Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Jennifer Crumbley Trial Continues; Trump Team Targets Fani Willis; International Judges Call on Israel to End Deaths in Gaza; Trump Walks Out of E. Jean Carroll Trial. Aired 1-1:30p ET

Aired January 26, 2024 - 13:00   ET

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

[13:00:33]

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: Drama in the courtroom, Donald Trump walking out as closing arguments wrap up in E. Jean Carroll's defamation trial. A decision could come as soon as today.

We will bring you updates live from outside the courtroom.

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: Plus, the International Court of Justice weighing in on South Africa's allegation that Israel has committed genocide, the judges calling on Israel to take all measures to prevent genocide in Gaza.

And disturbing new allegations against WWE founder Vince McMahon, now accused of sexual assault, trafficking, and physical abuse. We are following these major developing stories and many more, all coming in right here to CNN NEWS CENTRAL.

Hello. I'm Brianna Keilar, alongside Boris Sanchez here in Washington.

And closing arguments have just wrapped up in the civil defamation trial against Donald Trump., but not without more fireworks, including Trump walking out and interrupting the proceedings. Now jury deliberations are set to begin, and we could get a verdict as soon as this afternoon.

SANCHEZ: Remember, the jurors have to decide the price tag for defamatory statements Trump made about E. Jean Carroll when he was president. She is seeking tens of millions of dollars in damages.

Let's go live outside the courtroom now with CNN's Kara Scannell. We also have CNN legal analyst Norm Eisen with us.

Kara, first to you.

Walk us through what's been happening in court. What did the two sides present?

KARA SCANNELL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Hey, Boris and Brianna.

So closing arguments have finished up in the last day of this trial and Carroll's attorneys arguing to the jury that the only way to stop Donald Trump from repeating these defamatory statements is to make him pay. They say that E. Jean Carroll should get at least $24 million in compensatory damages and, what they said, a large amount in punitive damages, so asking for a big amount of money.

Because the question they put to this jury, they said, this case is about punishing Donald Trump for what he's done and what he continues to do. And they said that even after that jury last year found him libel of sexually assaulting Carroll and defaming her, that he continued to repeat those statements just 24 hours later at a CNN town hall.

That was the moment that Donald Trump got up and left the courtroom during Carroll's attorney's closing arguments. They also told the jury, one of the defense arguments has been that Carroll has asked for this. And her lawyer said, when you make an allegation against a sitting president, and he uses his massive megaphone to go after you, more people are going to know who you are.

They said the hate mail, the threats that she's gotten, they parrot Donald Trump's words, so trying to tie the negative statements, the threats that she's received to Donald Trump.

Now, his lawyers and their closing statements, he returned to the courtroom for this. They did make their argument that E. Jean Carroll was seeking some kind of publicity from this, that she was enjoying the attention she got when she went public, even reading some of her own words that she'd given in interviews immediately following that.

They said that the former president is not responsible for Twitter trolls, that he does not condone what they said. And they're saying that it's wrong of Carroll to try to ask this jury to make Donald Trump pay for, as she put it, mean tweets.

And she also cited from Carroll's friend that Donald Trump was called as a witness, some of the text messages that she sent privately where she said that Carroll was like Santa at the Christmas parade, enjoying the attention she was getting, but Carroll's team asking the jury that -- saying that a person can enjoy moments, but they can also be deeply hurt and threatened by some of the things that happened.

So, right now, the judge is instructing the jury. That is expected to take about a half-an-hour or so. Once that's completed, then jury deliberations will begin.

KEILAR: All right, Kara, we will be looking for that. Thank you.

Norm, the former president walking out in the middle of Carroll's attorneys closing. I mean, what's the impact of that drama?

NORM EISEN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Brianna, we were watching the president in this civil case, both because of the merits of the case. It's a very important case in its own right, but also as a forecast of how he might behave in the coming criminal trials that could lie ahead this year.

[13:05:00] Four are currently on the schedule. And I think his walking out and his other shenanigans during the trial, his loudly proclaiming that it's a con job, his shaking his head, his grimacing, which led the judge to chastise him several times, actually prove the malice.

Now, if the jury is sympathetic, maybe some of these behaviors might fan those sympathies. But looking at the proof, at E. Jean Carroll's powerful testimony of how she was injured and all of the evidence that came in, the greater likelihood is that the jury is going to tag Donald Trump with a very large damages number.

