Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Haitian-born Ohio Student Dies in Apparent Suicide After Losing Immigration Status; U.S. Takes Control of 65 Billion Barrels of Venezuelan Oil Reserves; Deadlocked Jury on Day 5 of Deliberations in Lindsay Clancy Trial; Princeton Review Find 15 Colleges Now Top $100,000 a Year. Aired 2-2:30p ET

Aired September 02, 2026 - 14:00   ET

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

[14:00:00]

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN CO-ANCHOR OF "CNN NEWS CENTRAL": -- sharing part of Pierre's story.

CARL RUBY, SENIOR PASTOR, CENTRAL CHRISTIAN CHURCH: (Inaudible).

SANCHEZ: Yeah, please.

RUBY: I just want to say that the mother of the truck driver called to express her sympathy to the family, and he is a victim too.

SANCHEZ: Well, thank you so much for joining us. We appreciate you bringing us the family's message.

RUBY: Yep, thank you.

SANCHEZ: Of course. If you or anyone you know is struggling with mental health, there is help available. You're not alone. You can dial or text nine 988 or visit 988lifeline.org for free and confidential support.

A new hour of "CNN News Central" starts right now.

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN CO-ANCHOR OF "CNN NEWS CENTRAL": The jury is out but not finished. A fifth day of deliberations in the Lindsay Clancy murder trial goes on behind closed doors, while a woman arrested outside the courthouse pleads not guilty to Intimidating jurors.

And a deal or a steal, the White House signs an agreement with Venezuela which President Trump calls the biggest oil deal in world history, but it remains to be seen what it will mean for energy prices here in the U.S.

And spare no expense, how taxpayers are footing the bill for a renovation of the presidential bowling alley to the tune of $250,000. We're following these major developing stories and many more, all coming in right here to "CNN News Central."

It is a done deal, the U.S. and Venezuela have a new oil partnership, the president Trump says will mean lower gas prices here in the U.S. A short time ago, Energy Secretary, Chris Wright oversaw a signing ceremony in Caracas. The U.S. is taking over 65 billion barrels of Venezuela's oil reserves, essentially doubling America's reserves in the process once this all goes into effect. Here's Wright.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CHRIS WRIGHT, UNITED STATES ENERGY SECRETARY: The catalyst for improving the life conditions of Americans, our hemisphere and everyone in the world is to massively expand energy production around the world. But of course, we're massively interested to do that in the Americas. This is our neighborhood and if we can replace the conflict of the past with commerce of today and of the future, we can build a better world.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KEILAR: CNN's Kevin Liptak is at the White House for us. So Kevin, how's the White House preparing to implement this deal?

KEVIN LIPTAK, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: Right and what you see Chris Wright doing there in Caracas today is overseeing these deals between oil companies and the Venezuelan government to try and boost expansion, to try and boost production of their oil reserves down in that country after this deal that would give the United States access to 65 billion barrels of oil.

But still, there are some big questions about how all of this would work, namely when it might bring down prices at the pump for Americans. And President Trump himself has said this week that that will not be an immediate process. He said he didn't think it would happen before the midterm elections in November. He actually suggested it might not happen for several years.

You also have analysts wondering how long it will take for this oil to actually come out of the ground. You know, the oil infrastructure in Venezuela has been neglected in a lot of ways for many, many years. It is dilapidated in some ways. And so it will take both time and a lot of money on the part of these oil companies to rebuild it in a way where you start seeing, you know, millions and millions of barrels coming out of the country.

And so this is not going to be an immediate process, but what Wright is doing today is sort of setting the groundwork for that to begin. And so you have Chevron, which right now is the only American oil company that's operating in Venezuela, they have announced that they will expand production there. Other oil companies from the United States are stopping short of that, so you don't see Exxon, for example. You don't see ConocoPhillips Joining in on that. They certainly do have a lot of questions about how all of that would work.

