Return to Transcripts main page


Bollywood Star Salman Khan Appeals Prison Sentence; Fury over Man's Arrest for Killing Home Intruder; Facebook's Role in Fueling Hate Speech in Myanmar; Migrants Head to U.S.-Mexico Border for Better Life; Trump's Trousers Dwarf the Competition; Trump Threatens New Tariffs on China, Repeats Debunked Claim; Former South Korean President's Verdict; Russian Spy Poisoning Update. Aired 1-2a ET

Aired April 6, 2018 - 01:00   ET




ISHA SESAY, CNN ANCHOR (voice-over): You're watching CNN NEWSROOM live from Los Angeles. Ahead this hour: fears of a trade war are again front and center after Donald Trump threatens another $100 billion in tariffs against China.

Plus Russia warns the British government it is playing with fire over accusations of Kremlin poisoned its former spy.

And South Korea's (INAUDIBLE) former leader could find out this hour if she's headed to prison.

Hello and thank you for joining us. I'm Isha Sesay. This is NEWSROOM L.A.


SESAY: U.S. President Donald Trump is taking another shot at China and the looming trade war between the two countries. He released a statement late Thursday saying, "In light of China's unfair retaliation, I have instructed the USTR to consider whether $100 billion of additional tariffs would be appropriate."

President Trump first announced a plan for $50 billion in new taxes earlier in the week. Then China responded with a proposal for $50 in tariffs on American goods. Wall Street finished the day up 240 points but the U.S. markets look to be headed for a disappointing start.

Right now Dow futures are down more than 1 percent. Nasdaq and the S&P futures are also pointing lower.

Let's take a look at how the markets in Asia are faring right now. The Shanghai Composite is closed today. But Hong Kong has been enjoying a nice rally. Tokyo and Sydney have been relatively and Seoul in negative territory.

Senior international correspondent Ivan Watson joins us now from Beijing.

Ivan, clearly the calculation on the part of the U.S. in threatening these tariffs is that China will buckle under the pressure. As we listen to officials, as we listen to Beijing, is there any indication that they plan on buckling?

IVAN WATSON, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Judging by the statement that we've just gotten from the ministry of commerce here, it does not seem like China is going to buckle, as you put it.

That statement says, quote, "We do not want to fight a trade war but we are not afraid of it."

Another sentence here, "The Chinese side will follow through to the end and will not hesitate to fight back at any cost."

It called the latest U.S. threat a provocation and a threat to international multilateralism. So those sound like fighting words coming from the Chinese government. Let's take a listen to the Foreign Minister of China and what he had to say before this latest threat came from the White House.


CHINESE FOREIGN MINISTER (through translator): The Chinese and the U.S. economies have been deeply interrelated with both sides' interests highly intertwined. The U.S. is wrong by attempting to benefit from protectionism.

Both China and the U.S. are the world's major countries who should respect each other and treat each other as equals. The U.S. is wrong again in picking China as its target of trade sanctions.


WATSON: Now as justification for this threat of an additional tariff on $100 billion worth of Chinese goods, President Trump in his statement said, quote, "China has chosen to harm our farmers and manufacturers."

So it does appear that China's threat to tariff U.S. soybeans, for example, and the previous from the beginning of this week, its decision to slap a tariff on U.S. pork products, that it does seem like that has gotten under President Trump's skin and that is his justification for escalating the threats in what seems to be teetering towards a trade war.

It is worth noting, though, Isha, that these now proposed $150 billion of goods that would be tariffed by the White House, that that has not yet gone into effect and, according to the White House on Thursday, it could be still be months before some of these tariffs do go into effect.

So there does seem to be still room for negotiation, though the escalating rhetoric here, may make that harder and harder to do.

SESAY: Ivan Watson, busy times. Ivan Watson joining us there from Beijing, we appreciate it. Thank you.

Michael Genovese is the president of the Global Policy Institute at Loyola Marymount University.

Michael, the president has been speaking out about this whole issue of tariffs. We know that the administration earlier in the week was saying that these are just negotiating tools.

Nonetheless a lot of people are watching this with a lot of concern, not the president, it would seem. Take a listen to what he had to say on Thursday.


DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: You probably saw that for many years no president wanted to go against China economically. And we're going to do it.


TRUMP: We're at a point where we had to do this. Our economy is strong. Our jobs are great. We're going to come out with numbers on Friday that hopefully will be fantastic numbers. Companies are doing really well and you have to go after the people that aren't treating you right.


SESAY: Could it be that those other people who are stupid in Trump's estimation, who have not gone after China in the past in this manner, haven't done so because they realize that the economies of China and the U.S. are intertwined, which is the point the Chinese Foreign Minister was making?

MICHAEL GENOVESE, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Right. And if one crumbles, the others crumble. We're all connected. President Trump has some very good points. China is terrible on intellectual property. They do have some trading practices that are really unacceptable.

