Return to Transcripts main page
Anderson Cooper 360 Degrees
TMZ: New Ranson Note in Guthrie Case Given to FBI; Reward Money Now Totals $202,500.00 in Guthrie Case; A Lab Visit to See How DNA is Analyzed as Investigators Look at DNA Evidence in Guthrie Case; Mark Zuckerberg Testifies in Landmark Social Media Trial; Zuckerberg Defends Meta's Youth Strategy at Social Media Trial; Eight Backcountry Skiers Killed, One Missing After Avalanche; Iran and Russia to Conduct Joint Naval Drill Tomorrow; Israel Raises Alert Level Amid U.S.-Iran Tensions. Aired 8-9p ET
Aired February 18, 2026 - 20:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
WILL RIPLEY, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: ... but that's the world we're living in, China and its humanoid robots getting stronger every year.
BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: Yes, certainly very concerning. Clearly to the Chinese government. Will, excellent reporting. Thank you so much for that. And before we go, a programing note tonight on CNN, Laura Coates has a special hour on "The Search for Nancy Guthrie" and that will start at 11:00 P.M. Eastern. Thank you so much for joining us. AC360 starts now.
[20:00:32]
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST, "ANDERSON COOPER: 360": Tonight on 360, with authorities on both sides of U.S. Mexico border looking for Nancy Guthrie another purported ransom demand surfaces.
Also, in the mountains near Lake Tahoe, the search continues for victims of the country's deadliest avalanche in 45 years, going on remarkably with up to another foot of snow falling and new warnings of avalanches.
And later with the second carrier group heading to the Gulf. Multiple sources now say the U.S. military is prepared to strike Iran as early as this weekend. The question is, has the President decided to do it?
Good evening, thanks for joining us. We begin with fresh reason to ask a central question, the search for Nancy Guthrie. Is this or is this not a kidnapping for ransom? Tonight, to that point, TMZ says it has obtained another purported ransom e-mail. This one, they say, involves a cryptocurrency other than Bitcoin, but the dollar amount is similar to the $6 million demanded in the first e-mail TMZ received days after miss Guthrie vanished.
There's no indication whether the ransom notes are connected or even authentic. They say this new e-mail includes a crypto account number different from the original, and reports that it, "graphically describes the consequences if the ransom is not paid." Also, tonight we are learning that the search for leads is
multinational. A law enforcement official telling CNN that authorities on both sides of the nearby U.S.-Mexico border have been briefed to look out for anything that might help in the effort.
Also today, the Pima County Sheriff's office upped its crime stoppers reward in the case by $100,000.00 to $200,500.00 thanks to the donation last night from an attorney in Milwaukee. The FBI is already offering $100,000.00 as well. Meantime, with the search now about to enter day 19, the tribute outside the Guthrie home is growing along with yellow flowers and yellow ribbons. A new sign which reads let "Nancy come home" and quotes daughter Savannah's recent pleas to the kidnappers "it's never too late to do the right thing".
On the set of the "Today" show this morning, yellow flowers as well to honor fellow co-host Savannah, who remains in Tucson waiting for word. CNN's Ed Lavandera is outside the Guthrie house for more tonight. So, what can you tell us about this new purported ransom note received by TMZ?
ED LAVANDERA, CNN SENIOR NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, TMZ says it is not going to at the request of the FBI because they say they are working with the FBI on this and sharing that information, not sharing too many details as compared to what they've shared in previous notes but they describe it as a more sophisticated note, spelling out the consequences for not paying the ransom and rather graphic detail. And it also is interesting because it demanding the ransom, which is about for the same amount of money as the previous notes however, it's demanding the money in a different form of cryptocurrency.
But again, Anderson, it's important to point out, I mean, we are 18 days into all of this. There has still been no indication from authorities on whether or not they believe these ransom notes are legitimate or authentic in any way we still haven't gotten any clarity on that, even though we know that over the last few weeks and the investigators and the Guthrie family have taken them all very seriously.
COOPER: And just to be clear, we have no indication one way or the other or correct me if I'm wrong, that this new alleged ransom note that TMZ got is in any way linked directly to the previous ones they have received, is that right?
LAVANDERA: That's our understanding. It sounds like, you know, in listening to Harvey Levin talk tonight, it sounded like they were confident that was perhaps coming from the same person, but just very, very different. That was my read on what was said.
But yes, but I think there's just still so much unknown and lack of clarity on it really, about whether or not this is even legitimate. In fact, in their TMZ reporting today they talked about how you know, the consequences for sending fake ransom letters you know, the punishment for that is very severe and something the FBI is taking very seriously, as we have seen in another fake ransom request that was done early on in this investigation.
COOPER: Yes, Ed Lavandera, thanks.
