Return to Transcripts main page


Torture Report; Jorge Ramos's Tough Interview with Barack Obama; Northeast and California Pounded by Torrential Rain; Terrible Crime in Small American Town

Aired December 10, 2014 - 20:00   ET


ANDERSON COOPER, CNN ANCHOR: Good evening, thanks for joining us.

We begin tonight with breaking news and a report detailing brutal interrogation tactics used by the United States after 9/11 torture. That detail of that report continued to reverberate throughout the country and the world describing methods of torture in more agonizing and more widespread than officials led on at the time.

And tonight, the word from the justice department is pretty much nothing is going to be done about it.

CNN justice correspondent Pamela Brown joins me for the latest.

So Pam, what are you learning from the justice department?

PAMELA BROWN, CNN JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Well, as you know, Anderson, U.N. officials have calling for prosecutions of U.S. officials involved in this and justice department sources I have been speaking with are saying that the department doesn't plan to initiate any new criminal investigations. In fact, U.S. law enforcement sources say if another country files an arrest for U.S. official, the justice department would not enforce it.

In a statement released today, the department was saying as we have in the past in the event of action by a foreign court or prosecuting authority against the U.S. government officials, the U.S. through the department of justice and state would raise appropriate jurisdictional and other legal defenses to prevent unwarranted prosecution of U.S. officials.

So making it pretty clear there, Anderson, they don't plan to pursue anything.

COOPER: So what's their justification for not prosecuting? What are they saying?

BROWN: Right, because we know torture by U.S. officials is illegal and justice department sources I have been speaking with, Anderson, are saying that the shared sentiment in the department is what happened is morally wrong and if something happened today, there could be criminal charges brought but because of course the changes President Obama made. However, because of the legal memos issued by the justice department

during the Bush administration authorizing U.S. officials to uses techniques, the U.S. attorney has his hands tied legally according to an official I spoke with.

Remember, the justice department opened up a criminal inquiry years ago on this and nothing came of that. They had prosecutors looking at legal options. So I think we forget that sometimes they already have looked at this.

COOPER: All right, Pam Brown. Thanks.

BROWN: Thank you.

COOPER: Well, former vice president Dick Cheney isn't mincing words expressing his opinion about the report on CIA interrogation techniques. Just a short time ago on FOX News, Cheney said, quote, "the report is full of crap," end quote. He said it is a deeply flawed, terrible piece of work, even while admitting he hadn't read it but only seen parts, seen summaries, the executive summary. He also said he has no regrets about the tactics used in interrogations after 9/11 and he'd do it again in a minute.

The report concludes the CIA misled President Bush about the extent of what it was doing in interrogation, something Cheney also denies. As you may remember time and again over the years, former President Bush and Cheney, the heads of the CIA, all denied the United States was torturing people and said that it enhanced interrogation techniques if they call them were effective but the report said it's not true. Take a look.


GEORGE W. BUSH, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I told our people, get information without torture and was assured by our justice department that we were not torturing.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We don't torture people.

BUSH: Whatever we have done is legal.

MICHAEL HAYDEN, FORMER CIA DIRECTOR: The use of these techniques against these terrorists made us safer.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We don't torture people.

BUSH: We've acted on information they've given us to prevent attacks.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We don't torture. Waterboarding, we do not -- I don't talk about techniques and we do not torture people.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE REPORTER: Do you think any of those tactics that we used against Khalid Sheik Mohammed and others went too far?


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Let me say that again to you. We don't torture people.


COOPER: Joining me no, two former CIA officers on the phone with satellite dish, Gary Berntsen, author of "Jaw Breaker, the attack of bin Laden and Al-Qaeda." Also with us is Glenn Carle, author of "the Interrogator, an education."

Glenn, let me start with you. You worked at a black site. I know you can't go into details anymore than that. But what do you say to those who say look, the terrorists want to do America harm. They don't play any rule book so why should America take anything off the table?

GLENN CARLE, AUTHOR, THE INTERROGATOR, AN EDUCATION: Yes, well, you don't define yourself by the practices and objectives of the enemy. The enemy is appalling and I dedicated my life as did Gary Berntsen and all of our colleagues at the CIA to stopping these people. They're terrible. There's no debate about that.

The issue is, who are we and what do we need to be? And torture doesn't work. It's illegal according to all of our laws. Multiple, I could cite and fill up your entire program with them. It's clear what happens. And all of the statements that you just played are disingenuous. You don't talk to the Wolf about what's going wrong in the chicken coop. I mean, that's quite obvious. It is simply -- it is unnecessary, it doesn't work. We can protect ourselves using methods that do affirm our values. And we have done so.

