have the Minnesota community, which maybe has a different standard.
And they read a statement that Adrian Peterson himself released saying, I did all of these things, but my intent is different than you think. We're hearing from a lot of people from the state of Minnesota and also the national sponsors you guys mentioned, saying, your intent doesn't really matter. We see these wounds on this child and that is not OK.
COOPER: Sunny, does the intent matter?
SUNNY HOSTIN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: No, it doesn't matter, and I think anyone that looks at these photographs, and also anyone that is mindful of his response, which is I love my children. I'm not a child abuser really leads you to believe that he doesn't understand or he doesn't understand the import of his actions.
This is clear child abuse. It is not discipline. And I think that unfortunately, there is this celebrity justice taking place. And I also think, Anderson, that what is so odd to me about this entire conversation is people are saying well, he made a mistake. But this is child abuse. It is not -- a mistake.
COOPER: There are a lot of people who disagree with that, what Sunny said. I got a lot of tweets last night saying look this is the way I was raised. Just like Peterson said this is the way I was raised, this is what my parents did to me. Spare the rod, spoil the child.
ROGER COSSACK, ESPN LEGAL ANALYST: Anderson, we're talking about a beating with a switch to a 4-year-old child. Not a teenager, and that would be unacceptable, too. We're talking about a beating of a 4- year-old child this is not disciplining your child, this is child abuse.
And there is no other way about it and is he being treated differently by the Vikings, you bet he is. They lost that game last week and suddenly they reinstate him? They need him to win. You know, they have to make peace with what they have done.
COOPER: It's interesting, Rachel, because we've reported also on other players, who have actually been convicted and are being still allowed to play while they appeal that conviction.
NICHOLS: Yes, and it is interesting. We talked a lot about Greg Hardy of the Carolina Panthers, who was convicted for assaulting his girlfriend. The Panthers put him out there week one of the season. There was so much of an outcry in between weekend one and two.
That the morning of the game they did decide to deactivate him. That is after saying all week he was going to play. First of all it tells you the public's voice matters. People need to keep talking about it because it is having an effect.
And then it leads to whether the sponsor's voice matters. And I do think that dollar sign speaks louder than words when you have Anheuser-Busch and Visa making a statement saying they don't think the NFL has done enough.
Radisson Hotels is taking back their sponsorship. We'll have to see if Adrian Peterson actually gets onto the field on Sunday. Right now, the Vikings are saying he will play, but we have a lot of people weighing in saying that he should not. And as the noise gets louder, we'll see if it has an effect.
COOPER: So Roger, are you saying that you don't believe he should play until a court determines what exactly happened? He should not be playing?
COSSACK: I absolutely believe that. I believe the due process is two different things here. What you're talking about is due process in the criminal courts and I obviously believe in due process in the criminal courts. He should have a trial and fair trial and the jury should decide whether they think it is reasonable for a man to do what he did to a 4-year-old child.
I think obviously a jury should make that decision. But in terms of whether or not he plays for the Minnesota Vikings that can be decided right now. He has admitted what he has done. He didn't deny it. I'm not sure he even gets it and it seems to me that this man has no place on the field.
COOPER: And Sunny, you are saying you agree with it?
HOSTIN: Well, absolutely, there are parallel investigations, right. The NFL does their investigation, a fair investigation and the court system makes the decision, as well. Why don't they just make the decision now?
COOPER: Sunny, Rachel, thanks very much. Roger Cossack, great to have you on the show. Thank you.
Just ahead, committing U.S. troops to fight Ebola in Africa. What it's going to mean on the ground if the epidemic grows faster and doctors alone trying to contain it. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COOPER: Today, President Obama said the United States is ready to take the lead in the fight against another global threat, Ebola. The epidemic in West Africa has already killed at least 2400 people and has infected thousands more.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: It is spiralling out of control. It is getting worse. It's spreading faster and exponentially. This is an epidemic that is not just a threat to regional security. It's a potential threat to global security if these countries break down, if their economies break down. If people panic.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: Speaking from the Centers for Disease Control in Atlanta, President Obama outlined today a plan that includes sending as many as 3,000 U.S. troops to Liberia. Before leaving Washington, President Obama met with Dr. Kent Brantly and his wife.
Dr. Brantly, as you may remember, contracted Ebola while working as a missionary in Liberia's capital. He testified today to congressional hearing. For months, global health officials have been sounding the alarm basically begging for help while the outbreak has grown exponentially.
Our chief medical correspondent, Dr. Sanjay Gupta joins me now. So the plan the president announced today. What are the details of it exactly?
DR. SANJAY GUPTA, CNN CHIEF MEDICAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, you mentioned these 3,000 troops, that is a big number. I tell you, Anderson, we have been covering public health stories for a long time. This is the largest public response I've heard of just outside the United States.