We're joined now, by our law enforcement team, criminologist behavioral analyst Casey Jordan, former NYPD detective David Sarni and CNN chief law enforcement intelligence analyst John Miller.
John, what stands out to you now on this, this day? I mean, this new ransom. What do you make of it?
JOHN MILLER, CNN CHIEF LAW ENFORCEMENT AND INTELLIGENCE ANALYST: Well, I think the longer this goes on and the less the later notes like this one don't indicate something specific that definitively proves that they have the victim, that the victim is, okay. The more were subject to the higher risk of scams.
We've already seen one individual in Los Angeles arrested and charged with trying to fake claims to get paid Bitcoin by the family. We've seen another note that came in late last week saying that I'll give you the name of the kidnapper in return for payment, but without fronting any information to show any bona fides there and now we have this. So, it's obviously -- each one has to be run down. Each one has to be treated at the outset as real, which is why they're being careful about what they say about it.
But in some ways, what this note says is in conflict with what another earlier note said. So, they're going to have to go through this but the risk of scams is increasing as the clock ticks.
[20:05:58]
COOPER: David, do you agree with that?
DAVID SARNI, FORMER NYPD DETECTIVE: Yes, you know you have to take every lead as they are and that's the thing we can't just dismiss it and say we don't believe in it. I've had cases like this, like, we may not think it's real, but you have to treat it as it's real, and that's how we have to look at it. These are notes that come in. You're going to take and work it anyway.
COOPER: It's got to be so frustrating on working a case like that.
SARNI: It's maddening when you're an investigator doing this, because all you're getting is stuff, information that you're going to look at but you feel that the feelings and the facts have to change and you have to deal with facts. You feel that these are annoying and these letters are not accurate, and they're just ways of scamming.
COOPER: It's also taking your time away from investigating other potential leads.
SARNI: Absolutely. Because now you have to have a team look at those leads and you have to have analysts look at that. And now you have what you're doing other things, you have evidence you're looking at, which is a video that glove, the crime scene that's still there. You're now going toward Mexico to look at that area. So, you have a lot of now feelers going farther out. COOPER: Casey, now that the combined total for the FBI and crime
stoppers rewards is more than $200,000.00, you know, do you think that could compel someone coming forward?
CASEY JORDAN, CRIMINOLOGIST BEHAVIORAL ANALYST: We do see that happen sometimes, especially if the suspect has an accomplice. It usually is going to be, well, we always like to say your chain is only as strong as its weakest link. Whoever might know who the culprit is will eventually fold and we like to say drop a dime to get some reward money. But I have to say, this is why we're seeing all of these ransom demands, which most people think are hoaxes at this point. Because compared to the amount of money you can get for a ransom, I mean, what's $200,000.00?
So, I really do think that if the money keeps inching up, we will get better tips. But whether any of them actually pan out, I really don't think they will. Not for the reward money. Somebody who's going to solve this is not going to be in it for the reward money. They're going to do it because it's the right thing.
COOPER: And John, the FBI's reportedly cross-referencing Google searches for Nancy Guthrie, Savannah Guthrie, how I mean, how effective is something like that?
MILLER: It can be very effective. They looked at google searches not just for Nancy Guthrie, Savannah Guthrie, but they looked at Google searches for specific things like Nancy Guthrie's home address before the kidnapping.
Now, when you look at the trends there, and we did our own version of this a couple of weeks ago at the beginning of this, looking for the same things. You see a giant spike in these searches starting February 1st because of the kidnapping. But if you then go backwards, you see you see a spike in January where there is a story, I'm sorry, a spike in November, where Savannah Guthrie does a story on Tucson, her home town. Her mother still lives there. And you see some searches for, well, where does her mother live there?
But then, at January 6th, with no such stimulus, you see a smaller spike. Now, that raises the question, is that one person doing multiple searches? Is that a couple of people doing the same searches? We can't see what's behind it. And at least one of the arrests, at least one of the suspects that they looked at in this case over the last couple of weeks, is somebody that had done searches in December but that lead, of course, washed out.
I solved a case this way in the NYPD where we had a bombing. It had killed an individual. It went to the wrong address, and we basically subpoenaed the search engines to say how many people searched for that address within the six months before this bombing with the right name, but the wrong address. And, you know, we eventually whittled that down to 12 names and then to five and number five was our killer, who's been arrested.
COOPER: And, David how crucial is it to figure out at this stage? Was this a robbery gone wrong? Was this a kidnapping from the get go? SARNI: Well motive, we may find the motive later on. What you're
dealing with right now is an abduction and we have other information that say it might be a kidnapping, but what we have really, at this point is abduction of an 84-year-old woman who has health issues. That's what you're looking at. We may find out the why this happened later on, but that may come out as a result of all the leads that you're looking at and then piecing that together.