COOPER: Gary Berntsen, do you believe torture works?

GARY BERNTSEN, FORMER CIA OFFICER (via phone): There is two questions here. First off, number one is does force and coercion work? And I believe it does work. And I've seen foreign intelligence services around the world coerce people and break down spy networks that we've created. I've seen the foreign leaders and services support us, used coercion. Should we be using it? That's a separate issue. But I do not deny the fact that I do believe it work does. It doesn't work on everybody. It doesn't work at every case.

COOPER: Gary, in this report, as you know though, they go through multiple cases that the CIA has said or examples where it actually provided actionable intelligence. And according to this report which, obviously, conserve a lot of Republicans and said it deeply partisan, they discount basically every single one of those cases saying, the information was gotten prior to the suspect being tortured. And in many cases, that torture ended up getting misleading information.

BERNTSEN: This is sort of, let me say this, and this a narrow window and these are a number of cases that the agency had a program for a short period of time. And I'm not disputing and let me just say this.

I don't know how good the report is. Did they interview the people that were involved in this? I do not believe they did. Did they interview the chiefs of station? I don't believe they did. This is a partisan report. Look. When I read this thing, Anderson, every page, paragraph and

sentence is an assault on the agency. This is the biggest hit job on the agency since Phillip A.G. wrote inside the company. Did they make mistakes? Yes. But they made the scene -- I mean, this is just the most -- as I read the document, I'm horrified.

And the United States, the CIA make some mistakes? Yes, I agree they made some mistakes. But the reality is that interrogation in the course of history, it does work, A. B, the separate question, should we be doing it? And in my particular belief is we the United States should only employ enhanced techniques if we believe we have an imminent possibility for catastrophic attack on the United States, we're talking about a bio-weapon, chemical weapons, nuclear weapon. We shouldn't have been using it and in these cases possibly.

COOPER: That's the example, Glenn, that's often used. That there is an imminent attack. Again, in this report, it seems to indicate that there's no real examples of this thwarting an imminent attack and actually dozens, I think some 26 people, were actually innocent. There were mistaken identities. These techniques were used on those people who were clearly deemed later on to be not guilty of anything, so I want to be able to respond to Gary.

CARLE: Well, I think Gary and I agree on one thing that, you know, where does -- you know, the saying, where does a fish rot? It rots from the head first. And the CIA is, as always in this sense, taking the fall because we're the executive actor in the executive branch following the instruction and the guidance written by the political hack on hue that are coming from administration. So there, Gary and I, agree.

There were 20 cases which I knew about and colleagues knew about in the agency at the time that were touted as triumphs on the war in terror which resulted from enhanced interrogation. All 20 were known and I've been shown by the documents, 6,000 pagers where is hundreds of millions of words worth of real time reporting and debate by colleagues of Gary's and mine at the time to be basically made of whole (INAUDIBLE) and not having either been true plots or dependent upon the information.

(CROSSTALK) COOPER: So Glen, when Gary says, well, look, this is a hit piece, political hit piece partisan, they didn't interview CIA personnel. They didn't interview directors of the CIA. You're saying what they did do is comb through thousands, tens of thousands of pages, hundreds of thousands of pages of realtime actionable reports from CIA officers in the field.

CARLE: Absolutely. When I was working, all of these issues were -- all of these cases were playing out in a realtime and they were heatedly debated. It was strongly felt by many in the agency that the information obtained under duress from enhanced interrogation from torture was spurious, couldn't be relied on and had any recall. And in fact, all of those reports were formerly recalled. That's a big deal in the intelligence community. That means you want to expunge it from the record as unreliable. And that's what the record shows to have been the case.

COOPER: Gary, it's interesting, though, because all along, there was testimony from CIA officials, public testimonies saying, look. The folks doing these techniques whether you call them torture or enhanced interrogation techniques, you know, they are carefully vetted, they are experts. This is done the most humane way possible. This is done in a very controlled environment, the way it sounds in reading this Senate report, it certainly doesn't sound like that. I mean, you had psychologists who had no training whatsoever in this, who had no communication -- language skills, who had no real intelligence backgrounds being paid tens of millions of dollars to design programs --

CARLE: $81 million.

COOPER: $81 million for contractors were filling, were, you know, fulfilling, that also didn't have any experience.

BERNTSEN: Well, let me just step in for a second and just say this. First off, there's the insinuation that it was inappropriate because you're seeing contractors. Well, the agency uses contractors that are --

COOPER: No, no. I'm just saying inexperienced people.