So just those numbers alone. They want to build 1700 hospital beds eventually. And they also train health care workers on the ground over there, 500 new healthcare workers a week.
Obviously this is very important because the response will end, and the question is what is going to happen when those troops start to leave? They also want to do something I think is very interesting, which is provide about 400,000 home protection kits.
You and I have talked about it, Anderson, despite everything that is going on there, there is still a lot of distrust doctors and hospitals. People will stay at home. This is more of an acknowledgment of that. We'll stay at home, and provide these home protection kits.
So if somebody is sick in the home they are not subsequently spreading it to everyone else. The analogy I keep hearing, Anderson, is that do all of this -- have all of this efforts, but you can't leave even one burning ember behind because eventually that could be a source of an outbreak. So it has to be a very, very robust effort in many different places.
COOPER: But to the point, this is only focused on Liberia. It doesn't address the crisis in Guinea or in Sierra Leone as my understanding.
GUPTA: I was surprised by that and I'm not entirely sure. That is obviously a place where there's been a lot of focus more recently. I was in Guinea back in April. It sort of started in Guinea and then spread to these other places.
So it is a little bit hard to understand how just focusing all these attention in Liberia is going to affect these other countries in that region. Maybe they will have these health care workers then spread out from that area.
Maybe this is going to serve more as a staging area, but you know, we've seen in other countries around the world even in certain cities within Haiti, for example.
If there was not a more broader effort it is hard to coordinate care in all of these different places. So I don't know how that's going to work. I've asked that same question.
And I will point out some of these plans that we've heard today from the president, they have sort of been in planning for some time. This didn't happened a couple of days ago. So this has been given some thought.
USAID is going to be on board. Maybe they will take the fall and go from there. You will also get a vote from the U.N. Security Council tomorrow on whether the U.N. should step in and have some efforts in other parts of West Africa.
So why the United States is focusing on Liberia alone right now, I don't know. It could be the hope that other people will pick up the slack.
COOPER: We'll see if other countries join in on this. Again, it seems like the U.S. leading the way on this effort. Sanjay, appreciate it.
Just ahead, more breaking news, less than a week after President Obama ruled out troops on the ground in the fight against ISIS. The U.S. troops top general says he is not closing that door. Details ahead.
COOPER: Well, there is more breaking news tonight, a top U.S. general says the U.S. ground troops may be used to fight ISIS, in his speech, President Obama said that the U.S. offensive against ISIS would not involve combat troops.
Today, though, in a Senate hearing on ISIS, General Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joints Chiefs of Staff seemed to open the door for just that, listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GENERAL MARTIN DEMPSEY, JOINT CHIEFS CHAIRMAN: My view at this point is that this coalition is the appropriate way forward. I believe that will prove true. But if it fails to be true, and if there are threats to the United States then, I, of course, would go back to the president and make a recommendation that may include the use of U.S. military ground forces.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: Well, Pentagon correspondent, Barbara Starr, joins me now. So he said if the air campaign against ISIS fails then ground troops could be something he would recommend to the president on a case by case basis. Administration officials basically quickly try to kind of walk that back.
BARBARA STARR, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: They did, Anderson. Good evening. General Dempsey talked about two cases in which he might recommend ground troops. One would be if he needed those troops to call in airstrikes to locate targets from the ground and call airstrikes in on them or to advise the Iraqi air forces, and what they call close combat.
Close combat meaning you're right up there at the front line. So is this different than what the president has been talking about? Are these troops in combat? Well, they may not be in direct offensive combat. You know, if you're out there and bullets are coming your way you are in combat.
So -- there is a semantics theme going on here. There is a bit of wordsmithing. But Dempsey definitely opening the door and in fact, later today, after the hearing, his office issued a statement again clarifying what the general meant to say that he was not talking about putting troops right into combat.
But he was talking about these cases in which U.S. troops may help on the ground in a combat situation.
COOPER: So the House votes tomorrow and expected to pass giving the president authority to arm and train moderate Syrian rebels. Do we even know how -- what that operation would look like, how quickly could begin and how they are going to identify and vet these people?
STARR: All of the problems with all of this. And the training program, about 5,000 moderate Syrian rebels per year is according to the administration absolutely crucial to dealing with ISIS on the Syrian side of the border not in Iraq, of course.
The problem is how do you identify them? How do you train them? Where do you train them? No country has exactly stepped up to welcome the 5,000 troops to their country to be trained.
And perhaps most interesting, Senator McCain pointed out today his problem with the whole effort if you train and equip these moderate Syrian rebels what is to say they're going to fight ISIS? They may just go back to Syria and fight the Assad regime. No guarantees about any of this.
COOPER: All right, Barbara, thanks for the update.
Vowing to destroy an enemy like ISIS that's one thing making good on the promise something of another order. It took years for U.S. intelligence agencies to gather information to target key al Qaeda operatives.