One of the goals that the president has set out for this arrangement is to have some of this Venezuelan oil replenish the Strategic Petroleum Reserve which he has tapped in part to bring down oil prices because of the Iran War. It's now at its lowest level since 1982. There too, there are some questions, the biggest one being the type of oil that's coming out of the ground in Venezuela is not the type that goes into the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. It's sort of too sludgy and so there would have to be some sort of arrangement to either downblend it or exchange it with lighter oil.

That's one of the president's objectives in all of that. But clearly, the president I think really searching for ways both to bring down gas prices for Americans ahead of the midterms, but also to show how he's doing that. You know, he was at the White House yesterday, meeting with top oil refiners. They didn't come out of that meeting with any concrete announcements about how they plan to do that.

[14:05:00]

And in fact, as they were in that meeting, you saw oil prices tick up because of escalating tensions with Iran. Now drivers who are going to hit the road for Labor Day will be facing the highest holiday gas prices on record. That's a projection for this weekend, Brianna.

KEILAR: Yeah and inflation concerns about these sustained prices of oil and gasoline. Kevin, thanks so much for that report. Boris?

SANCHEZ: A day after saying they were deadlocked, jurors in the Lindsay Clancy murder trial are now in their fifth day of deliberations. The Massachusetts mom admits to strangling her baby and two older children three years ago. Her attorneys say that she's not criminally responsible because she was suffering from postpartum psychosis when she did it. Prosecutors though say that Clancy acted "intentionally, rationally and swiftly."

As the possibility of a hung jury looms, Clancy's attorney was asked if the 36-year-old defendant could handle a retrial.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yeah, but if you have to retry this, do you think that your client is emotionally prepared to do it again?

KEVIN REDDINGTON, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: No.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You don't think she is? Would you do anything different in the second trial if you have a second trial?

REDDINGTON: I don't know.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Do you think that there's still a chance that the jury comes back with a verdict of some sort?

REDDINGTON: I hope so.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: And do you take that as a good sign that they were at in-house, that it is a good sign for the defense?

REDDINGTON: I don't know that it is a good sign or a bad sign or any sign. It's that they're working hard to try to come to a decision.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SANCHEZ: CNN's Jean Casarez has been covering this trial from the start. She joins us from outside court in Plymouth, Massachusetts. Jean, I understand the judge questioned each juror this morning. What can you tell us about that?

JEAN CASAREZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Right, individual voir dire. Now before that, he told the court that there's proper protocol. Orders have been established on how you conduct yourself around the courthouse.

And at that point, one by one, each juror was called up to the front of the courtroom. The defense attorney, the prosecutor was there. We couldn't hear anything, but they swore each juror and then the judge talked to them.

You could tell the juror responded by shaking their head one way or the other. But we have now learned, and it is in the record, that voir dire was done of every single juror to see if they had any lasting ramifications in regard to a woman that CNN has confirmed was arrested by the Massachusetts State Police yesterday afternoon, right as the jurors were leaving, of one count of intentional harassment or intimidation of the jury.

So that retired nurse, that's who she is, a retired nurse, she was in the courthouse this morning at a formal arraignment, and that is where we saw the defense saying she in no way wanted to intimidate, harass the jurors. She just wanted to see Lindsay Clancy. But the prosecutor, assistant district attorney, they had some evidence that they told the judge about at that moment.

Listen to what was happening in court.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

NICOLE PIACENTINI, ASSISTANT DISTRICT ATTORNEY, PLYMOUTH COUNTY: She let troopers get the phone and go through her deleted photos. In the deleted folders file, they did locate a video of a number of individuals coming out of the courthouse building from the vantage point that she was located in.

State police then spoke with court officers who were then able to confirm that those individuals in those videos were the jurors.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CASAREZ: Now, this defendant had the court enter 'not guilty' into the court record. She is facing up to 20 years in prison. But when she walked out, dawn light, 56-years-old, retired nurse, and she comes outside of the courthouse, she had no idea what was going to be meeting her. It was the media.

They wanted answers. They wanted to know what her intent was, and she literally started running past our cameras to get to her car. She wanted to get out here, and that's one condition. Don't come around this courthouse, the judge ordered. Do not come at all near the Lindsay Clancy jurors.