And his walking out, the rudeness that that represents, that these comments and grimaces will actually be used by the jury to say, gee, this is somebody who really does have malice. That's the test.

SANCHEZ: As Carroll laid out, the judge is going to deliver instructions to the jury. There were multiple occasions during this entire case, and specifically yesterday, when the judge intervened to let the jury know, strike that. Don't pay attention to that. Disregard that in your deliberations.

But at some point, if you're a human being and you're watching all of this unfold, even if you're told to disregard some of what you have seen, doesn't that play into your perception?

EISEN: It certainly does. And it's impossible for jurors to erase something very striking.

Having often appeared before juries and talked to them afterwards, they do pick up on everything that happens. And, of course, that's why we have multiple jurors. It's not just one person. It's nine people who are watching, and then they go back and they trade notes.

And I think one comment that Trump made that the judge ordered stricken will have some resonance with the jury. I don't think it'll be enough to help him with -- but it's the comment where he said, "I did it for myself, my family, and for the presidency."

So what he's doing there is saying, I didn't act with malice. It wasn't with bad intent. I was defending myself.

If there's one juror who is a Trump sympathizer, that line, despite being stricken, speaks to that person. It has a certain commonsensical resonance. I don't think it's going to be enough, but there is that risk of a juror going rogue. We call that jury nullification. It's a risk. I don't think we're going to get that here.

KEILAR: It is just hard to put the cat back in the bag, even if there is something that is stricken from the record there.

Let's talk about the damages here, because you have Carroll's attorney saying, listen, if you really want deterrence, it has to be an unusually high punitive damages amount. Take us through what that could mean. EISEN: Damages are calculated in two categories. There's compensatory

damages, and we have just seen a request to make Carroll whole. That's things like hiring a consultant and having a campaign to repair her reputation, the pain and suffering that she has endured.

That's $24 million. Then, to send a lesson, when a defendant is found to have acted with bad intent, malice, that he wanted to hurt E. Jean Carroll, you multiply that compensatory damages number by an X-factor. The factor can be quite high.

There is a limit. They couldn't order billions in damages. Normally, the upper ceiling is about 10 times compensatory. So, you could be looking here, if there is a true home run, and the proof has come in powerfully, the argument has been strong, Trump wasn't allowed to speak -- you could be looking at multiple times of $24 million, and that would send a message.

KEILAR: Certainly would. Certainly would.

SANCHEZ: Yes.

KEILAR: Norm, thank you so much for that. We appreciate your insights.

EISEN: Thanks, guys.

SANCHEZ: We have a big update now from Georgia, another case concerning Donald Trump, the election interference case.

The former president now joining the fight to dismiss Fulton County district attorney Fani Willis over misconduct allegations involving her lead prosecutor, Nathan Wade.

KEILAR: That's right. Trump's attorneys also accuse Willis of trying to stoke racial bias among the public and prospective jurors, pointing to recent comments that she made at her church, where she defended her team of prosecutors, including Wade.

We have CNN's Nick Valencia following all of this for us from Atlanta.

Nick, walk us through what's going on here.

NICK VALENCIA, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Boris and Brianna, it's interesting.

Initially, the defense team for the former president had said they didn't have sufficient evidence to adopt this motion to dismiss this case, but that seems to have changed. And now they have filed a motion not just to dismiss, but to disqualify Fani Willis over these improper -- alleged improper relations with her top deputy, as well as what she said in her first comments after these allegations first surfaced.

[13:10:07]

They allege that she may have prejudiced the co-defendants, prejudiced potential future jurors by injecting race into this discussion. And here's what they're saying in part of that motion to dismiss, saying -- quote -- "Although this court may not have the authority to disbar DA Willis, it certainly does have the power to dismiss the indictment and to disqualify her, the special prosecutor she hired and her office from any further involvement in this case. Her attempt to foment racial animus and prejudice against the defendants in order to divert and deflect attention away from her alleged improprieties calls out the sanctions of dismissal and disqualification."

I want to be very clear here, because this is more than just about the alleged improper relationship between two consenting adults. This is about a potential misuse of government funds, a public official who may have given out a government contract to an alleged lover and may have financially benefited from that contract.

