Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Arizona Issues Abortion Ruling; Idaho Man Accused in Alleged Terror Plot; Trump Days Away From First Criminal Trial; School Shooter's Parents Sentenced to 10-15 Years in Prison. Aired 1-1:30p ET

Aired April 09, 2024 - 13:00   ET

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

[13:00:24]

ANNOUNCER: This is CNN breaking news.

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: We're following breaking news into CNN.

Moments ago, the parents of the oxford Michigan school shooter were sentenced to 10 to 15 years in prison each. James and Jennifer Crumbley were both found guilty of four counts of involuntary manslaughter after their teenage son murdered four of his classmates back in 2021.

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: And this is really a landmark case, with the Crumbleys being the first parents convicted and sentenced for a mass school shooting committed by their child.

Today, we heard emotional impact statements from the families of the victims. The Crumbleys also addressing the court.

CNN's Jean Casarez is joining us now for this.

Jean, really emotional testimony from the family members of those victims today.

JEAN CASAREZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: And this is the first time in this country ever that we have not only had charges and a conviction of homicide against the parents of a school shooter, but now a sentencing for the parents of a school shooter, who did not pull the trigger of a gun.

The prosecution argued today before the judge for sentencing that the continued gross negligence, that the smallest of decisions could have changed the course of this, and they did nothing in regard to that, the defense trying to show that there was an independent act, it was their son that pulled the trigger.

But it was those victim impact statements that the judge must consider -- and she did -- of what and how those lives have changed for the families of those four students.

All right, I think we're going to look at that in a second. But, Brianna, the impact today of this sentence, 10 to 15 years, which means that, at the end of 10 years, they can go before a parole board, they can possibly get parole -- 15 years would be the maximum.

But they both spoke and begged for mercy for the court. But it just didn't, I think stand, in the way of those victim impact statements.

This is Madisyn Baldwin's mother, who created a timeline of what she was doing to find her daughter and how the Crumbleys were just trying to locate that gun.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

NICOLE BEAUSOLEIL, MOTHER OF SHOOTING VICTIM: While you were hiding, I was planning her funeral. And while you were running away from your son and your responsibilities, I was forced to do the worst possible thing a parent could do. I was forced to say goodbye to my Madisyn.

STEVE ST. JULIANA, FATHER OF SHOOTING VICTIM: They chose to ignore the warning signs.

And now, as we have heard through all of the objections, they continue to choose to blame everyone but themselves. Hana, Madisyn, Tate, and Justin are the ones who have lost everything, not the defendants.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CASAREZ: Judge Cheryl Matthews is the one that pronounced the sentence. She has been the judge on both of these trials. She has been there from the beginning.

She knows the case, knows this evidence. And she opened up her heart at the end, saying that she had labored on this, that she had been up nights, that she had prayed about this. And, of course, she wants rehabilitation for the defendants in this case.

But she also wants -- and it's a criteria that is looked at sentencing -- is deterrence, so that others in this country, other parents, cannot believe that they can do similar acts as the Crumbleys, get away with it and allow these mass shootings to take place.

SANCHEZ: It is undoubtedly a landmark case.

Jean, there was something that James Crumbley said shortly before the sentencing when he had an opportunity to address the court. And he specifically spoke to a loved one of someone, one of the teenagers that was killed at Oxford High School, referencing wanting to get to the truth and nothing but the truth.

He was alluding to testimony that wasn't heard during this trial. Walk us through that and explain if there is a potential for an appeal based on his statements.

CASAREZ: It's very interesting. It is a legal issue that I would think would be part of the appeals.

Ethan Crumbley is their son. He's serving now life in prison without any possibility of parole. He pleaded guilty to all of the counts of shooting those students and injuring so many. The parents wanted him to testify in this trial, because he had texted his friend during the middle of the night.

The family never knew about these texts that he had continually with his friend, saying: I asked my dad for mental help, and he laughed at me and he said, take a pill and just suck it up.

Well, after Ethan was arrested, the jail psychiatrist had many sessions with him and determined, first of all, that he was not mentally ill, that he was competent in what he did, but also questioned him about that text to his friend.

[13:05:10]

And we heard in testimony from his jail psychiatrist in the Miller hearing that he told his jail psychiatrist: I made that all up to my friend. I never asked my dad for help, never did.

They wanted that in the trial to counter what those texts were to that friend, because they came in, and the parents had nothing to counter it with, because the appellate attorney said, no, Ethan is not going to testify. He's not going to relinquish his Fifth Amendment right he has on his appeal to have life with the possibility of parole. And, number two, those are medical records, and we're not going to release that privilege. So you have nothing.