That does not mean you have to beat them to death with a baseball bat and that has been President Trump's strategy.

The Chinese, I think, have a very clear strategy in return. You start with tit-for-tat and then at some point you give Donald Trump a small victory, something that he can claim is this great success. And then you steal us blind.

And I think that is what they are going to do. I think they are going to just go along and then, at some point, say, here you go. We will cave in on this. Trump will throw a parade for himself and the Chinese start stealing everything in sight. And that is pretty much, I think, the strategy that a lot of people use because they think Trump is weak and vulnerable and that, because of his personality needs, he has to win.

Give him a win, something he can celebrate. You got him controlled. SESAY: Republican senator Ben Sasse is pretty alarmed by all of this. I want to read you what he said in a statement.

"Hopefully the president is just blowing off steam again. But if he's even half serious, this is nuts. He's threatening to light American agriculture on fire. Let's absolutely take on Chinese bad behavior but with a plan that punishes them instead of us. This is the dumbest possible way to do this."

His highlighting of American agriculture there, explain why this is potentially really painful for American farmers.

GENOVESE: Because the Chinese are smart. They've done their homework. They know where Trump's base is and they know that if they can strangle him at the base, he'll collapse, either by giving into the Chinese or by doing something really probably very provocative and dangerous, which no one wants.

But we're already seeing the consequences. The markets are up and down. My 401(k) is like a roller coaster ride, going up and down, it's got whiplash. And these -- this before tariffs are even imposed.

So you can imagine what is going to happen if you keep taking these steps and escalating upwards. Something's got to give and it could be the economies of the United States and China and Europe and just go down the list.

SESAY: And what is interesting that you talk about the seesawing of the markets, this is a president who has made the economy his singular achievement, right. He says the economy's booming, you know, it's a Trump bump.

That could all be wiped out if this road is the one that he truly goes down.

GENOVESE: And if the economy is booming -- and to a large degree it is and give Donald Trump some credit for that -- why risk it? Why jeopardize it?

Why take something that you could be working on behind the scenes, doing some negotiating, maybe some hard trading, why would you risk everything on this if things are going so well?

This is an act of really probably self abuse in the sense that we're killing ourselves by doing this, there is no reason for us doing it this way and the risks are so incredibly great, the rewards simply do not match up to those risks.

SESAY: The president was at an event on Thursday, West Virginia, and he was in the mood to talk. He was in the mood to say things that have been debunked before, claims he's made over and over again, like this about voting in California.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) TRUMP: In many places like California, the same person votes many times. You probably heard about that. They always like to say, oh, that's a conspiracy theory. Not a conspiracy theory, folks. Millions and millions of people.


SESAY: When you look at him and you hear him say that, you get the impression he truly believes it. But he formed a voter fraud commission. It folded. It never produced any evidence as far as I remember.

GENOVESE: But it's but it is part of the grand Trump narrative, everybody's out to get me, oh, the election is going to be rigged and then when he won it, he said, well, then, I really got the most votes. It is part of his narrative. It is part of his identity. What he says is completely untrue.

The truth does not matter when the psyche is demanding that it be petted and that it be fed and so Donald Trump has not been able to confront the reality in front of him because psychologically it is so difficult for him to. He has to see himself as a winner. He has to be --


GENOVESE: -- on top. He has to be the strong man and that is why he is so easily manipulated by the Chinese and others.

SESAY: It was not just voting in California. He was saying untruths about -- he also had a lot to say about those crossing the U.S. southern border. Take a listen.


TRUMP: And remember my opening remarks at Trump Tower. When I opened, everybody said, oh, he was so tough and I used the word rape. And yesterday it came out where this journey coming up, women are raped at levels that nobody has ever seen before. They don't want to mention that. So we have to change our laws.


SESAY: Apparently really interesting if I listen to it but at the time, he's like, I said it then and everybody was upset and now look. So I guess what, now it's the do-over and they have the evidence to back the statement that he made when he started the campaign.

GENOVESE: But he does not have the evidence.


GENOVESE: That's the thing, more women raped than--


SESAY: And what does that even mean?

GENOVESE: It is just Trump's hyperbole and it is Trump's fantasy.

SESAY: But, why, why hold onto such a fantasy, to achieve what?

GENOVESE: That's a great question. Because it is counterproductive. In the long run, it damages him. So if the action damages him, why do you do it? Because you have a psychological need to.

The bluster and the showmanship and the loud noises and the shiny objects are part of his entertainment package. And more than anything, he is an entertainer. And that entertainment is part of a storytelling narrative and that's what he loves to do, tell stories. They don't have to be true as long as they're interesting and entertaining and enough people will believe them so that the base is happy.

SESAY: Well, as you talk about him being an entertainer, he certainly displayed that on Thursday because this was supposed to be about tax reform. It was supposed to be a tax event. But, no, he wanted to be a showmen. Take a look.