BERNTSEN: Just hold on. The other thing you are saying is that well, they should have had some sort of psychologist there. Actually, the people they had were sere instructors. And if I had to choose between a professor from the university or sere, I'd choosing a sere.

COOPER: Gary, what I am saying is they actually did have psychologists. They had two psychologists who design the program who basically reverse the sere thing and your CIA officers in the field saying these guys don't know what they're doing.

BERNTSEN: No. Also, Anderson, there were people that did interrogations that had spent a career in the U.S. military. Twenty years as interrogators. And I don't think that's included in the report. And they had native language skills. That's not included in the report. I know that for a fact.

COOPER: Glen, when you were working at this black side, and I know, obviously, you say what you can say, you actually raised objections the things you were seeing. What were you told?

CARLE: Well, when I was brought into this,, it was quite typical, I think, if the process and the dynamic they are describing. You know, I'm a career intelligence officer. Gary, in one week or I am one have more experienced relevant to the issues that we are assigned to handle than Jepson and Mitchell, the two Charlottes since who were paid $81 million who had never been in the field, never done intelligence work, they didn't know anything about interrogation and then fobbed off the CIA. Somehow, the (INAUDIBLE) believed that sere torture tactics were actually a waste of extract information rather than the break somebody which is completely the opposite of what they were intended to do. But I was told you'll do whatever it takes to get him to talk. Do you

understand? And I understood and I had no training in interrogation nor did most others. Now, I figured it out. I think I did a good job. But that's how it played out. And most people where the agency is a host (ph) hued to the lines by these frauds. And we were misled to use what were North Korean torture tactics as supposedly interrogation tactics. That was just insane and others felt the same way at the time.

COOPER: Glenn Carle, I appreciate you being on. Gary Berntsen, as well. I'm glad that we got both perspectives on this.

Quick reminder, make sure you set your DVR. You can watch 360 whenever you like.

Coming up, part two of hire guns and started yearlong investigations, the wildly different and also the lax regulations that states that differ state to state that put guns into the hands of security guards sometimes, sometimes with deadly consequences.


COOPER: Now part two of our report on armed security guards. The results of the yearlong investigations as people hired to protect who in some cases end up killing. Private arm security guards, they are everywhere -- in shopping malls, exporting events, patrolling neighborhood just like the police and most of them do a very important job and risk their lives at times.

But unlike the police, their training and government oversight is spotty at best depending where they work. In our exclusive investigation with the center for investigative reporting, we look what happens when poor oversight does lead to tragedy.

Here's senior investigative correspondent Drew Griffin with part two of Hired Guns.


DREW GRIFFIN, CNN INVESTIGATIVE CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): This is former security guard, Joshua Kosashanko (ph), taking a smoking break outside of the private security company where he works in suburban Phoenix. He is not carrying a gun now, but five-and-a-half years ago, he was armed and licensed to carry by Arizona's department of public safety. That turned out to be a dangerous breakdown in the system.

An investigation by CNN and the center for investigative reporting found licensing requirements so varied. And in some states, so lax, it can be harder to become a manicurist than an armed security guard.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I woke up and I had tubes running down my throat.

GRIFFIN: Daniel Tarango (ph) today is in a wheelchair paralyzed after being shot through his car window over stolen food. The person that shot and nearly killed him was a then 19-year-old security guard Joshua Kosashanko (ph) who should never have been allowed to carry a gun.

Hey, Joshua, Drew Griffin with CNN. How are you? We've been trying to get in touch with you. We're doing a story on security guards. How do you become an armed security guard? How is that possible?

JOSHUA KOSASHANKO (PH), SECURITY GUARD: I'd rather not comment, sir.

GRIFFIN: Do you think you should be placed in a position where I think you're training security guards now?

KOSASHANKO (PH): No comment.

GRIFFIN: It was shortly before 2:00 in the morning on June 3rd, 2009 at this convenience store in Tucson. Tarango (ph) was 18 years old. Kosashanko was hired as a security guard -- shoplifters.

DANIEL TARANGO (PH), SHOT BY SECURITY GUARD: : We were going to get food, and leave, and it was not going to that big of the deal.

GRIFFIN: Tarango (ph) says he waited outside in his car as his friends went to steal food. And in the next moments, Kasashanko (ph) and a second security guard gave chase, a scuffle broke out. His friends ran. Tarango through the car in reverse. Kasashanko (ph) opened fire.

TARANGO (PH): When I had identified, I looked back and I just seen the glass shatter and felt like a slight push, somebody had pushed me over.