[20:10:27]
COOPER: Casey, the sheriff told NBC his team is looking to a particular moment on the doorbell camera footage when the suspect's right hand is near the lens. Some people believe they see the outline of a ring on one of the fingers inside the glove, this person is wearing circled it on the screen. Or maybe it's, it could be just a ridge material, the glove, I suppose. If no one has identified the guy on his eyes and facial hair and the way he moves around, do you have much hope that a ring could possibly jog someone's memory? If it is, in fact, a ring?
JORDAN: Well, the problem is, we really have no idea if it's a ring. I've heard that maybe its sap from a sap glove. And the bottom line is that we don't know what it looks like maybe its round, its embossed. Maybe it's a class ring. I think the value in that is, for anyone out there who may have someone in mind who seems to fit the suspect. Did he stop wearing the ring? That's what you're looking for. Not the guy with the ring but the guy who got rid of his ring, a ring he wears all the time. That's the kind of thing that would tip somebody off. Especially if he also got rid of his backpack and his Aero Hex jacket, right.
These are the kinds of things which together can get us closer to a suspect. I don't think the ring is going to be a critical piece of evidence, but it could actually fit into a profile down the road.
COOPER: We're going to take a quick break. We'll have more on the process of trying to match the DNA that investigators have with a person or persons. How one renowned lab does it.
And later, the effort in an almost impossibly dangerous conditions right now to recover eight backcountry skiers killed in California's deadliest avalanche in recorded history and one who is missing and presumed dead.
We'll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[20:16:34]
COOPER: New development to report about the volume of evidence in the search for Nancy Guthrie, a law enforcement source tells us that investigators are now reviewing thousands of hours of videos from the Greater Tucson area. They've been canvasing homes and businesses government agencies for any surveillance video that might help locate miss Guthrie. Also, the Pima County Sheriff's Office says investigators are still
analyzing what they call biological evidence from her home. This comes after none of the DNA samples in the case tested so far have flagged any matches on the FBI's criminal database. Randi Kaye takes us inside a DNA lab at John Jay College of Criminal Justice to show us how DNA is analyzed.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
RANDI KAYE, CNN CORRESPONDENT (on camera): I brought with me this t- shirt so you could show us how you would extract a sample if there is some DNA on here. So, what would you do?
NATHAN LENTS, PROFESSOR OF BIOLOGY, JOHN JAY COLLEGE OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE: We would want only the DNA from that blood if possible. Not contaminated with DNA around it and then we would also do a separate swab around it so that if there is DNA from the victim, we have a nice clean profile that we can subtract if we have a mixed sample.
We open it like this and were carefully opening it away from myself.
KAYE (on camera): With gloves on.
LENTS: With gloves, always with gloves. And you would take this out. And you see, there's a cotton swab inside that tube. So that cotton swab is extra protected, just like this. And that would be all you need. You do not need to collect very much.
KAYE (on camera): So, this is what's called the biological safety cabinet. What goes on in here?
LENTS: I will open this back up and I'll expose, and just the tip is all we need because if you remember we only touch the tip to the evidence. We would open up our tube here and just simply cut off the extreme end. And if I did my job well, this will be right there in the bottom. You see that little cotton swab? And the DNA of interest will be there. Now, we need to extract that DNA.
KAYE (voice over): After the extraction, the sample is heated up in what's called a heated shaker.
LENTS: What we collect is actually cells, intact cells, and they could be blood cells, skin cells, whatever it is, the DNA is still in there, so we need to release it so that we can then extract it and analyze it.
You can see that this will circulate the solution to help release the DNA.
KAYE (voice over): Next up this thermal cycler, which makes billions of copies of the DNA sample in order to analyze very specific regions.
LENTS: The cloned PCR test, we'll hit start.
KAYE (on camera): How much do you need? LENTS: We can get a full profile from, you know, sub-nanogram, so
picogram amounts. I think the smallest I've ever seen a full profile come from is about 100 picograms, and that represents about four human cells.
KAYE (on camera): Wow.
LENTS: Very, very little. So, we can get a full profile.
KAYE (voice over): Then finally, answers from this genetic analyzer which examines and sequences fragments of the DNA.
LENTS: Put the samples into this plate and what this is going to do is a small capillary will come in and suck out the sample one at a time and send it through a matrix that is designed to separate the pieces based on their size. It's so accurate that a single nucleotide, a single base pair difference, can be easily discriminated by this machine.
KAYE (voice over): After all that, this is what the DNA profile looks like.
LENTS: If they match at every single position, the search would come up positive and would say, here's where your hit was. Contact this crime lab and ask them for more information, because the database does not contain identifying information.