TRUMP: You know, this was going to be my remarks. It would have taken about two minutes but the hell with it. That would have been a little boring, a little boring. Now I'm reading off the first paragraph. I said, this is boring, come on. We have -- we have to say, tell it like it is.


SESAY: Governing is laborious. Governing is --


SESAY: -- it's about staying on message.

GENOVESE: Yes, but it's not fun. It's not entertaining and when you're an entertainer, that is the package you sell. You are selling the package. And again, what -- we've said this so many times before -- he gets off message so easily.

Instead of focusing like a laser beam on something that he might have a chance to really get accomplished, it is about him. It's the shiny face. It is the sparkles. It is the glamor, it's the --


SESAY: It's the laughter. It's the engagement of the crowd. He feeds off that.


SESAY: -- which Bill Clinton did as well. He was known for doing that --


SESAY: -- completely different.

GENOVESE: Extroverts get a lot of results from the crowd, the enjoyment of the crowd. They energize people, like Clinton and Trump. Clinton, though, then could focus on policy. Trump seems to have a very short attention span.

And I'm not trying to say that to be rude but he seems to start off on the policy and then gets back to being the entertainer, whereas a real leader knows that you've got to focus like a laser beam at times and it is not always fun. It is hard work. It's getting your hands dirty on policy. It is learning about things. It is knowledge. It's experience, it is getting people around you who know, whom you will listen to.

He does not listen.

SESAY: Well, finally, away from the event itself he was on Air Force One, had a gaggle with the media. They came together and he addressed the Stormy Daniels affair. Take a listen.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Mr. Trump, did you know about the $130,000 payment to Stormy Daniels?


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Then why did Michael -- why did Michael Cohen make it?

TRUMP: You'll have to ask Michael Cohen. Michael's my attorney. You'll have to ask Michael Cohen.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Do you know where he got the money for the payment?

TRUMP: No. I don't know.


SESAY: OK. Before you weigh in on that, listen to what Stormy Daniels' attorney told Anderson Cooper after that sound emerged.


MICHAEL AVENATTI, STORMY DANIELS'S ATTORNEY: It's like Christmas and Hanukkah, all rolled into one. You can't have an agreement if one party claims they knew nothing about the -- one of the principle terms of the agreement. So the president has just shot himself in the foot, thrown his attorney, basically, Michael Cohen under the bus in the process, put him in dire straits with the state bar of New York.


SESAY: I don't know the legal veracity of the statement made by Michael Avenatti but what is clear is this is not going away anytime soon, whether or not the president claimed what one could assume was an attempt at plausible deniability.

GENOVESE: And Donald Trump stepped in it. He did not need to. He was so quiet on this for so long. You knew it was only a matter of time that he had to just blurt it out.


GENOVESE: And what he has done is that he has undermined his own defense. And instead of being able to claim, well, you know, I did not know about, just ask him -- he basically got his lawyer and said, OK, he is the one who has been doing. He is in trouble. But if you do not -- if the president did not know, is there not say anything, if he did not know there was an agreement, how is the agreement enforceable.

So he played right into the hands of Stormy Daniels and her attorney again. They played him because they know they can be patient and his ego will supersede his judgment.

SESAY: It's been quite a week. Michael Genovese --

GENOVESE: It's been quite a 15 months.

SESAY: It really has. I'm aging by the day. Michael Genovese, we appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you.

All right. Away from U.S. politics now and South Korean court is delivering its verdict in the corruption and bribery trial of former president Park Geun-hye. She denied any wrongdoing. You are looking at live pictures from inside that court there, where they are reading out the verdict, the accusations on numerous against her. She's accused of corruption which led to her impeachment.

If she is found guilty, she could get up to 30 years in prison. Our Paula Hancocks joins us from Seoul.

Paula, there are those cameras in court, taking the sentencing and the verdict and sentencing live. Tell me what is happening outside where you are because I know for a fact, these cameras in court, this is the first time it's happened. This is quite a moment for South Korea.

PAULA HANCOCKS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Absolutely. This is the first time that this low court has been allowed to broadcast this live. And the reason they did that is they said that they knew it was in the national interest.

So people around the country will be watching this live. The judges are in there now. But they have to go through every single charge. So there are 18 charges, we understand it could take an hour or even two hours before we get to the verdict and before we get to that sentencing. (INAUDIBLE) 30 years. We're not expecting the former president to be inside the court. She has refused to show up to many of the cases as it's been going on. Let me show you what's happening just outside.

There is a small pocket of pro-Park Geun-hye supporters here. There's maybe 100-200. Now this is the minority view in South Korea. Certainly these people gathered here today, think that she has been falsely accused. They think that the charges against her are trumped up and she should still be in power.

But for many other people, though, the protest with hundreds of thousands of people on the streets of Seoul for many months throughout the bitter winter here in Korea, calling for these corruption charges to be laid against her, calling for her impeachment and calling for justice to be seen to be done.