GRIFFIN: Tarango admits he should have never been there. It turns out Kosashanko should not have been working as an armed guard there either. He had a criminal record as a juvenile. In fact, he had several run-ins with the juvenile system. When he was 13, he pled guilty to two counts of aggravated assault. He was deemed a felon at a juvenile delinquent. The court placed him on probation and made him a prohibited possessor, meaning, he lost his right to bear arms, at least until he turned 30.

But even with all that information, we discovered the Arizona department of public safety never checked his record. Captain Steve Entaman oversees licensing for armed guards.

This guy's juvenile records apparently weren't checked. So where was the breakdown?

CAPT. STEVE ENTAMAN, OVERSEES LICENSING FOR ARMED GUARDS: Because Arizona does not require juvenile records to be reported, on this particular instance, it was in the adjudicated record as opposed to conviction. It did not show that he had any kind of record whatsoever.

GRIFFIN: But certainly, the check could have gone beyond that. You could have looked beyond the juvenile records.

ENTAMAN: We could look at his juvenile records had he disclosed that he had that in his background. GRIFFIN: So as long as he lies on his application, he basically hides

his entire juvenile record?

ENTAMAN: In this particular case, yes.

GRIFFIN: The state didn't need the record. Since Kasashanko (ph) a prohibited possessor, banned from carrying a gun, that information would have shown up in a federal law enforcement database, but Arizona didn't check it.

The state of Arizona may be a poster child for what's wrong with the nation's lack of regulation for the armed security guard industry. Kasachanko's armed guard training was 16 hours, only about four of which took place at a gun range.

Arizona is one of 27 states that doesn't check if someone applying to become an armed guard is prohibited from possessing a gun. The company that hired Joshua Kosashanko refused to talk with CNN as did Kasashanko (ph) himself.

Yes, Drew Griffin with CNN.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Can you please leave the building? We don't want to be on film.


But in a court deposition, he explained he was fully justified in shooting the fleeing shoplifters because his job was to stop them.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: So did you think it was smart to chase after them into the parking lot?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I wouldn't necessarily say it was smart or not smart. I would say that it's a danger associated with the job.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The job is to arrest snack food shoppers.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Shoplifters for anything period.

GRIFFIN: Steve Amitay is a lobbyist and general counsel for the national association of security companies. We met up with him at the industry's annual convention earlier this year where he continues to push for FBI background checks for anyone who wants to be an armed guard. In nine states, even an FBI background check is not required.

STEVE AMITAY, GENERAL COUNSEL. NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SECURITY COMPANIES: The public lay book to security officers in emergency situations, we want to make sure this guy is properly vetted and not a problem himself.

GRIFFIN: That's not going to be easy. In the last four years, there's been no fewer than a dozen bills introduced in state legislatures and in Congress trying to control and license or regulate who can be a security guard. Of those, most have failed.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Get down on the ground.

GRIFFIN: Even after the shooting of Daniel Tarango (ph). Arizona did little to change licensing requirements. There is this additional box which relies on applicants to disclose or check if they are a prohibited possessor. Legally barred from owning a gun. But Arizona still doesn't check that federal database when someone applies to be an armed guard.

ENTAMAN: If they're not truthful with us, we can't control it.

GRIFFIN: As for Joshua Kosashanko (ph), after the shooting he was arrested for attempted murder but ultimately, only indicted and convicted for violating the law that banned him for possessing a gun. He served probation. He now works according to his linked in page, as a corporate trainer and hire manager for the very same security company he worked for the night he shot and nearly killed Daniel Tarango.

Do you think that the state of Arizona shouldn't giving you a license to be an armed guard when you got an arm.

KASASHANKO (PH): No comment, sir.

GRIFFIN: No comment at all?


COOPER: Drew griffin joins me now.

What's next in terms of making some sort of changes in some of these states?

GRIFFIN: You know, I think the problem, Anderson, is the industry itself. They want to keep the pay low. These jobs are very low pay jobs and as a result, you have very low skilled or no skilled people going into these jobs.

And I think until, because regulation has failed, until you have businesses that hire security companies to guard them, in this case, a convenience store, demanding more, then I don't think there will be a change and you are going to continue to --.

COOPER: I mean, there's certainly good security guards out there. I mean, there is hundreds of thousands of them in this country. CNN has them and I, you know, I have great faith in the folks I have seen.

GRIFFIN: And the very good ones, the very good companies, they will pay for training, they will pay for skills, they will update their guards. They will make sure that every one of their guards does not have a criminal, you know, background but it's the matter --

COOPER: The lack is checking in this case. It is pretty incredible.