[20:20:04]
KAYE (on camera): So, they would have to match all of these genes, this entire program.
LENTS: All of them, even one being different is enough to eliminate a suspect.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
COOPER: So, Randi, in the Guthrie case, without a DNA match in the FBI's National Database, they are now looking for familial DNA matches. How does that work?
KAYE: Well, Anderson, with familial DNA investigators, they sort of work backwards since they didn't match the suspect in the FBI's database. They then will try to match the DNA they have to a profile in one of these public genetic genealogy databases where people have shared their genetic profiles.
Now, a match wouldn't be exact in that case, but it could point authorities toward a relative of the suspect and then they would go from there. But as I learned today, Anderson, one of the greatest misconceptions about DNA is that it answers every question, when in fact it's really just part of the puzzle. Among other things, a DNA profile doesn't say when a sample was deposited or if it was left by an innocent third party. And obviously, that would be very crucial information in the Guthrie case -- Anderson.
COOPER: Yes, Randi, thanks very much.
More now from our law enforcement team. John, I mean, how difficult is or how long does it take for familial DNA? It seems like for, you know DNA from the FBI database, if that takes a long time, is it even longer for familial?
MILLER: It can be and it can be very quick. I mean it can go from seconds to taking much longer months, years, depending on a number of things that have to do with the construct of the DNA and how far the family members removed and so on. But look at all of the cases that were hopelessly unsolved where these familial DNA keys opened the case to a smaller universe of suspects, somebody related to these people, and then you go through them and you find out who in this crowd appears to have a predisposition towards this kind of crime and it can and it can work.
COOPER: Have you ever worked with familial DNA?
SARNI: When that's, when we started doing the familial DNA, it wasn't happening with us. But we would do is wed get DNA we'd get a notification saying it's, we have a substrate, but it's no good. In other words, its mixed. You can't get anything out of it. You have a match to somebody. The thing is, they're not in the system, which means you can then, if we with any partners we have in the private sector, that's relatively new when we're starting that the last few years we've been doing that and it has been successful with these cold cases, much more successful than it was before, because DNA testing has leaps and bounds from when it started in like the late 80s, so.
MILLER: The NYPD just had a case. It's awaiting sentencing any day now where it was a 25-year-old murder of a little girl. They did familial DNA on evidence they found at the homicide scene where the body was left, and it went to an individual in Florida. They looked at that guy upside down and backwards. They conducted surveillance. They waited for him to drink a cup of coffee. They collected the cup. They ran him. He wasn't a match. But as they expand that out to his family they found he had a brother in the Bronx and the brother in the Bronx lived in the same building as the girl was abducted from. That is one of those miracle cases that came together on a real long shot.
COOPER: And Casey, I mean, on one hand, the suspects tried to cover up the doorbell camera, a piece of shrubbery which seems clumsy at best. On the other hand, this person managed to essentially vanish with Mrs. Guthrie as far as we know, and has evaded capture and evaded investigators for more than two weeks how do you square all that?
JORDAN: Listen the theories have been very fluid and evolving as we go. I think all of us were a little baffled by the amateurish nature of the guy on the porch, you know grabbing the weeds and putting them in the camera and carrying his gun dangling between his legs. And just it could be beginners luck. I mean, this tends to support the current theory that perhaps this was not a planned kidnapping. It was an afterthought from somebody who was planning just a burglary got inside. Maybe you got surprised by Nancy. Maybe things went wrong and he decided to take her with him. But at this point, we are just expanding from the inner circle of
Nancy's friends and families, outwards. Because statistically, it is somebody who is a few degrees of separation from Nancy. So, they're working on that. They're working on all the angles between the Google, the family DNA, checking all of the footage from the border. You have to cover all bases. And you know, the public is so invested in this because we love Savannah and her family. But at this point, I have to say it's a long slog, there are hundreds of law enforcement and investigators working on this. Something will turn up, but it will take a while.
[20:25:03]
COOPER: Casey Jordan, David Sarni, John Miller, thanks very much.
Up next, Mark Zuckerberg, the powerful CEO of Meta, grilled in a landmark lawsuit accusing social media companies of intentionally addicting kids to their platforms.
Also, eight backcountry skiers killed, one still missing, presumed dead. It's in what is now the deadliest avalanche in California's recorded history, the latest, just ahead.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
COOPER: There is breaking news. Mark Zuckerberg, the powerful CEO of Meta testified in a landmark trial in Los Angeles today where social media companies are accused of intentionally addicting children to their platforms.
[20:30:14]
Now, Meta owns Instagram, which is a defendant in this suit. This is the first time that Zuckerberg has testified in front of a jury on claims that social media harms children's mental health.