So that is the wider opinion in South Korea. But certainly a very interesting day. This has been a landmark corruption case to find out exactly what that verdict and sentencing will be.

Of course, this isn't the end of it. No matter what it is, everyone is widely expected Park Geun-hye's lawyers to appeal because they believe she shouldn't be in prison in the first place.

SESAY: As you make the point, that everyone is watching this closely, we're expecting appeals. We don't know what's going to happen. They're going through charge by charge, waiting for the verdict and see whether there's a sentencing that the (INAUDIBLE) guilty verdict, if there is one.

A number of others in this case have been sentenced. Can you tell us a little bit about that because that might give us some insight into what may be playing out in that court, bearing in mind some of those people were charged with the very same offenses Park Geun-hye is facing.

HANCOCKS: It's a good point, Isha. And Choi Soon-sil, which was the non-elected confidante of Park Geun-hye who has been on trial as well as part of this corruption case, she was sentenced to 20 years in prison. There was also the head of Samsung, Lee Jae-yong, Jay Y. Lee, he's known as around the world. He was sentenced to five years. It was then lessened in appeals court and he actually walked within about a year of being in prison. He was let out early, which some people in South Korea did not agree with.

They believed that he had been let off easily. But that gives you an idea of the scale of the prison sentences we have so far from that 20 years for Park Geun-hye's confidante just to 2.5 years for the Samsung chief.

But of course it's worth pointing out, Park Geun-hye does still insist that she is innocent. She denies all wrongdoing and all charges against her. But it will be really interesting to see what those three judges inside that courthouse just there decide today -- Isha.

SESAY: Very, very interesting indeed. Paula Hancocks there in Seoul, outside that courtroom, where they are now, reading out the verdicts in Park Geun-hye's trial, Paula, we appreciate it. We'll check in with you in a little while. Thank you.

Let's pause here and take a very quick break on NEWSROOM L.A. Russia warns the British government it will be sorry if it doesn't stop accusing the Kremlin of poisoning its former spy.





SESAY: Moscow's ambassador to the United Nations says blaming Russia for a nerve agent attack in the U.K. is a, quote, "fake story." He made the claim Thursday at a U.N. Security Council meeting and warned the British government it was playing with fire in making the accusation. CNN's Richard Roth has the very latest now from the U.N.


RICHARD ROTH, CNN SENIOR U.N. CORRESPONDENT: Russia and the United Kingdom went at it in the Security Council over the spy case in Salisbury, England. The Russian ambassador, Vasily Nebenzya, hurled numerous accusations against the U.K. government and politicians.

He said there were lies being spread about Moscow's involvement and he scoffed at accusations, saying, why would Russia do such a thing right before presidential elections and a few months before the World Cup of football?

The Russian ambassador also issued this threat.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE (through translator): We all know the -- what the words of British intelligence information is based on, the experience of Tony Blair. We have told our British colleagues that you are playing with fire and you will be sorry. Because it's one thing to put forward unsubstantiated accusations. And it's quite different to start speaking, using professional terms, which requires not -- which means not simply who will speak loudest in diplomacy. But it requires clear answers to very specific substantial questions. I do not think that the British investigative bodies are grateful to the British government for their hasty and unequivocal statements and conclusions.


ROTH: Russia hinted intelligence agents from other countries were responsible for what happened to the former Russian spy and his daughter. The British ambassador, Karen Pierce, returned fire in a measured tone though she did look directly at the Russian ambassador at times. Karen Pierce said, "How can Russia try to lecture the United Kingdom about chemical weapons use when it has blocked numerous investigations into what is really going on in Syria?


KAREN PIERCE (PH), U.K. AMBASSADOR TO THE U.N.: We can't ignore what has happened in Salisbury. We cannot ignore Russia turning a blind eye to the use of chemical weapons in Syria and in Salisbury. And we cannot ignore the way that Russia seeks to undermine the international institutions which have kept us safe since the end of the Second World War.


ROTH: At one point, the Russian ambassador accused the United Kingdom of using media manipulation tactics similar to those practiced by former Nazi leader Joseph Goebbels. The deputy U.S. ambassador scoffed at that, saying such language is unfit for the Security Council -- Richard Roth, CNN, the United Nations.


SESAY: Fireworks at the U.N. and U.K.'s foreign office was forced to --


SESAY: -- delete a tweet that blamed Russia for the poison attack. It was a serious misstep by U.K. foreign secretary Boris Johnson. Chemical weapon experts in the U.K. had not identified the nerve agent as Russian in origin.

CNN contributor Jill Dougherty joins us from Seattle, Washington. She's a former Moscow bureau chief at CNN.

Jill, the strong words from the Russian ambassador to the U.N. point to an increasingly strident tone being taken by Moscow. It's something that we have also heard from the Foreign Ministry spokeswoman. I want to read the statement she posted on Facebook because, again, it is a trend in recent days. They are getting firmer and firmer.