SANCHEZ: Wow. Some drama outside the courtroom, even after all that we've seen inside. There are instances, Jean, of juries eventually reaching verdicts after being deadlocked. We should know, they've been deliberating now for more than 27 hours.

CASAREZ: Yes, that's correct. And one case that comes to mind was a case that I covered the various trials, Harvey Weinstein. The first trial, of course, there was a conviction of third-degree rape. The highest court in New York overturned the entire conviction. But then they went to another trial and third-degree rape charge they could not get a verdict on. And so there was a mistrial on that one charge. It went back to a jury last year. Continued to be a mistrial. The jury could not reach a verdict. And now prosecutors in New York are saying we're not going to try it again.

Another trial, Daniel Penny, and that was in New York City also, and the jury was deadlocked on manslaughter.

[14:10:00]

And so a mistrial was declared on that particular charge. The other charge, he was acquitted on.

Finally, Sean "Diddy" Combs. Now that had to do with a racketeering conspiracy charge that, initially, the jury was deadlocked on. And as you see, they can reach verdicts in these cases, and sometimes they don't, and mistrials are declared.

SANCHEZ: We'll see what they decide here. Jean Casarez, thanks so much, from Massachusetts.

Still to come, as more universities begin charging upwards of $100,000 a year, some families are asking whether the cost of college is worth it. We'll discuss the degrees worth the cost and those at risk of being rendered useless by A.I.

Plus, a viral video reigniting concerns about police use of force after a state trooper is reported smashing a car window trying to pull out a passenger by his dreadlocks. And later, from the ballroom to the basement, President Trump renovating yet another part of the White House. The details are straight ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:15:40]

KEILAR: We have some Breaking News in the Lindsay Clancy triple- murder trial. The jury, which has at this point been deliberating for almost 30 hours, raising concerns that they may not be able to come to a consensus, has a question.

So right now, you have folks going back into the courtroom, reporters finally back in there. And we are waiting to hear what that question is that the jury has. They came out yesterday morning, said they could not come to a consensus.

The judge, in a sort of informal way, told them to keep trying. That they did. And so we'll see where they are here in a moment. And we'll bring that update to you when we get it. A question that a lot of parents and young adults are wrestling with this fall, in a time of spiraling tuition costs and serious doubt about whether A.I. could eliminate some industries, is the cost of college worth it anymore? Is the cost of some colleges worth it?

According to a Princeton review survey, more than a dozen schools have topped the $100,000 a year mark. The study also finding that 35 percent of students and parents say the debt they'll take on for school is their biggest concern, while 96 percent say financial aid will be necessary for them to cover the cost of college.

We're joined now by Robert Franek, who is the Editor-in-Chief for "The Princeton Review." Thanks for being with us here. These are eye- popping numbers. 15 schools that cost more than $100,000 a year. I mean, one year ago only two did. Is college worth that?

ROBERT FRANEK, EDITOR-IN-CHIEF, THE PRINCETON REVIEW: Brianna, I so appreciate this story. And it is an eye-popping number, sobering for so many college-bound students and their parents. Nine schools in the $90,000 category, so just shy of the $100,000 mark. But I tell all my students at The Princeton Review, college is still worth it for four reasons.

Number one, you're going to make more than $1.5 million more if you have an undergraduate degree than if you don't. You're going to be more nimble in the professions that you get to choose from and the places that you get to live. Students that have a college degree, an undergraduate degree, will report far lower rates of unemployment.

And I thought you'd find this one interesting. Robert Wood Johnson did a study a couple of years ago that said you will live longer if you have a college degree because you will likely have better health care throughout your career, over your career lifetime. So those four things, and it tends to reassure students and parents, albeit in light of these big sticker miles.

KEILAR: OK, great to live longer, especially. I like that one.

FRANEK: Yeah.

KEILAR: You know, that is sort of an average, right? So let's talk about, as students are kicking off this new school year, as they're thinking about majors, because not all are going to be created the same when you're talking about what they're going to make, how they're going to be able to cover their student loans.