So there was nothing that could be countered for that text. And James Crumbley -- here's what's interesting. James Crumbley did not testify. He has a constitutional right to not have to testify.

SANCHEZ: Right.

CASAREZ: The only way they could have countered it is for him to take the stand and to say: He never asked me that.

But the fact is, is there a constitutional issue there to force him on the stand -- he didn't do it -- to actually rebut those texts?

KEILAR: Very interesting.

Jean, thank you so much for that.

We do want to bring in Tom Hoyer. His 15-year-old son, Luke, was killed back in 2018 at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, when a teen gunmen killed 17 people and injured 17 others. He is a board member and also a treasurer for the group Stand With Parkland.

Tom, your reaction to today's sentence? And thank you so much for being with us.

TOM HOYER, FATHER OF MARJORY STONEMAN DOUGLAS HIGH SCHOOL SHOOTING VICTIM: Thanks for having me. Good afternoon.

I think this is a -- is an important step, actually. The endgame in all this is to keep weapons out of the hands of people who hurt others or hurt themselves. And we tend to focus on local law enforcement, FBI and school (AUDIO GAP). Parents have a role in this. We tend to talk about it in terms of safe storage at home, but this

family went way beyond that. They encouraged their son to have a gun. They were frivolous about his transgressions. And in the moment that they were in the office with him, with a piece of paper showing that he was fantasizing about killing people with a gun, they chose not to tell anybody that he had access to a weapon.

And that's just unforgivable. And I think that just sets this apart from probably a lot of other cases that might be floating around out there. I think the right thing happened today.

SANCHEZ: Tom, I'm curious to get your response to how they approached this case, because, at different points, they expressed varying degrees of remorse, but, as Jean pointed out, more often, they pointed the finger elsewhere.

Ultimately, what message do you think that sends?

HOYER: I think it more of an indication of what they are like. They're just shirking their responsibility here.

They were shirking it before, and they certainly did after, when they went on the run. When it looked like they might get in trouble, they took off, when there was a consequence for them. This kind of a verdict might give people pause, because they will know that there might be a consequence for them before something like this happens, so that, before something like this happens, they take some kind of an action, even if it's protect themselves, which could wind up protecting others.

KEILAR: So, your hope then is that people will look at this and that it may prevent other shootings?

HOYER: I do, actually.

I think it's a clear message that parents also have a role in keeping firearms out of the hands of children who just shouldn't have them, they're mentally disturbed. And it'll send a clear message that they can be held accountable.

And I think, if they practice safe storage at home, liability, culpability probably wouldn't be there. But when you are as egregious as this family is, and just ignoring the signs, and ignoring the transgressions, and actually encouraging the ownership of a weapon, I think it'll send a message to families like that there's a consequence.

You have got to step up, and you have got to face reality. You have got to get your kid some help.

KEILAR: Tom Hoyer, we appreciate your time this afternoon. Thank you so much for being with us.

SANCHEZ: We have more news just in to CNN.

Donald Trump's two latest requests to postpone his hush money trial have been denied. So, jury selection is now on track for Monday in Manhattan, and we have learned what the potential jurors are going to be asked.

KEILAR: We have CNN's Katelyn Polantz and also Paula Reid here tracking all of this for us.

What else can we expect here in these last days before the trial, Katelyn?

KATELYN POLANTZ, CNN SENIOR CRIME AND JUSTICE REPORTER: A lot of filings, a lot of decisions from the court.

[13:10:00]

The trial is set for Monday. And nothing Donald Trump's team has tried in these last couple days has enabled them to push back the case. We had two, essentially, emergency appeals, saying, please pause the case yesterday -- this was the appeal yesterday -- because we want to see if we can move it out of state.

The appeals court came back within an hour or so and said no. And then, today, 20 minutes after an appeal was heard, when Trump's team said pause the case because there's a gag order on him, it's causing him irreparable harm as a criminal defendant -- he can't speak about Michael Cohen, Stormy Daniels in the way he wants to.

And the appeals court came back very quickly and said, no, we're not pausing the case on that too. There are other things that they are asking for to pause this case. They don't want to go to trial on Monday, but none of that has worked at this point.

SANCHEZ: I can anticipate that, in a moment, Paula is going to tell us that the Trump legal strategy has been to delay, delay, delay. And this plays into that.

PAULA REID, CNN CHIEF LEGAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: You have been listening.

SANCHEZ: Of course.

REID: I'm so proud, Boris.

SANCHEZ: Of course.

(LAUGHTER)

SANCHEZ: But -- but, before we get to that, Katelyn, the jury questionnaire is interesting, because they're not asking directly what political affiliation some of these potential jurors might have, but they are asking if they have been to Trump rallies, if they support the Proud Boys or other sort of seditionist groups.