GRIFFIN: Yes, the lack of checking by both the company and by Arizona itself. A quick follow-up on a story we got from last night, our story about

the security guard who shot and killed a man outside of a night nightclub. The security company he worked for is being sued in another case resulting in death. And the second case, the company is being sued for not protecting the business, Anderson. The guard was not directly involved in the killing itself. We'll keep you updated on that.

COOPER: All right. Drew Griffin, thanks very much. Appreciate the reporting.

If you've got a comment on this story or idea for investigative unit, you can email

Up next, Noticiero Univision news Jorge Ramos goes toe-to-toe with President Obama with the way he's handled immigration. Jorge joins me in the program.


BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: That is not true. Listen, I just -- here's the fact of the matter.




COOPER: Hours after the Senate report on torture was released, President Obama sat down for the interview with Noticiero Univision news and news anchor Jorge Ramos. They talked a bit about the report. But when the subjects switch to immigration, that when things got heated.

Seventeen governors have filed a lawsuit trying to block President Obama's executive order on immigration. They content he doesn't have the authority to unilaterally suspend deportations. Preside Obama says he does. So Jorge Ramos asked him why he didn't exercise that option soon. Listen.


RAMOS: As you were saying, you always have the legal authority to stop deportations. Then why did you deport two million people?

OBAMA: Jorge, the idea of -- We are not going to ..

RAMOS: For six years you did that.

OBAMA: No, listen, Jorge.

RAMOS: ... many families ...

OBAMA: Jorge ... RAMOS: They call you deporter-in-chief.

OBAMA: I -I - You called me deporter-in-chief ...


OBAMA: But let me say this, Jorge.

RAMOS: But you could have stopped the deportations ...

OBAMA: No, no, no. That is not true. Listen. Here's the fact of the matter.

RAMOS: You could have stopped them.

OBAMA: Jorge, here's the fact of the matter. As president of the United States, I'm always responsible for problems that aren't solved right away. I regret millions of people who didn't get health insurance before I passed health insurance and before I implemented it. I regret the fact that there are kids who should have been going to college during my presidency, but because we didn't get to them fast enough, they gave up on college. The question is, are we doing the right thing and have we consistently tried to move this country in a better direction?


COOPER: Jorge Ramos joins me now. Clearly, the president disagrees with your assertion that he could have stopped deportation and he's clearly trying to focus attention in a way that he and Democrats get credit in the Latino community for trying to do what they say is the right thing, but there's this tension among many of Latinos who both appreciate what he's done, but don't think he's moved fast enough.

RAMOS: I agree completely. Let me say that among the Latino community, 89 percent of Latino boroughs (ph) are very grateful to President Barack Obama. They support completely what he did with his executive action, but on the other hand, there's a lot of resentment and disagreement with President Barack Obama. First, because he didn't deliver on his electoral promise on immigration reform when in 2009, when he had control of both chambers of Congress, but that's one point. But the other thing is that, he deported more than 2 million immigrants. He destroyed, really, he destroyed thousands of families and if he's saying that it's because of politics, that it's because of the political process and that he couldn't do anything about it, of course it's debatable if he has the authority or not to go ahead with this executive decision, but if he says he has the authority, why he didn't just do it before? He waited six years to do this. Clearly, again, Latinos are very grateful, but this is a point of resentment. No question about it.

COOPER: It's interesting, though, because you know, you've done interviews with him in the past and in the past, he'd always said, you know, he's not the emperor. He couldn't just make this executive order and rule by (INAUDIBLE) on this. Clearly, that he changed his mind on that. He's never really given you an answer about what changed. Why, whether he was wrong in the past when he said he couldn't do it or whether he's wrong now.

RAMOS: So I guess that there are a couple of ways of trying to explain this. He did say that he was not a king, that he was not an emperor. He told those, he told me personally that he didn't have the legal authority to stop deportations and now what we see is that the president's opinion either has evolved or that he completely changed his mind. He didn't agree with my own interpretation. The fact is that at the end, he decided to go ahead and benefit more than 4, almost 5 million undocumented immigrants, either he - because he evolved or he changed his mind. At the end he acted. And that's why Latinos are going to be very grateful for that. But I - from my point of view, my perspective, is that he did change his mind. Maybe it was because of the pressure from journalists, from the Latino community, from members of Congress like Luis Gutierrez. I don't know exactly why, but at the end, the pressure from the community, from the Latino community was felt and he acted and that's the important thing.

COOPER: I want to play another portion of your interview with the president and talk about it. Let's listen.