It says, "What are they going to say next? They're going to keep on lying, dodging, shifting responsibility among themselves?

Why? Because this is not the first time they are doing it."

Jill, she said that; we hear from the Russian ambassador there in the Security Council and then we hear that threat, the U.K. will be sorry.

How seriously should we take those words?

JILL DOUGHERTY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: I think we ought to listen to what Russia says actually and who knows what precisely was meant by that particular comment. But I do think that Russia feels in some way it's going to have to retaliate.

Now how it's going to do that, up until now it has been the back-and- forth, tit-for-tat type expulsions of diplomats.

But maybe Russia has some other ideas that it can make things for the West uncomfortable. But at this point, they don't have as many tools as let's say the United States or U.K. or the West in general do, especially when you get into these financial dealings.

For instance, the British saying that they would look into perhaps changing regulations about the transparency of buying real estate or bringing money into Russia -- into the U.K. from Russia, stopping planes at the border.

You've already seen that with the Mueller investigation in the United States into alleged Russian interference in the election. And they have been stopping, reportedly, according to CNN, they have been stopping Russian oligarchs in the United States and beginning to question them, look at their electronic devices.

So these are things that are getting very uncomfortable for Russia. And I think you feel the depth of their anger. I did notice one thing that I was reading that gave a little bit of a tone in the Russian media.

They're saying this does not just have to do with the poisoning or the election or whatever. It is really an organized attempt by the West to push Russia into the corner and to demean Russia and blame it for everything internationally.

So they're really building it into something that is much bigger than just these issues. Now that works well at home because people do -- the latest polls that I've seen, even if you just count some of it, a lot of Russians, about 70 percent, according to the latest poll agree that this is ridiculous and that Russia had nothing to do with those poisonings.

Again, maybe those are correct, maybe as usual with pools you have to take some off the top. But still I would say, just -- I was just in Russia a few weeks ago and I think that's correct, that a lot of Russians believe this is ridiculous and it's an attack by the West.

SESAY: Fascinating insight, Jill Dougherty joining us there from Seattle, appreciate it. Thank you.

Next on NEWSROOM L.A., one of Bollywood's biggest stars fights to stay out of prison. Why a court convicted actor Salman Khan. We'll tell you why when we come back.


[01:31:29] SESAY: You're watching CNN NEWSROOM live from Los Angeles.

I'm Isha Sesay.

The headlines this hour: U.S. stock futures are off sharply after President Donald Trump announced he's considered $100 billion in additional tariff on Chinese goods. Both countries said this week they're planning $50 billion in new import taxes. A top White House advisor called the tariffs just a proposal.

The U.N. Security Council has met for a second time to discuss the poisoning of a former Russian spy and his daughter in England. Russia's ambassador warned the U.K. that blaming the Kremlin for the attack was quote, "playing with fire". "The Times of London" reports British officials believe they have pinpointed the Russian lab that made the nerve agent.

A South Korean court is delivering its verdict in the corruption and bribery trial of former president, Park Geun-Hye. The process is expected to take a few hours. She denies any wrongdoing. Prosecutors are asking for a 30-year sentence.

Well, Malaysia's Prime Minister has just announced Parliament will be dissolved on Saturday, kicking off an election drive. The vote then has to be held within 60 days. The run-up to the election has been mired in controversy. The government has been accused of manipulating electoral boundaries.

And authorities also just approved a law against so-called fake news complete with prison sentences for violators. Critics say it's aimed at curbing dissent and free speech ahead of that vote.

Well, an appeal hearing has just kicked off in India to decide the fate of actor Salman Khan. The Bollywood superstar was sentenced to five years in prison, convicted of killing a rare and protected antelope back in 1998.

Journalist Liz Neisloss is in New Delhi and she joins us now.

Liz -- I can't help but wonder why something that took place in 1998 is only working its way to the court now and the verdict coming out in the last couple of days and then this appeal. Why has it taken so long?

LIZ NEISLOSS, JOURNALIST: Well, it actually hasn't been 20 years but it's been nearly that long. That case was actually filed in 2001. But with various appeals, petitions, legal maneuvers a case like this can easily drag out this long.

And it's actually not uncommon -- it's happened in other cases, in business cases -- for it to take years to get to this point.

SESAY: Tell us a little bit more about Salman Khan. I know he's a huge star. I know that he's a star that cuts across many different demographics there in India. And I also know he's something of a Bollywood bad boy.

NIESLOSS: Yes -- Isha. I think you've basically nailed it. He is someone who is described as having a dual personality almost. On the one hand, he's really known for charitable work. He has a foundation, the Being Human Foundation. He has given time. He has given money. He's made personal appeals on behalf of cancer victims, particularly children. His foundation funds education, health care. So really that is one side of him that many people say is really who Salman Khan is.