He's testifying as a witness, not a defendant in this case, which was brought by a woman who claims the companies designed their products to addict her when she was a child damaging her mental health. Hundreds of more cases like this have been filed. Two years ago, Zuckerberg was called before a Senate committee and asked to apologize to parents who claimed that social media harmed their children and led to their deaths.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN. JOSH HAWLEY, (R-MO): You're on national television. Would you like now to apologize to the victims who have been harmed by your product? Show him the pictures. Would you like to apologize for what you've done to these good people?
(APPLAUSE)
MARK ZUCKERBERG, FOUNDER & CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, META: I'm sorry for everything you have all been through. It's terrible. No one should have to go through the things that your families have suffered. (END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: Kara Swisher joins me now, host of the podcast "On with Kara Swisher" and "Pivot." How big a Moment does this feel like to you, or doesn't?
KARA SWISHER, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: It doesn't.
COOPER: I mean, obviously, it's a landmark case. We've seen Zuckerberg testifying there.
SWISHER: Yeah.
COOPER: Apologizing awkwardly to those families.
SWISHER: Sure.
COOPER: But, courtroom is a different arena.
SWISHER: Yeah, I think it's just yet another appearance and doing the same thing where they've done nothing over the many years and then they have these testimonies of parents that feel like their kids have gotten hurt or there are safety issues or addiction issues, and they sort of sail by them.
I mean, this is obviously a court case. But it's sort of more of the same. I've been hearing this from Zuckerberg since I met him, essentially, is that everybody wants to use these apps because they're so fantastic and not that there might be problems using them.
COOPER: Parents of kids who have been harmed by social media, they were at the courtroom say, here's what one had to say.
SWISHER: Yeah.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JULIANNA ARNOLD, FOUNDING MEMBER, PARENTS RISE!: He knew perfectly well what was going on. The intention of the company was to prey on teens, use teens usage, exploit them so they can make greater profits, and that was done intentionally not by accident.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
COOPER: And the plaintiff in this case began using Instagram at nine. There was some heated testimony about Instagram's age verification rules, keeping kids under the age of 13 off it.
SWISHER: Right.
COOPER: Is there any reason to think that that is a sufficient safeguard?
SWISHER: No, not at all. They took years and years, I think, just till 2019 to really have age -- a version of age gating and it's a very light one in place. I was surprised to see, what is it, four million 10- to 12-year-olds on the platform when nobody under 13 is supposed to be on it.
And so, obviously, they're not doing a great job of keeping people off and you know, a lot of the emails talk about the idea of employees who wanted more guardrails and them not being put in place because of the leadership. They have all kinds of arguments. Why not?
And by the way, they're not the only one, like YouTube is right now on trial here, and others. There's many others and this is a question of whether these are addictive experiences and products, or are they just so great that we can't stop using them. It seems like the same thing to me.
But, they're trying to call it problematic usage versus addiction, and that's what they'll try to do. They'll try to blame the victim for her own problems and that didn't happen because of them. But certainly, all of us know social media is a problem whether it's on partisanship or making us hate each other, making us feel bad, or making girls have less self-esteem or boys be more isolated. I think anyone who's a parent knows this. And anyone who's a person knows this using these, using these apps can be really problematic.
COOPER: Well, even for adults, I mean, you know ?
SWISHER: Yeah.
COOPER: I mean, I'm on Instagram and I find myself, occasionally, getting sucked in and just scrolling --
SWISHER: Right.
COOPER: -- and feeling terrible about my life --
SWISHER: Yeah.
COOPER: -- because everyone seems to be --
SWISHER: Yeah.
COOPER: -- having a much more exciting life. And there's the core gamification --
SWISHER: Yeah.
COOPER: -- aspect of getting the dope little dopamine hits of likes and followers --
SWISHER: Yeah.
COOPER: -- and things like that.
SWISHER: Well, it's designed, as I said earlier today, like a casino of attention. It's not the same thing as watching a movie. It's not this -- they do make those arguments. It's not -- they call it entertainment now, but it's not entertainment, it's something else and I'm not sure what to call it, but it does feel like a casino. You can't look away from the lights. You can't stop pressing the button. You can't stop going to the next red button. And I -- you know, it can make you feel bad, especially if your feeds are bad. It can make you feel isolated and all kinds of things. I think everybody knows this and that's going to be the problem here for Facebook, is the jury probably has addiction problems of their own, even if Facebook doesn't want to call it addiction, Facebook executives.
But everybody understands the relationship with the phone has gotten toxic, especially for young people.
COOPER: Yeah, Kara Swisher, thanks so much. Appreciate it.
SWISHER: Thanks.