OBAMA: And those like you sometimes, Jorge, who to suggest that there are simple quick answers to these problems. I think - no, yes you do. Because that's how you present it. And I think when you present it - when you present it in that way, it does a disservice because it makes the assumption that the political process is one that can easily be moved around depending on the will of one person and that's not how things work.


COOPER: What about - is there something to that, I mean the way immigration reform presented in Latin American media doesn't acknowledge how difficult process it is? Because the president seems to say it doesn't.

RAMOS: It is very difficult. Of course, it is very difficult. However, one person, the president of the United States, he is changing the lives of almost 5 million people. So, in other words, it's important what he thinks and it's important what he's doing. And I do agree that it is unfortunate that we are concentrating on President Barack Obama when we should be concentrating on Republicans. Really, the enemies of immigration reform in this country are Speaker John Boehner and the Republicans. It's john Boehner who blocked immigration reform in the House. So, it is really unfortunate that we're not concentrating on what Republicans didn't want to do instead of trying to concentrate on the disagreements that there are and there are a couple of them between President Barack Obama and the Latino community. It is a complicated issue, however, the president acted alone at the end and that's exactly what many Latinos were expecting from the president.

COOPER: Jorge Ramos, fascinating interview. Thank you very much.

RAMOS: Thank you. COOPER: Just ahead tonight, a teenage girl found on fire still alive outside of her burning car. What did she whisper to rescue workers and what her last words help solve her murder?


COOPER: Welcome back. In "Crime and Punishment" tonight, a murder that is, well, it's so horrible it is hard to fathom. What happened to 19-year-old Jessica Chambers is horrific. There's no other word for it. Her killing in a small town where everyone knew her, has shattered her family, shaking the community. Now, when rescue workers arrived on the scene, Jessica was still alive, just barely. And what she whispered to them may lead police to her killer. That's what her family is now praying for. Here's Martin Savidge.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's hard (INAUDIBLE). It's hard to breathe. You know, even think about it.

MARTIN SAVIDGE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: On family's anguish over - and almost unspeakable crime. Their teenage daughter burned alive.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: They have ripped everything I have.

SAVIDGE: 8 p.m., Saturday night, rural north Mississippi. A 911 call reports a burning car on a county road. Within minutes, the volunteer fire department arrives.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We were expecting - they just - a normal car fire.

SAVIDGE: Instead, a horribly burn teen stumbles from the darkness. In this small town, they know her.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I realized who the victim was. And it was just shocking.

SAVIDGE: 19-year-old Jessica Chambers described by friends as well- liked, outgoing high school cheerleader, had been doused with a flammable liquid and set on fire. She would die the next day due to burns covering nearly every inch of her body, but it gets even worse. According to what the family says doctors told them.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They said they (INAUDIBLE), like they squirted fluid down her throat and up her nose because burning on the insides so bad.

SAVIDGE: Incredibly, despite her suffering, Chambers whispered something to firefighters. Many believe that it was the name of her attacker.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I can't really disclose that information at this time.

SAVIDGE: Authorities will only tell me what the teen said is a lead. Meanwhile, in this small town, the big question is who could have done it?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Certainly, we're looking at murder charges, capital murder charges.

SAVIDGE: The authorities have been retracing where Chambers went that night. This surveillance video shows her stopping at a local gas station where police say she bought a drink and chatted with a few people. Everyone she spoke with has been cleared. The teen's burned car is being analyzed, as is her phone recovered inside. Investigators believe a text or last call could be key. Especially if it links to her last whispered words.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I only suggest - Just, you know ...

SAVIDGE: And in this part of Mississippi, they believe justice can be here or the hereafter.

LISA CHAMBERS, JESSICA'S MOTHER: God's punishment. God's punishment. It's going to be far more worse than anything that we could do.

(END VIDEOTAPE) COOPER: Poor family. Martin joins me now. I mean I understand they're just getting access to this young woman's phone, correct?

SAVIDGE: Right. And the phone they believe could be absolutely key to solving this mystery and may be finding who this killer is. It required a couple of things. First, you have to get the legal warrants in order to gain access to someone's information like that and then, number two, they need, physically, to have the password, the pass code. Just been told by the authorities they achieved all of that today, they've been able to get into the phone and first thing tomorrow, they're following up on the leads it generates.

COOPER: Somebody has the information out there. Let's hope that the police finds them. Martin Savidge. Thanks very much. There's a lot more happening tonight. Susan Hendricks does a "360" news a business bulletin. Susan.