Walk us through the questionnaires.

POLANTZ: Yes, the judge really laid out his entire approach to how the jury is going to be selected whenever this begins on Monday. They don't -- they won't be asked what their political party is, if

they voted for Trump, if they're planning on voting for Trump, if they have even given political donations. But they will be asked questions that can expose some sort of very strong bias.

Are they people who have adhered themselves to extremist groups in politics in the U.S. before, the Proud Boys, the Oath Keepers, groups like that? Are they reading certain publications or any publications? Where do you get your news from? That will allow the attorneys to ask additional questions?

Because, at the end of the day, the judge says, this isn't about whether you like or dislike Donald Trump. This is about, can you find people for the jury who can set aside their biases and their feelings, look at the facts and the evidence, and be impartial jurors?

KEILAR: It's so interesting, what they're asking them and what they're not asking them.

Now to the immunity claims that are headed for the Supreme Court, so huge as we await these. What does Jack Smith's filing tell us before the court is going to hear this later this month?

REID: So, the only thing that could really distract from the first criminal prosecution of a former president would be the biggest case at the Supreme Court this term, and that is going to be this question of immunity.

And, last night, Jack Smith, he asked the Supreme Court to reject Trump's sweeping claim of immunity. He describes it as novel and asked the justices not to allow Trump to delay this any further. They said, look, the founders of this country did not envision a situation in which presidents are immune from criminal repercussions. They said that is -- that is unfounded.

They said, no one is above the law. Now, Trump has argued that, well, if they're not, they should be, because he's worried, going forward, there could be retaliatory, politically retaliatory prosecutions. Now, that's something that has been rejected by the trial court and the appellate court. Jack Smith wants the justices to reject it as well.

SANCHEZ: So, walk us through the permutations of what a Supreme Court decision might look like. There's a few different scenarios.

REID: Yes, there are.

Look, even if -- even people on Trump's legal team, they're not expecting that he's going to win outright on this -- this issue of immunity. But they have also given the justices a possible off-ramp. They have said, you could always throw this back down to the lower courts for further proceedings that contemplate maybe some form of limited immunity.

That would be a win for Trump, because it would, of course, delay...

SANCHEZ: Delay. (LAUGHTER)

REID: ... delay, yes.

But, again, we don't expect a decision on this, since it's the biggest case of the term. We expect that we won't get the decision until late June. That leaves only about four months before the election to go forward with this trial, assuming that's what the justices are going to allow.

Now, the Justice Department has said they are open to doing this in the months right before the election. The judge appears willing to move pretty quickly, but you have to give lawyers time to prepare. And the Supreme Court has made Jack Smith's life difficult.

He asked them months ago to take up this issue and just decide it once and for all. They declined to do that. They let it go to the appeals court. Now they have it, likely won't decide it by the end of the term, that, in and of itself, really helping Trump, because it helped him to, Boris...

SANCHEZ: Delay, delay, delay.

(CROSSTALK)

SANCHEZ: We've been listening.

REID: Yes.

KEILAR: We need like a button, one of those, like, key chains or something.

(CROSSTALK)

REID: ... use it a lot. I mean, they really...

(CROSSTALK)

KEILAR: In the control room, they just push the button.

(CROSSTALK)

REID: They're getting a lot of help from the courts.

SANCHEZ: Yes.

KEILAR: Paula, thank you so much. Katelyn, thank you as well. We appreciate it.

SANCHEZ: Of course.

Still plenty more news to come on NEWS CENTRAL.

The Arizona Supreme Court just ruling on the future of abortion access in that state. We're reading through that decision as we speak. Stand by for that. Plus, the FBI says it arrested an 18-year-old before he could carry

out an ISIS-inspired attack. The details on this alleged plot coming up.

[13:15:03]

KEILAR: And the U.S.' top diplomat says Israel has not yet shared when it plans to invade Rafah, as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says no force can stop him from doing so.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KEILAR: An alleged terror plot foiled in Idaho.

An 18-year-old is accused of pledging his allegiance to ISIS and planning to attack churches on the group's behalf.

SANCHEZ: Well, the Department of Justice says that the plot involved knives, guns and fire.

CNN's Zach Cohen joins us now with the details.

Zach, this man was arrested one day before he planned to carry out the attack.

[13:20:00]

ZACHARY COHEN, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY REPORTER: Yes, Boris, essentially a teenager, Alexander Mercurio, was planning to go on this killing spree on April 7. He was taken into custody by the FBI on April 6.