Some of that information came from a radical Islamist turned double agent, a former Danish boxer, Morton Storm. He shares the secrets in his ne memoir, "Agent Storm, My Life Inside Al Qaeda and the CIA," which he co-wrote with CNN terrorism analyst, Paul Cruickshank.
Tonight, at 9:00 Eastern Time, just 9 minutes from now. The CNN special report, "Double Agent Inside The Al Qaeda for The CIA," tells his story. Paul Cruickshank joins me now.
I mean, it is really an unbelievably fascinating story. He joined up as an Islamist and then became a double agent. Why did he choose to do that?
PAUL CRUICKSHANK, CNN TERRORISM ANALYST: He became radicalized after converting and then he went deep into al Qaeda's world. He got to know many of the people who became top al Qaeda leaders in Yemen. People like Anwar Al-Awlaki was a very friend of his.
So when he had all of these contacts. He was trusted by them and was perhaps the most important spy that the CIA has had inside al Qaeda since 9/11.
COOPER: Is it clear -- people become double agents for many reasons, some financial, some ideological. Do we know what --
CRUICKSHANK: He was fed up with all the civilian casualties from al Qaeda and did a lot of soul-searching and he decided that the only thing he could do was to work with the CIA. He knew just how dangerous these people were, because he rubbed shoulders with them for years and years.
COOPER: How did he make contact then? I mean, if he is deep in bed with these terrorists, how did he make contact with CIA?
CRUICKSHANK: Well, he came back to Denmark and Danish intelligence actually tried to reach out to him. He rebuffed them time and time again. But eventually when he was ready, he called them up. He arranged a meeting at a hotel in Denmark.
And to prove that he switched sides, he ordered bacon and beer. They were very, very excited that the guy that they've been monitoring, this guy who had all these contacts in al Qaeda. They were very excited he would become a key resource.
COOPER: So ordering beer and bacon was a sign to them that he was no longer following the dietary laws. In terms of what he actually was able to accomplish for western intelligence, Anwar Awlaki was ultimately killed. Did he have something to do with that?
CRUICKSHANK: He was crucial in the Awlaki operation. There are all sorts of admissions he was involved with, one involving a Croatian woman who was sent out to marry Awlaki with a tracking device in her suitcase.
In the documentary tonight, you'll see how that mission ends. But he was absolutely crucial in the end, he had this courier that was going between him and the CIA were able to monitor those meetings, trace this back to Awlaki.
And on September 30, 2011, you had a drone strike, which took Awlaki off the battlefield.
COOPER: It is an incredible story, an amazing tale. What happened to him? I understand he is in hiding.
CRUICKSHANK: He is in hiding. ISIS threatened his life last year, they had a picture on a wall of him. He doesn't receive protection from western intelligence, he has to have his wits about him every single day, Anderson.
COOPER: Why doesn't he receive protection?
CRUICKSHANK: Because he told his story and wrote a book with us. He felt that was the best thing he could do. He wanted the world to know what he really was. That he was not part of al Qaeda. But really secretly working for western intelligence with CIA.
COOPER: And because of that, that was something obviously western intelligence, they don't want people that they are protecting writing a story like this. So they said we can't protect you.
CRUICKSHANK: Yes, that was the deal. You stay silent, we protect you, you go public. You're on your own.
COOPER: That is fascinating, and congratulations on the book of course. Check out CNN special report, "Double Agent: Inside Al Qaeda for the CIA" 9:00 Eastern, right here on CNN.
Wildfires burn, thousands in Northern California, threatening hundreds of homes. Details ahead.
COOPER: A lot more happening tonight. Susan Hendricks has AC360 Bulletin -- Susan.
SUSAN HENDRICKS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Anderson, a delay in the case of the shooting death of unarmed teenager, Michael Brown, by Police Officer Darren Wilson in Ferguson, Missouri. A St. Louis County judge has extended that deadline for a grand jury to decide whether Wilson should be charged. That new deadline is January 7th.
Wildfire, forcing thousands of people from their homes and burned at least 9,000 acres in Northern California. The biggest fire is in El Dorado National Forest, east of Sacramento and is only about 5 percent contained.
Well, it looks like NASA has awarded contracts to the Boeing and Space X to take astronauts to and from the International Space Station. Since the shuttle program ended, astronauts have been going on Russian spacecraft. The space crafts from both companies will undergo safety testing before they're certified for flight.
And a 360 follow now on a story we covered last summer, a doctor in the Detroit area has pleaded guilty to giving patients unnecessary chemotherapy to defraud Medicare and private insurance companies. The doctor faces up to 175 years in prison when he is sentenced in February. We, of course, are going to be following that -- Anderson.
COOPER: Unbelievable, all right, Susan, thank you very much. We'll see you again at 11 p.m. Eastern, another edition of 360. "DOUBLE AGENT: INSIDE AL QAEDA FOR THE CIA" starts now.