COOPER: Coming up next, the survivor of one avalanche on how he lived through it as searchers work in still dangerous conditions to recover victims from the latest one, the deadliest American avalanche in decades.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
CHRIS FEUTRIER, FOREST SUPERVISOR, TAHOE NATIONAL FOREST: That persistent weak layer is still there and has reloaded with another three feet of snow. So, the hazard remains high.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[20:39:53]
COOPER: Conditions remain deadly tonight in the mountain hit by California's deadliest avalanche in recorded history. That is what search crews have been up against in their effort to recover the bodies of eight backcountry skiers who did not survive, and locate a ninth who is presumed dead.
[20:40:00]
They and six survivors were returning from a three-day excursion when they were overtaken by a wall of snow. More from CNN's Stephanie Elam.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
STEPHANIE ELAM, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): It was the final leg of a three-day cross-country skiing trip when the avalanche hit. 11 skiers and four guides were traversing the backcountry at Castle Peak, a more than 9,000-foot summit in the Sierra Nevada Mountains near Lake Tahoe, when catastrophe struck.
According to the Sheriff's Department, the group was trying to get out when someone saw the deluge of snow and yelled avalanche.
SHERIFF SHANNON MOON, NEVADA COUNTY, CA: They were nine women and six men. One was A Blackbird Mountain Guide and five survivors were clients on that tour. ELAM (voice-over): Eight people died on the mountain, one remains missing. The group was cut off by an avalanche of snow, ice, rocks and debris about as long as a football field, according to the U.S. Forest Service. The local sheriff's office received a 9-1-1 call around 11:30 Tuesday morning, saying much of the party was trapped.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Castle Peak, reported as nine to 10 people buried, three others attempting to dig them out.
ELAM (voice-over): There were storm warnings to avoid the area as early as Friday. The National Weather Service in Reno issued a haunting forewarning, "Will you be able to make it home Monday? With forecasters predicting that the storm would drop several feet of snow when all is said and done. And on Sunday the Blackbird Mountain Guides, the company leading the trip, forecasted a weak layer of snow that could create unpredictable avalanches.
Then on Monday, the powerful winter storm began pummeling the Sierras before Tuesday's tragedy struck. Now, as recovery efforts continue, an urgent plea.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Please avoid the Sierras.
ELAM (voice-over): Stephanie Elam, CNN.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
COOPER: Joining me now is Nevada County Sheriff, Shannon Moon. Sheriff, what more can you tell us about how this unfolded and what if anything survivors have told you -- told your department?
MOON: Yeah, thanks for having us on, Anderson. You know, this has been an incredible incident for the staff and the volunteers to respond to. We've been in contact with the six, clearly, the six survivors that we were able to safely extricate from the mountain late in the evening last night. A lot of joy for those six. But, of course, we have confirmed the eight decedents that we located that evening and then one that is still missing, presumed to be deceased.
The efforts are really combated by Mother Nature and truly some really horrific conditions that are still up at that high elevation.
(CROSSTALK)
COOPER: I mean, just watching the images just -- I mean, I can't imagine how difficult it is for search-and-rescue teams to locate those who've died, locate survivors and get them to safety.
MOON: Yeah, the wind, clearly, zero visibility, the ability to get our snow cats deployed and in close to the area. But again, with the extreme high avalanche dangers, we weren't able to get as close as they wanted. So just from where the snow cats were able to get to, they still had about a two-mile ski in from that location just to get to the scene.
Again, locating the six survivors that were taking shelter. They had already discovered three of the decedents as they were trying to do their best to help with their friends and loved ones, and clients that were in that trip.
(CROSSTALK)
COOPER: So they had already searched and found three?
MOON: Correct. And again, just the amount of time that it takes to get through and traverse into the backcountry in our vehicles and with the experienced folks on our teams, just an incredible event. And then, as soon as they started assuring that we could get all six of them -- two of them were not mobile because of their injuries. So getting them the two miles to the snow cat was difficult and the other searchers that were present were, again, continuing to search and look for any other survivors and they were able to locate eight of the nine missing.
COOPER: Wow.
MOON: So, we still have one missing presumably deceased, unfortunately, on a tragic incident like this. I can't say enough about the heroic effort of the searchers and the first responders that went out in those conditions last night and moving forward into our next operations. Clearly, we've switched over to a recovery which is just really wanting to make sure that we're safe in the conditions.
[20:45:00]
We've received nothing but more of Mother Nature today with more snow. We work in hand-in-hand with our partners at Sierra Avalanche Center through the Tahoe National Forest and conditions are just -- right now, that it's too unsafe.
COOPER: Yeah.