So this is just more unwanted pressure for Fani Willis -- Boris, Brianna.

SANCHEZ: Nick, there's also news out of the Georgia state Senate.

We should note it is a Republican-controlled Senate. They passed a resolution to investigate DA Willis. Tell us more about that.

VALENCIA: That's right. This happened in the last several hours. The GOP-controlled Georgia Senate here passed a resolution to form a special committee to investigate Willis and her team.

They will have subpoena power. They also have power to put people under oath to testify. They don't have power to remove Willis, though, so this is just another symbolic move from the legislature here to try to put pressure on Willis, and, as I mentioned, more unwanted pressure for the district attorney -- Boris, Brianna.

KEILAR: All right, Nick Valencia, live for us from Atlanta, thank you.

And still ahead: The International Court of Justice is now ordering Israel to take measures to prevent acts of genocide in Gaza. We're going to discuss the impact, if any, this will have on the war.

SANCHEZ: Plus, a former employee is accusing wrestling mogul Vince McMahon of sexual assault, trafficking and physical abuse. We have more on some disturbing allegations.

And coastal storms may have washed away businesses that have stood for generations, and now some families are facing a tough decision in the Northeast, whether to rebuild under the threat of climate change.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:16:34]

SANCHEZ: Some shocking allegations to tell you about today from the Israeli government.

They are claiming that 12 U.N. relief agency employees were involved in the October 7 Hamas attack on Israel that saw at least 1,200 people killed and more than 250 taken hostage. The U.N. Relief and Works Agency operating in Gaza claims it has fired those workers. It's also launching an investigation where the accused could face criminal prosecution.

Now, here in the nation's capital, the State Department has paused more funding to the agency, at least for now. We're going to continue to update you as we learn more about this case -- Brianna.

KEILAR: The International Court of Justice at The Hague has ruled it is plausible that Israel's actions in Gaza violate the Genocide Convention, though it cannot make a final determination at this point, as expected.

In a series of provisional measures revealed today, the U.N. High Court also says Israel must take immediate steps to prevent genocide in Gaza and allow more humanitarian aid to enter the enclave. The judges also called for the release of all hostages held by Hamas, but stopped short of ordering a cease-fire as requested by South Africa when it brought the case.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

NADIA SIIMI, PRO-PALESTINIAN PROTEST ORGANIZER: It feels like a victory and a significant milestone and a step in the right direction in the liberation of the Palestinian people.

In a way, it is also very disappointing that the court did not rule in favor for an immediate cease-fire at this time, because I personally believe that that is what the people need. It's an acknowledgement of what is going on right now and it's finally a moment that Israel is going to be held accountable. And I'm very happy that they're choosing to pursue this case in court.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KEILAR: The Hamas-run Health Ministry is reporting the death toll in Gaza has now surpassed 26,000 since the start of the war, with 64,000 people injured.

I'm joined now by Pierre-Richard Prosper. He is the former U.S. ambassador at large for war crime issues under George W. Bush's administration.

Sir, thank you so much for taking time to be with us today.

You heard what the court has said here, plausible Israel committed acts that violate the Genocide Convention, prescriptions there for stopping and preventing that, for punishing actors for that, for getting humanitarian aid in, but no cease-fire. How significant is this?

PIERRE-RICHARD PROSPER, FORMER U.S. AMBASSADOR AT LARGE FOR WAR CRIME ISSUES: Well, I think it's significant in the sense that the court did not rule that Israel is committing genocide.

Really, what we have here is a placeholder decision where the court wants to reserve jurisdiction to review this before, because evaluating whether a nation or an individual has committed genocide is very complex and it comes down to the intent.

So what they decided to do was essentially say, preserve information, report back to us in a month or, so we stay updated. And they also recognized that Israel has a continued right to defend itself against acts of terrorism and atrocities.

KEILAR: Will this really change anything about how Israel is prosecuting this war, do you think?

PROSPER: I don't believe so, because, again, what the court did is, they reminded Israel of its international obligations under the Genocide Convention, which is all nations have a duty to prevent and to punish.

So, they didn't say that they need to stop the war, stop fighting, stop doing what they are doing, but they just said to be mindful of the Genocide Convention and alerted Israel that they are they are watching.