On the other hand, he has a reputation as a bad boy. He's had other brushes with the law. There have been other poaching cases which allegedly occurred around the same time as this case. He was acquitted in two other cases. He was also acquitted in a hit and run in Mumbai.

[01:34:56] There have been suggestions that he has violent outbursts. He has girlfriends who have gone public with this kind of thing. So really this is a guy who is fantastically popular but has two sides of him.

SESAY: That's really -- that's really what's coming out and that's the picture being painted.

Liz -- I mean let's just give our viewers some perspective here. I mean the fact that he was found guilty and this sentence is handed down shocked his legal team. And I think much of India I think, it's fair to say, there is this sense that the rich and the famous are almost above the law.

NIESLOSS: I think that's certainly true. The law drags on for many people but for the rich and famous it can go on indefinitely. And that's obviously because they have the means to pursue legal avenues. They have the influence.

There are many instances, not just celebrities, but very -- the super rich, the business people. There are many examples of cases where the law just keeps moving on. And to the average person it may seem that justice never really gets done -- Isha.

SESAY: Well, as you say that, I'm forced to ask you do you think he'll ever serve any time?

NIESLOSS: Well, it's not clear how much time he'll serve. He has actually already done several stints in jail for the two prior poaching cases. And then obviously he spent the night last night in jail related to this case as well. And he is by his account, by other accounts -- he's treated just like most prisoners sleeping on the floor, eating the food other prisoners eat.

So he may serve more time, we just don't know. Or he may serve a few days here and there depending on the appeal. But that five years -- it's hard to say.

SESAY: Yes. That's very hard to say. Liz Niesloss -- we shall wait to see what the appeals court judges decide and it will say a lot I'm sure about the state of Indian justice.

Liz -- we appreciate you. Thank you. All right.

Well, many people in London are angry after an elderly man was arrested for killing a suspected burglar who broke into his home. Supporters of Richard Osborn-Brooks say he shouldn't be punished for defending himself.

As Salma Abdelaziz reports, this is happening amid a surge of homicides in the British capital.


SALMA ABDELAZIZ, CNN PRODUCER: What happened just behind me here in the southeast part of London has really sparked a national conversation. It's on the front page of nearly every paper today in the U.K.

Let's just run through what happened. In the early hours of Wednesday morning, two burglars entered the home of a 78-year-old pensioner. According to police an altercation ensued between the pensioner and these two burglars. One of the burglars was stabbed and later died in hospital. The second one was able to get away and is still at large.

It has many here in this community worried, of course, for their own safety but also outraged and asking themselves, what would they do if it was me. Take a listen at what two neighbors told us earlier.

SARAH DAMINA, LOCAL RESIDENT: Well, what could this man have done? Just sit, just watch them or let them do whatever they want to do in house? Do what? Did he have a right protect himself?

GORDON WILLIAMS, LOCAL RESIDENT: I feel sad for the guy who has died, surely. But I feel anger because the burglar got into a man's home and he's been arrested for defending his home. It's wrong.

ABDELAZIZ: The reasons behind this uptick in violence -- more than 50 people murdered here in London since the start of the year -- are many. But according to experts and officials there are three main factors.

First is the issue of gang violence. One MP in (INAUDIBLE) tweeted that it's easier to buy cocaine than to order a pizza. Harsh words targeted at officials who he blamed for not getting a turf war over drugs under control.

The second is one about policing. Experts say that many youth (ph) feel that they are over-policed but under-protected. This, of course, in reference to the fact that there's not enough community outreach programs to help youth get off the streets and out of violence.

The third is a matter of money. Many people feel that austerity measures and budget cuts have meant that there's police on the streets and therefore more crime.

The mayor of London, Sadiq Khan has tweeted in response to these numbers saying that he is angered and heartbroken by the violence on the streets in London and has already put out more police patrols.

Salma Abdelaziz, CNN -- London.


SESAY: Well, next on NEWSROOM L.A. fueling the fire. New data suggests Facebook may have helped spread hatred as the Rohingya crisis unfolded.


SESAY: Hello everyone.

Mark Zuckerberg says Facebook did play a part in inciting ethnic violence in Myanmar. A visual analysis reveals that as the Rohingya crisis unfolded last August, activity within an anti-Rohingya Facebook group spiked.

Since August, nearly 700,000 Rohingya refugees have fled to neighboring Bangladesh. Zuckerberg says Facebook takes this seriously but critics say the damage has already been done.

Let's discuss all of this now with Ray Serrato, a senior program officer on governance and innovation expert at Democracy Reporting International. Ray -- thank you for joining us.

Help us understand how you arrived at the conclusion of the role Facebook played. When we talk about a spike -- I mean how great a spike are we talking about?


First I want to -- I think it's important to recognize that local groups and journalists in Myanmar have been working on hate speech for several years. The main thing is that we didn't have very hard numbers about the severity of the problem.