SUSAN HENDRICKS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Anderson, the fate of a $1.1 trillion federal spending bill is uncertain. Congress must pass it by Thursday at midnight to keep the government running, but some Democrats are blessing add-ons including a proposal to ease banking regulations in the Dodd Frank law. And at a news conference today, NFL commissioner Roger Goodell outlined a new personal conduct policy for all players and staff after team owners unanimously approved that plan. It includes a more extensive list of prohibited conduct and a minimum six game suspension for domestic violence. Carolina Panthers quarterback Cam Newton is soar, but in good spirits after being released from a Charlotte hospital. That is him yesterday on a stretcher after he suffered two fractures in his back in an accident near the stadium. Police say it appears Cam Newton was not at fault. A car hit his truck, which flipped over several times.

And Malala Yousafzai makes history, becoming the youngest person to accept a Nobel Peace prize. The 17-year old Pakistani education activist was shot in the head by the Taliban two years ago. That did not stop her. She shares the award with India's Kailash Satyarthi, another champion for children. They both spoke, Anderson, about education and the millions of children deprived of their childhood.

COOPER: Remarkable people. Both of them. Susan, thanks very much.

Up next, a dramatic rescue at sea. 67-year-old fisherman missing since Thanksgiving amazingly found alive. Details ahead.


COOPER: Extreme weather is hitting both the East and West Coast, another nor'easter is dumping snow, freezing rain from upstate New York to Maine. There are also wind gusts of up to 60 miles an hour. Northern California is going to get a drenching up to five inches of rain in many places. Dan Simon reports on the wild weather.


DAN SIMON, CNN CORRESPONDENT: If it isn't heavy snow, it's torrential rain. As the powerful nor'easter slams the northeast along the Jersey shore in Ocean County, streets underwater. The conditions treacherous for drivers in towns like Cobleskil, New York on the far eastern side of the state. Similar conditions in upstate New York, as much as ten inches could hit the area before the end of the week.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We're stuck at home, you know, until this dies down. I'm not even sure if I'll be able to get my kids to school.

SIMON: And no better in Boston, where the streets are lined with ice. People and cars sliding. An SUV ramming into a parked car.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I couldn't stop the car. It was so icy.

SIMON: All of this bad weather having a ripple effect on air travel with more than a thousand flights canceled on Tuesday alone.

And what happened on the East Coast could pale in comparison to what may occur on the West Coast. Here in San Francisco Bay Area communities are gearing up for flooding, a winter storm is expected to hit the region tonight. It could be the worst storm we've had here in five years. Public schools have already closed in advance.

Worrisome, yes. Tree trimmers are around on force, to prevent branches from falling on power lines, but the moisture is also a welcome relief for a state in the middle of a record drought.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Definitely we need the rain, so I'm glad that it's coming. But, you know, of course, we don't want our house to flood.

SIMON: Dan Simon, CNN, San Francisco.


COOPER: A rough weather off the coast of Hawaii nearly cost the 67- year-old fisherman his life. He was lost at sea for 12 days after huge ways damaged his sailboat. That was just the beginning of an ordeal that sounds like something from a Hollywood movie. The Coast Guard had actually given up on finding him. Sara Sidner has more now on the rescue.


SARA SIDNER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Rescuers thought he had died at sea, but after nearly two weeks in the rough seas, fisherman Ron Ingraham is clearly alive and well enough to crack jokes.

RON INGRAHAM, RESCUED FISHERMAN: I was out of water by hydrated on fish. I'm a fisherman, so I caught fish and that's what -- wasn't as good as the sushi bar, but that's how I hydrated.

SIDNER: A true fisherman's tale that could have ended in disaster. On Thanksgiving Day he made this call for help as his 25 foot sailboat was taking on water.

INGRAHAM: Mayday, mayday. I'm in the middle of Alenoi (ph) channel. Small boat, danger of sinking.

SIDNER: He says currents sucked his boat 200 miles away from where he was trying to go, and the waters up the Hawaiian island of Oahu.

INGRAHAM: I tried all through the night. Weather came up, I couldn't make it. I was going backwards all night long.

SIDNER: After four days, the Coast Guard called off the search for the boat. They simply couldn't find it. That's when Ingraham's son Zakary got a call from the Coast Guard telling him his dad was missing.

ZAKARY INGRAHAM, FISHERMAN'S SON: I was crushed, like, you know, anybody would normally feel after they find out their dad is probably gone.

SIDNER: Miraculously after 12 days at sea, a Navy ship found the 67 year-old and his boat after the Coast Guard heard a short Mayday call from Ingraham and his son received yet another call from the Coast Guard.