MOON: The avalanche that did occur on yesterday was classified as a D2.5. So they go -- the destructive ratings for avalanches go from D1, which is harmless to a D5, which is pretty, you know, the most immensely destructive. This was a 2.5. A 2.0 would bury a person. A 3.0 would bury a house.
COOPER: Wow.
MOON: And it's right in the middle of those two. So just horrific conditions and we really --
COOPER: I'm sure --
(CROSSTALK)
MOON: Condolences to the families.
COOPER: Yeah, and sure, I just -- thank you so much for all your efforts, for telling us about them and for all those who have risked their own lives to try to save others and help others. And I know there's more work ahead to to bring them all home. Sheriff Moon, thank you very much.
MOON: Thank you, sir. Appreciate the time.
COOPER: Joining me now is David Miller. Dave Miller, Owner and Director of International Alpine Guides, a certified avalanche safety instructor. Also, Cory Richards, a retired professional climber who survived an avalanche in Pakistan back in 2011.
Dave, as someone who has spent a lot of time in the mountains around Castle Peak, Frog Lake, how difficult do you think it would have been to navigate that area in yesterday's storm? And the fact that these folks who survived were able to find three of their own seems remarkable to me.
DAVE MILLER, OWNER & DIRECTOR, INTERNATIONAL ALPINE GUIDES: Well, it would have been difficult because it was snowing very hard at the time and the visibility was obviously very low. So it does increase the difficulty for sure. Professional mountain guides almost all have extensive training and how to do whiteout navigation. So they do have the tools in which to navigate, but of course, it is more difficult when you have whiteout situations like this.
As far as them being able to dig out some of their companions, mountain guides all have and these mountain guides in particular had extensive training in Avalanche rescue. So it is going to take time because with that many victims buried in the snow, but it's not unreasonable that they were able to do that.
COOPER: Cory, you and I have spoken before and it's good to talk to you again. I'm sorry it is under these circumstances. You survived an avalanche in 2011 in Pakistan. You famously took this photo of you, I think, an hour or more after getting yourself out. Can you just explain? I want to talk to you about what these survivors are going to be facing in a second, but can you just explain a little bit about what it is like to be buried in an avalanche and how you got yourself out?
CORY RICHARDS, SURVIVED 2011 AVALANCHE IN PAKISTAN: Well, I mean we were very fortunate, my two climbing partners and I, we were very fortunate that we ended up mostly on the surface because we ended up in what's called a deposit zone, where the snow has started to slow down and it's on flat ground.
But really, being in these avalanches is chaotic, it's loud and it is quite terrifying because it -- the best way I can describe it is sort of like being in a washing machine but feeling your body getting sucked deeper and deeper into the debris and knowing that there's a strong possibility that if you're buried, there's going to be no way out and you're going to have to rely on the people around you.
COOPER: No way out because you can't, I mean, you can't just climb out?
RICHARDS: Yeah, I mean, first of all, the weight of this kind of snow, especially if it's wet. I don't know what the actual snow pack is in the Sierra right now, but if the snow is carrying a considerable amount of water, or if there's just a considerable amount of snow, once you're buried, it's basically like being encased in. There's no movement, right?
So whatever position you're buried in whether it's upside down, whether -- you're not going to be able to move. And on top of that, it's completely dark and as soon as your body heat starts to heat that snow around you, that snow pack is going to start to form an ice sort of encasing around you. So there's really no way to move once you're totally buried.
COOPER: And Dave, I knew you had a guide out yesterday in the Lake Tahoe area. What were snow conditions like what -- was -- why -- you know, there was a high avalanche danger. Why?
MILLER: Why was there high avalanche danger?
COOPER: Yeah.
MILLER: Yeah. Well, there was a lot of new snow that came in quickly. There has been some forecasted persistent weak layers in the snow. But really, it was a lot of snow coming in very quickly. And that's why it was high avalanche danger.
[20:50:00]
Yes, we did have one guide out in the field. They were not in or near avalanche terrain, which is kind of important to note here, those avalanches don't happen everywhere in the backcountry. Not everywhere in the backcountry is avalanche terrain. You can travel in some areas where you are safe from avalanches.
COOPER: Yeah. And Cory, just briefly, I mean, what's your concern for those who survive? What are they going to need?
RICHARDS: Well, my immediate thought with all of this, Anderson, was aftercare. I mean and I know that sounds it's kind of a strange term. But look, these things have profound psychological impacts and we need to start to metabolize those psycho-emotional impacts as quickly as possible. I mean because trauma like this and the resultant grief, whether it's from losing a loved one, whether it's the trauma of being caught in the avalanche, or whether it's survivor's guilt, these things are insidious and they're persistent.