So the contribution here is that we have some concrete data to suggest the spike that's happening is kind of similar to what happened in the U.S. elections. So bad actors, using Facebook deceived and manipulated people to divide society and undermine pluralism (ph).

The spike that we're talking about is about 200 percent increase in interactions that coincided with the attacks by the Rakhine Rohingya Salvation Army in August of last year in Rakhine state.

SESAY: Wow -- 200 percent. Who are we talking about in terms of these groups here? How clearly have you been able to identify them?

SERRATO: Well, in this case, it's a specific platform of around 55,000 members and a Facebook group which supports Ma Ba Tha, which is a nationalist Buddhist organization. That's one specific group.

There are, of course, many groups in Myanmar. Some of the largest groups, for example is a Facebook group of around 400,000 users which is focused on Rakhine state. Although that isn't specifically geared to be, you know, anti-Rohingya or anti-Muslim in nature you often find many, many posts there which are being spread.

SESAY: What kind of things did you -- I mean it's hate speech. It's obviously hateful. But what's the general theme of the language you found there and was it inciting violence? I mean give me some insight into what typically populated these platforms.

SERRATO: I will say typically it's language that's used to vilify Rohingya and Muslims at large. You would find typical stereotypes and tropes about Muslims that at least circulate in Myanmar which are about overpopulation. For example you would have images and memes which have shown families of what they allege as 90 people.

So it's warning -- it's often warning about what they say the Islamification of Myanmar which might take place. So it's sometimes very similar tropes and stereotypes that you see circulating in right- wing groups in the west and elsewhere.

[01:45:01] We also see posts more recently which was celebrating the death of U Ko Ni, who was the adviser -- the only Muslim adviser to Aung San Suu Kyi.

SESAY: I mean it's not the kind of content that could have another interpretation. It's clearly hateful.

Mark Zuckerberg has said that it's been an issue. What's your assessment of how they've dealt with it?

SERRATO: I think overall, the -- I think they've done a quite poor job of dealing with it. Ashin Wirathu who is the leading hard-line nationalist monk -- his account was only suspended in January of this year.

This particular group that I looked at is still quite active. The group has since went private so we can no longer retrieve data about their posts.

You know, I think one thing that Mark Zuckerberg recently gave an interview in Vox where he told Ezra Klein that Facebook's systems had detected an incident in September of last year and they had stopped that incident from occurring.

Just yesterday, a group of city organizations in Myanmar released a statement rebutting Mark Zuckerberg's claims. It's saying that Facebook's systems did not identify this. Those groups themselves didn't. They say, you know, Facebook is relying way too heavily on organizations which are ill-equipped to kind of examine the data because it's not available and also don't have the technical and human resources to do so.

SESAY: So, I mean you've been very clear that -- you were quoted as saying that you don't know how they sleep at night, the Facebook executives, given what played out in Myanmar. You also say that the damage has been done already.

So is there anything that can be done? Is there any remedy here that you see?

SERRATO: I think one -- the first that Facebook has to do, of course, is to recognize, you know, the consequences of their platform and their advertising model in context, which you know, are much more volatile than in the United States or in the West.

That is, you know, hate speech, misinformation are much more dangerous in places where you have a history of ethnic conflict and violence. And often in this context, I would say, as in Myanmar, they're in a position to deal with those consequences whether it's clamping down on specific groups in a very earnest way because they have no offices in Facebook -- as far as I know, they have no staff that speak Burmese. In Sri Lanka that was also the case.

But they're one of the major players that can deal with the consequences I think in a way that other actors are unwilling or unable to do in Myanmar. And of course, that's not the entire story but that's a big part of it.

SESAY: Yes, it certainly is.

Raymond Serrato -- thank you. Thank you for coming on and showing what you discovered through your research and talking about the way forward. We appreciate it.

SERRATO: Thank you.

SESAY: Now, President Trump is considering sending 2,000 to 4,000 National Guard troops to bolster security on the U.S. border with Mexico. This as a migrant caravan from Central America makes its way towards that very border.

CNN's Leyla Santiago has the latest on the migrants' journey.


LEYLA SANTIAGO, CNN CORRESPONDENT: They are women, children, men, families -- this is the caravan President Trump calls dangerous.

She says they're not armed. They only have the very basics.

Karen Gallo joined the group in southern Mexico. They left Honduras 20 days ago and the entire family is traveling together. This is mom, dad, one of the kids, and there's another kid that has made the journey as well. They're heading to the United States.

They never expected to catch the attention of President Trump. But that's exactly what the group did when about 1,200 gathered in southern Mexico nearly two weeks ago for an annual pilgrimage that has been organized for more than five years.

Lillian Mejia is from El Salvador. She's a mom. She left two children there.

She says there's no work in El Salvador and there's also a lot of gang violence. That's why she left. Only clothes and shoes in her backpack as she heads to the United States hoping to find a job to send money back to her children to help them escape poverty and violence.