Which majors do you see as having the best return on investment over time, especially as A.I. is sort of a new unique threat to certain majors?

FRANEK: Yeah, and this is a great question. We've been thinking about it because it continues to come up from college-bound students and their parents. Anything in the STEM field, business-related majors, anything in the service industry as well, health care, education, teaching. I mean, these are all, one, industries, but academic disciplines that students are studying in school that have great value to students, even given our A.I. environment. And that will likely continue for the foreseeable future.

KEILAR: OK, so, Robert, college is obviously really expensive.

FRANEK: Yeah.

KEILAR: But not all schools cost as much as these ones that are creeping over the $100,000 a year mark here. So, you know, if students get into a school, or they get into various schools, right, and they are of varying degrees of prestige and price levels, when do you think it's really worth the debt, taking on the debt to go to the better school? When is it not worth it?

FRANEK: Well, a couple of things that I tell all of our students to keep in mind. Number one, you have to think about not only the education that you're getting, but what is the career development, the career resources that you're going to have throughout your undergraduate experience. You know, number one, I have a best career services list, Bentley University, which is right outside of Boston.

Number one on that list, we call these students some of the most employable upon graduation, thinking about those employment rates.

[14:20:00]

So, I don't think you can separate the two, prestige and, you know, the career service output as well. And that's pretty important in my mind. And then, I start to reassure students in thinking about A.I. majors. There are now over 200 individual schools that have A.I. majors.

(CROSSTALK)

KEILAR: Robert, I am so sorry to interrupt you, but we have some Breaking News right now in the Lindsay Clancy triple-murder trial. And our Jean Casarez is there following all of this. The jury has a question, Jean. What can you tell us?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: After much deliberation, we are still unable to come to a unanimous decision.

CASAREZ: I believe him.

KEILAR: All right, let's listen in to the court.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (Inaudible) more attainable, the law imposes the burden of proof on one party or the other in all cases. In the present case, a criminal case, the burden of proof is on the Commonwealth to establish every element of the crime charge beyond reasonable doubt. If you were left in doubt of any element of the crime, (inaudible) the benefit of the doubt and must be acquitted. However, in conferring together, you ought to pay proper respect to each other's opinions and listen (inaudible) jurors for a reason.

If it makes no impression on the minds of others who are equally honest, equally intelligent, and who have heard the same evidence with the same attention (inaudible) conviction. SANCHEZ: We're obviously having some technical issues with the feed from the courtroom. You could hear the judge there indicating that the jury has been deliberating and that they should respect each other's opinions during those deliberations, that the burden of proof here is on the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

Obviously, Jean Casarez, who's on the scene outside the courthouse for us, the judge hearing what the jury has to say that they are again deadlocked and trying to, what sounded like, offer guidance.

CASAREZ: Exactly, and what we are talking about right now is the Tuey Rodriguez charge. We've talked about it before. It is the case precedent, along with the American Bar Association input of what is to be read to a jury. The judge was reading this. It wasn't off the cuff. Reading to the jury to continue to do their job as a juror. I think we do have some words here of what the judge was saying.

Proper respect to each other's opinions. Listen with an open mind to each other's arguments. When there is disagreement, jurors for acquittal should consider whether a doubt is in their own minds and a reasonable one. So the judge giving them this, realizing there truly is a deadlock, this is now serious. This is where the Tuey Rodriguez charge comes in.

They have now left the courtroom, we understand. They will continue to deliberate, but we need to stay close to see what happens next.

KEILAR: So Jean, this was actually just kind of boilerplate language, right? That is read to the jury. And so --

CASAREZ: Yes.

KEILAR: And it basically spells it out to them. At some length, when they cannot agree and if we look back on what has happened here, the jury came back yesterday morning. They deliberated for part of Thursday. They deliberated for Friday, right? And they kept deliberating, but they came back yesterday morning, after a little more than a day this week, and said, we can't come to an agreement.