And the reason is, they had intelligence and they had indications that he was going to go around to 20-some churches in his hometown in Idaho and use guns, use machetes, use various different weapons that he could conjure up and try to kill as many people as possible before he himself was killed.

And, look, we have seen this formula play out before in the past with these terror plots, some successful, some not. But this one is different because Mercurio is, one, so young, and, two, because the FBI alleges that he was talking to people online to people he thought could help him join ISIS overseas for a span of two years before he ultimately had this shift and started to -- there were indications that he was planning to take online violent and -- violent rhetoric into the real world.

So he's in custody now. He's waiting for his first court appearance, but he faces 20 years in federal prison.

KEILAR: How did they uncover this?

COHEN: Yes, Brianna, this case goes back to 2022, when Mercurio was online.

A confidential source who was working for the FBI, unbeknownst to Mercurio, was approached online in one of these chat rooms. And Mercurio started talking about his support for ISIS views and kind of voicing this willingness and this desire to join the group.

And so, over the course of two years, you see this evolution -- you can see it in the court filings -- of this boy, teenager, developing more and more radical viewpoints. And there's these messages that prosecutors point to specifically when things really reached a head.

And that's when he was arrested over the weekend. One of these messages says Mercurio was telling a confidential source, the FBI source saying -- quote -- "The plan is basically this, equip the weapons and storm the temple, kill as many people as possible before they inevitably disperse, scatter, then burn the temple to the ground, flee the scene, then move on to the next church, rinse and repeat for all 21-plus churches in the town until killed."

That was on March 25 and 26, when Mercurio sent that message to the confidential FBI source.

There was another one that says: "I'm doing the weapons research now. Resources should not be hard to find. The weapons are something I will hide in my room and design them to be easy to conceal in a jacket."

So, after seeing these messages from the confidential source, the FBI did secure a search warrant for his family home. They found many of these similar items, including a butane -- you know, fuel accelerants. They found guns. They found a machete. That led to the arrest, so, ultimately, a long saga, but two years in the making and really a foiled plot, as far as the FBI is concerned.

SANCHEZ: Yes, and clearly a sign that even about a decade after it first drew so much interest, and so many young people from around the world to commit horrible acts, ISIS is still out there engaging people this way.

COHEN: Absolutely.

SANCHEZ: Zach Cohen, thanks so much for the reporting.

And still ahead this hour on CNN NEWS CENTRAL -- actually -- yes, it's big breaking news that we're following. The Arizona Supreme Court just ruled on the future of abortion access in the state. What we're learning about that decision just moments away.

Stay with CNN.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:27:30]

ANNOUNCER: This is CNN breaking news.

KEILAR: And this is big breaking news just in to CNN.

The Arizona Supreme Court just issued a major ruling on the future of abortion access in that state. SANCHEZ: And CNN's Natasha Chen is going through the court's opinion

right now.

Natasha, walk us through this ruling.

NATASHA CHEN, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, this is a 47-page decision.

And, right now, our teams are going through all of that language. But the bottom line here is that Arizona must adhere to a -- an abortion ban, nearly all abortions banned, except in the case of saving the life of the mother. And this law dates back to the Civil War, before Arizona was even a state.

There has been a lot of confusion back and forth in Arizona on which state law applies here, because, right before Roe v. Wade was overturned, the state had instituted a 15-week abortion ban. So, there had been pauses to abortions in the state, and then resumption of that, and pause again, all in hopes that the state Supreme Court could offer some clarity here.

And, today, this is what the court has said, that the state must adhere to this 123-year-old law banning near all abortions. Now, the text of that law says that there is also a punishment for providers of the abortion, between two and five years in prison.

Obviously, a lot of strong reactions right now coming in, including from the state's governor, Katie Hobbs. Let's take a listen.

GOV. KATIE HOBBS (D-AZ): Now I'm going to hand it over to Representative Stahl Hamilton.

Thank you.

STATE REP. STAHL HAMILTON (D-AZ): Good morning. Thank you.

CHEN: So, you're hearing from various different officials there who are all reacting to this court decision.

They heard opening arguments last December. The important things to note here so far that we have gleaned from this document is that no one who provided an abortion prior to this ruling today will be subject to the penalty and that there is a stay on this decision for 14 calendar days, so two weeks out.

The Arizona attorney general tweeted today that this is unconscionable and an affront of freedom and said: "Make no mistake that the court has risked the health and lives of Arizonans."

You can see that tweet right there on the screen. There's a lot more to that statement.

Again, this is a long, twisted path to get to this moment. And, at the same time, there is a group trying to gather signatures to enshrine abortion rights in the state's constitution.