ZAKARY INGRAHAM: They said, we found your dad. And I was - I had this image of somebody floating with a life vest around him that, you know, wasn't alive. And I says, well, OK, you know, was he with his fishing boat when you found him? They says, no, we found him and his boat. He's alive and he's well. So yeah, it was awesome.

SIDNER: Found dehydrated and desperate for food, and still Ingraham refused to leave without his boat. He not only uses his boat to make a living, but it's also his home, so the Coast Guard towed it back to shore. Ingraham gets his battered boat and Zakary gets his dad.

ZAKARY INGRAHAM: Best Christmas present ever.

(END VIDEOTAPE) SIDNER: I had a nice long Skype chat with Mr. Ingraham's son Zakary. And he told me that they had actually lost touch. And they hadn't spoken to each other about 20 years that he'd been looking for his father. And he'd hoped that this would not be his final time to meet him when he got that call from the Coast Guard now. He's happy to hear that his father is alive and he says this is a lesson for everybody to stay in touch with family members because you never know when you might lose them. Anderson.

COOPER: Sara Sidner, thanks. They were kind of very - when they called up the son and said, we found your dad. Maybe they should have said alive right away. Anyway, but he's back. The fisherman son you saw there at the end of the piece also said this about the toughness of his dad. He said Rambo has a picture of my dad on his wall. I'm sure that's true. "The Ridiculist" is next.


COOPER: Time now for "The Ridiculist." We are adding the naughty airline executive. Now, allow me to explain. A woman named Heather Cho, Korean Air's vice president for cabin service and wait for it, daughter of the airline's chairman, was recently a passenger on a Korean Air flight scheduled to go from New York to South Korea. The plane pushed back from the gate and was just minutes from takeoff at JFK when Miss Cho was affronted in a way that's really quite unimaginable. Truly appalling, if you ask me. Now, brace yourselves. I hope you can handle this. She was served macadamia nuts in a bag instead of on a plate. I'm serious. I'm not making this up. Macadamia nuts in a bag, not on a plate. Now, I can keep repeating it for you, but it will not sound any less insane. Miss Cho's reaction to this unforgivable breakdown in first class service, well, like any executive who cares about her customers and employees, Miss Cho forced the plane to return to the gate where she had the head of the cabin crew kicked off.

And let's just pause a second and break this down. Because before you start yelling at me on Twitter saying, I don't know anything about VIP air travel, let me remind you that just this week, I was the third biggest celebrity on a flight from Washington to New York, right after Prince William and that monkey who looks like Larry King. I love that monkey. Anyway, sadly the monkey actually wasn't on the flight, nor was Larry King. But I'd like to see him. I miss him. Anyway, I digress. I know a thing or two about proper cabin etiquette. I mean so the nuts were in a bag, not on the plate. So what? Big deal. You've got to reach down and adjust your nuts, so you are more comfortable with how they are presented. We've all been there, honey. I know what it's like, Miss Cho. There's actually a range of acceptable reactions that Miss Cho could have had, none of which would have resulted in the employee being kicked off the plane. Option one, something like I'd call the murder she wrote reaction.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Oh, Miss, I asked for white wine with my (INAUDIBLE)

(END VIDEO CLIP) COOPER: See, now, did you notice how calm and polite Angela Lansbury was? And she was on a plane with a murder, she was investigating a murder and yet, she was nice. All right, the next option, the Elaine from Seinfeld reaction. Slightly more tense, but still I think within the boundaries of acceptable behavior.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Excuse me, I didn't get a meal.



UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes, I'm sure. I would know if a tray of food had been served to me.






COOPER: And yeah, that was Jim Jay Bullock as a flight attendant. Again, I digress, but look, I get it. Sometimes something is so offensive, so unthinkable like macadamia nuts in a bag instead of on a plate, that you need a third option, a way to blow off some steam.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I have had it with these [EXPLETIVE DELETED] snakes on this [EXPLETIVE DELETED] plane!


COOPER: That's right, the Samuel L. Jackson reaction. Even that would have been better than bringing the plane back to the gate. As for Miss Cho, her actions delayed the flight by about 20 minutes. Which doesn't actually sound very much for doing that and after the story sparked outrage throughout South Korea and much of the world, she resigned some of her duties, though she's apparently keeping her title at Korean Air. Whatever her future, she'll always have a first class seat and plenty of bagged macadamia nuts on "The Ridiculist."

Quick note, time to vote for your favorite RidicuList of 2014, vote at or in the AC 360 Facebook and Twitter pages. We'll countdown your top five on the air at the end of the year.

That does it for us. I'll see you again 11:00 p.m. Eastern tonight, another edition of 360.

Somebody's Gotta Do It with Mike Rowe, starts now.