And how we metabolize these experiences is important and how quickly we start down that journey is really important too. Many people that I've known sort of sit on it and they are like this, well, I don't know. I wasn't really bothered. But then, months or years pass, and all of a sudden, there are behavioral changes. There's all sorts of stuff that trauma sort of forms in our lives.
COOPER: Yeah.
RICHARDS: So, caring for that immediately is really important.
COOPER: Yeah, Cory Richards, it is good to talk to you again. Dave Miller, thank you so much. I really appreciate it, both of you.
Coming up next, we're going to take a look at the Pentagon moving significant military assets to the Middle East. There's new word on the potential time frame of and readiness for a strike on Iran. The top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee joins me.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[20:56:01]
COOPER: More Breaking News tonight as the Pentagon significantly increases assets in the Middle East. Sources tell CNN that the military is prepared to strike Iran as early as this weekend if President Trump gives the order.
One source saying he is consulting with advisers and allies, and has not made a final decision. Meanwhile, Iran's state media reports that Iran and Russia will stage a joint drill in the region beginning tomorrow.
Joining us now is Democratic Congressman Jim Himes of Connecticut, Ranking Member on the Intelligence Committee.
Do you think an attack is imminent? What are your thoughts on that?
REP. JIM HIMES, (D-CT) RANKING MEMBER, HOUSE INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE: Yeah, look, I think the president has now conducted a military attack on Caracas, which went flawlessly, and he has conducted a military attack on the tunnels, the nuclear infrastructure in Iran. That also went flawlessly. So right now, the president believes that he can do this stuff without much risk which is, by the way, a very dangerous frame of mind because there's a lot of risk involved.
I think that both the United States and the Israelis are aware of the fact that the Iranians are doing, carefully, what they can to sort of restore what was damaged in the initial attacks. And so, yeah.
COOPER: They are doing that? They're doing what they can to restore it?
HIMES: Yeah, yeah, look, they're clearing tunnels. They're restoring electricity. They're doing stuff in tunnels that we can't see. So, I mean, I think they're probably doing everything they can to try to rebuild what was destroyed a number of months ago.
So when you say imminent, is it this week? I don't know. The president -- remember, the president will be satisfied with something that is cinematic, that makes a big boom and destroys and breaks a lot of stuff. That's what happened in Caracas.
He doesn't care so much about the longer questions of regime change, which are much more challenging. So --
COOPER: Right. So which raises the question, what would be the objective of an U.S. action against Iran? I mean, if it's not regime change. HIMES: Well, remember, this is President Trump. So his objective would be to do something which thrills people cinematically, right? I mean, this is what the president does, right? He appoints people to his cabinet who look good, who play the part. So, he will be very satisfied with a lot of explosions and a lot of broken stuff in Iran. That doesn't lead to regime change.
And in fact, I have a lot of Iranian diaspora folks in my district and they say, we really hope, especially since Donald Trump told the protesters that we would be there, that he is there. The question is, what does it mean to be there? Regime change can't happen just from the air. I mean, you might get lucky, right? You might break enough stuff that the regime collapses.
The probability of that is pretty low though. So when you start talking about regime change, you start looking at Iraq, you start looking at Afghanistan, where we actually had a lot of troops on the ground. And that's a place where the president has never gone.
COOPER: I mean, he was telling protesters to take over government facilities, to get the names of people who were attacking them that help was on the way.
HIMES: Yeah, exactly. And I mean, when that happened, it just -- it sort of broke my heart, right? Because if you're going to say that, and we've done this -- we did this in Iraq, right? When a U.S. president sort of said, you know, rebel to the Shiites under Saddam Hussein, and they did, and they got brutally murdered, and we did not show up for them.
And there's a long and ugly history of this. So, again, presumably the president, when he said that, he didn't appreciate the fact that they believed that we would be there in force, not just dropping bombs on battleships, because we can do that really easily without a lot of risk. But anyway, when the president said that, it really worried me because a lot of people could wind up dead.
COOPER: In terms of an operation in disguise over Iran, I mean, the Israel, the U.S. had pretty much, by the time the U.S. struck, they had freedom of movement in disguise over Iran. Is that still the situation?
HIMES: No, it's not. As you might imagine, in a matter of months, the Iranians have worked pretty hard to rebuild their air defenses. So every day that goes by, and this is why your question about is an attack imminent is, you know, the clock is ticking, right? Every day that goes by, the Iranians improve their air defenses and make a raid that much more dangerous.
And again, the president has gotten lucky, right? He's done these military actions without significant casualties on the U.S. side. So yeah, there's a clock ticking here. And even if Donald Trump doesn't appreciate all of this sort of chessboard stuff, the Israelis sure do.
COOPER: Yeah, Congressman Jim Himes, it's always good to talk to you. Thank you very much. (CROSSTALK)
COOPER: That's it for --