El Salvador and Honduras have murder rates that are among the highest in the world.

So she has this piece of paper that says she can be here for 30 days. She doesn't know if 30 days is enough to get to the U.S. but she says "Vamos a lucha". She's like we will fight to get there.

The Mexican government has been in touch with the caravan even giving some that 30-day permission to stay in the country without having to worry about deportation. President Trump insists the caravan is breaking up.

So you can see this is a little bit of a smaller group that has just arrived here into Puebla -- not a thousand as originally had gathered in the southern part of Mexico.

[01:50:00] But this is not necessarily the Trump effect. This is what happens every year during this annual pilgrimage. That's not the Trump effect. They always kind of diminish in numbers.

What has changed since, President Trump now a new plan to put the National Guard on the U.S.-Mexico border because President Trump says this is a dangerous caravan.

This gentleman is saying that -- he's saying they are not dangerous because they're not thieves. They don't kill people. They're not gang members. He says these are families and workers.

For now, they'll stay in this church where the priest makes sure everyone has food and shelter before they even arrive though much of the day was spent preparing for them. The community bought food, water, even books.

But this is temporary. After a few days here, they head to Mexico City where organizers say about 200 will continue on to the U.S.- Mexico border.

She says she doesn't know what will happen but if she finds herself with the National Guard she may have to wait. But with God's help she says she'll get there ok.

They'll make it to the U.S., they say, not to endanger anyone, rather in search for a better life.

Leyla Santiago, CNN -- Puebla, Mexico.


SESAY: We're going to take a very quick break. More news after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) SESAY: Well, New York police say ultimate fighting star Conor McGregor has turned himself in for question after an altercation in Brooklyn. UFC president Dana White says McGregor and his entourage attacked a tour bus Thursday throwing trash cans, metal barricades and a hand truck (ph). TMZ obtained video of the incident that you're looking at here.

Two of the fighters involved were hurt and deemed unfit to fight Saturday. White says McGregor had some sort of disagreement with an athlete on the bus. Police say charges are pending.

Well, the first round of the Masters, golf's first major of the season, is on the books. And no great surprise past winner Jordan Spieth grabbed a two-stroke lead, thanks to an eagle and four straight birdies.

All eyes on Tiger Woods on the comeback trail. He struggled to one over par and is tied for 29th position.

But the shocker was Sergio Garcia. The implosion on the 15th hole, the defending champ dunked fived balls into water setting a course record 13 strokes at the hole -- yikes. The Spaniard's hopes of wearing another green jacket are now all but sunk, no pun intended. He said simply, the ball just didn't want to stop.

You tell me that happens sometimes.

Donald Trump appears to be running his administration as if he's flying by the seat of his pants. It's no great mystery. It might have something to do with his jeans. We apologize for that really, really awful pun.

Jeanne Moos reports.


DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: It would have taken about two minutes.

[01:55:01] JEANNE MOOS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: He's got a big personality. He's got big hair. And now he's got big pants?

"Vanity Fair" asked the pressing question -- what is going on with Trump's pant legs?

On a couple of recent occasions the President has been photographed with what the magazine calls enormous pant legs, "the circumference of a healthy toddlers head -- is something changing"?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Height 75 inches, weight 239 pounds.

MOOS: Is the President gaining weight or losing height or just in need of a tailor? In Trump's "Think Like a Billionaire" he wrote, "I wear Brioni suits which I buy off the rack."

Remember the last (INAUDIBLE) over presidential pants? UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Your husband wore these -- that's a picture of




OBAMA: Jeans.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: But if you're not a mom then you're --

OBAMA: Dad jeans.

MOOS: Dad jeans, mom jeans -- whatever you call them, they're not President Trump's problem.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He has incredibly good genes and it's just the way God made him.

MOOS: But there's one guy with a leg up on President Trump -- forget nuclear button size -- look at these babies.

One Twitter user launched the dear leader with the caption "Final inflation test for the new Kim Jong balloon. His massive pant legs have inspired a British journalist to create #KimJongUnTrouserWatch. Another commenter likened his limbs to a par of those inflatable wind dancers.

Forget the arms race, we're talking a legs race -- one President Trump would probably rather lose. At least when the Politi-fact pants on fire meter lights up over the President's latest untruth -- he'll have more pants to burn.

And if it's money you want to burn, his jogging pants will set you back $50.

Jeanne Moos, CNN -- New York.


SESAY: I'm going to get those pants for John Vause.

You're watching CNN NEWSROOM live from Los Angeles. I'm Isha Sesay.

Be sure to join us on Twitter at CNN Newsroom L.A. for highlights and clips from our shows. We'll be back with much more here right after this.


[02:00:04] SESAY: This is NEWSROOM L.A.

Hello and welcome to our viewers all around the world. I'm Isha Sesay.