It was sort of this informal send back, keep trying, right? And now we are to this point. I wonder what the expectation is about doing something more formally if that tends to be helpful for a jury.

CASAREZ: It's a good question. It is to the point there where legally though, and by case precedent, the Tuey case from the 1800s in Massachusetts, the Rodriguez case from 1973 in Massachusetts, both laid the groundwork of the wording that needs to be used by the judge. But when it gets to be to the point it is at, the judge is truly required to do this and he must read it word for word.

But your question on whether it helps, I can tell you from the first Karen Read trial that I was at, it did not help.

[14:25:00]

They came back and again, once again, said that they were at an impasse, that they could not reach a verdict and a mistrial was ultimately declared. But they will go back, they'll confer with each other and I presume that they will either keep trying for the rest of the day or there will be another note out saying we've tried so hard but we can't.

SANCHEZ: Yeah. Jean please stand by. Let's bring in Dave Aronberg, he's a former State Attorney in Palm Beach County, Florida. Dave, thanks so much for being with us.

I just want to read a portion of what the judge just read out loud to the jury from Instruction 2.460 from the Massachusetts I guess legal guidance in the event of a jury that has become deadlocked. He read quote, "You should consider that it is desirable that this case be decided. You should consider that you have been selected in the same manner and from the same source as any future jury would be. There is no reason to suppose that the case will ever be submitted to six people who are more intelligent, more impartial or more competent to decide it than you are or that more or clearer evidence will be produced on one side or the other."

Effectively the instructions point out that, you know, if they were to do this again, it's highly likely that a future jury may not come to a consensus.

DAVE ARONBERG, FORMER STATE ATTORNEY, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA: Yes, Boris, so this is the equivalent of the Allen charge, the Tuey Rodriguez charge. So judges are limited how many times they can say this because if they do this too much, it's strong-arming the jury.

And you can see if the defendant is convicted after the judge pretty much says, we're not going to have another shot at this, you have to reach a verdict, you can see why that would be right for appeal. So the judge previously told the jury, go back and keep deliberating and that was informal. This is more formal.

This is the directive that you need to go back and try to come to an agreement. And if they still cannot, then under Massachusetts law, the judge can't do it again unless the jury consents to it. So this is where it gets into the fourth quarter of the game here. If the jury doesn't come to an agreement, this thing is going to be a mistrial.

KEILAR: And so where -- I mean where does that leave us? Because even though these instructions say there's no reason to suppose the case will ever be submitted to six persons who are more intelligent, more impartial, or more competent to decide it than you are, the fact is sometimes these cases then do go on again.

We heard from the defense attorney, you know, he doesn't think his client can kind of make it through another one of these. This has been a grueling, tough, I mean tough, tough case just even to watch, Dave. What does that mean going forward for what that would look like realistically?

ARONBERG: I think what happens is, Brianna, that they're going to try their best but they are reflection of the national mood, the national debate. We're split on this case and I think that's the reason why it's not so easy just to say, all right, I'll give in because people feel this in their bones, this in their soul. This is either just a case of premeditated murder or there's something here that deserves jail time, prison time. And then others, you say she was under the throes of medication, she had serious psychosis and insomnia. You put it all together and she should be at a mental institution.

And remember the judge said that she's not going free, she would go to a mental institution not just walk free if she's acquitted by reason of insanity. So I think what's going to happen is, I think this is going to be a hung jury and I think the decision on whether the prosecutors do it again is not going to be up to the defense lawyer but it'll be up to what they see in the jury vote. If it's 11-1 against them, against the prosecution, I think that's it. They're not going to try it again.

If it's the reverse then it's game on again. So there's a lot to be decided.

KEILAR: Yeah that's a very good point. All right, again, we are watching this Breaking News here. The jury in the Lindsay Clancy triple-murder trial has come back to the judge for a second time saying that they are deadlocked, as they decide how to hold Lindsay Clancy accountable for killing her three children.

They received instructions from the judge, very formal instructions and we'll see now, as they've been deliberating for almost 30 hours, where this is going to lead them. We'll be back with more right after this break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)