[13:20:05]

So, I really view this as -- effectively a nondecision. And what comes out of it is that the court is remaining engaged in what we want in periodic reports.

KEILAR: Let's listen to how Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu responded to this preliminary ruling.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BENJAMIN NETANYAHU, ISRAELI PRIME MINISTER: Israel has an inherent right to defend itself. The vile attempt to deny Israel this fundamental right is blatant discrimination against the Jewish state, and it was justly rejected.

Our war is against Hamas terrorists, not against Palestinian civilians. We will continue to facilitate humanitarian assistance and to do our utmost to keep civilians out of harm's way, even as Hamas uses civilians as human shields. We will continue to do what is necessary to defend our country and defend our people.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KEILAR: His message there is that they're already doing these things that the court is calling for. They will continue with aid. They're going to continue to protect civilians.

Is that really the message, though, that the court is sending here?

PROSPER: Well, I think the court is really sending a message that, Israel, you are on notice, and that the court will be paying attention.

It seems that Israel did an effective job during the hearings in presenting its case, because South Africa wanted a determination of genocide, which did not happen, but that Israel should know that the ICJ will continue to monitor. And it does seem that the Israelis are preserving evidence. They're doing what they believe is important or relevant as far as protecting civilians and bringing in humanitarian aid.

But it will be reviewed. And, again, they have to report back to the ICJ, I believe, within a month, and that may continue throughout the process.

KEILAR: This is an interim ruling here. Explain why it takes so long for there to be a real determination on the question of genocide.

PROSPER: Well, genocide is complex.

A lot of people confuse that genocide is simply the fact that you have people dying or people being harmed; therefore, it is genocide. There are other crimes that cover that, such as war crimes, crimes against humanity.

The issue with genocide is, it's the intent. The perpetrator has to have the intent to destroy the group in whole or in part. So, in this case, South Africa or others would need to prove that Israel is out to destroy the Palestinian people in its entirety, effectively.

And that is a difficult task for any court to evaluate and anyone to prove. So, again, what the court did here is that it's plausible in a sense where people are dying, but they don't have any evidence or sufficient evidence to discuss the question of, what was Israel's intent in the specific acts?

Because lastly, again, Israel will argue that these -- the civilians are casualties, if you will, collateral damage, if you will, but that they're not -- they don't have the intent to kill the population; they're going after Hamas.

KEILAR: Ambassador, it's so great to get your insights on this. Thank you so much for being with us.

PROSPER: Well, thank you for having me.

KEILAR: Still ahead: Jennifer Crumbley, the mother of the 2021 Michigan school shooter, is back in court, her testimony now turning to her son's chilling text messages.

And the MAX is back. Alaska Airlines says it plans to resume 737 MAX 9 flights today. This will be the first time since that terrifying door plug incident caused planes to be grounded. We will have more on that when we get back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:28:36]

SANCHEZ: Right now, prosecutors in Michigan are presenting their case against the mom whose son carried out that horrific mass shooting at Oxford High School.

Jennifer Crumbley is charged with involuntary manslaughter after her son killed four of his classmates in that 2021 rampage. Today, the prosecution presented text messages that they claim show the shooter's parents ignored warning signs about their troubled son.

Earlier, a former detective took the stand, reading some of the shooter's text messages sent months before the rampage.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

EDWARD WAGROWSKI, FORMER OAKLAND COUNTY, MICHIGAN, DETECTIVE: The shooter said: "I actually asked my dad to take me to the doctor yesterday, but he just gave me some pills and told me to -- quote -- 'Suck it up.'"

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And then what?

WAGROWSKI: He says: "Like, it's at the point that I'm asking to go to the doctor."

Then he says: "My mom laughed when I told her."

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: CNN's Jean Casarez has been following this case closely. She joins us now.

Jean, there's been some arguments back and forth between the defense and prosecution, because, during his trial, he apparently told a medical professional that those text messages he sent weren't actually true, right?

JEAN CASAREZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Right. It was a jail psychiatrist.

And Ethan, of course, pleaded guilty to all charges, but this did come out in a hearing and -- for his sentencing, what his sentencing should be. And the jail psychiatrist said in an open courtroom -- I was in that courtroom -- that Ethan had said that he lied and that it wasn't true that he had asked his parents for help.