Return to Transcripts main page

Early Start with Rahel Solomon

Astronauts Speak for First Time Since Unexpected Space Stay; Mega Donors Intensify Wisconsin Supreme Court Race; U.S. State Elections Seen as Referendum on Trump So Far; Karen Read Murder Retrial to Begin Later Today. Aired 5:30-6a ET

Aired April 01, 2025 - 05:30   ET

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

[05:30:00]

RAHEL SOLOMON, CNN ANCHOR: Of this high profile case.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: 4, 3, 2, 1, ignition, and liftoff.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAHEL SOLOMON, CNN ANCHOR: The latest SpaceX mission is underway after a successful launch late Monday night.

[05:35:00]

The Fram2 crew and one of SpaceX's Crew Dragon capsules will be the first humans to orbit the Earth's North and South Poles. It's a private mission funded by a cryptocurrency billionaire. He's flying with three guests, all with links to polar exploration. They'll be conducting experiments to understand more about human health in space and increase human capabilities for long-duration space trips.

A pair of NASA astronauts say that they never felt abandoned or stranded during their stay on the International Space Station, Suni Williams and Butch Wilmore spoke Monday for the first time since coming back to Earth.

Now, their original test flight turned into more than nine months on the International Space Station. They shared their gratitude for the teams that got them home safely, as well as the opportunity to sleep in their own beds again.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SUNI WILLIAMS, ASTRONAUT: After we got off the plane and saw a lot of our support crew, the people who had really got us back to Earth, it was really nice to just say hi, but I think the best thing that night was just to lay down in a bed and go to sleep. BUTCH WILMORE, ASTRONAUT: Sleeping in space is amazing, just floating. It's restful. But the change to sleeping on Earth was special as well. I think if I could choose one or the other, maybe sleeping in space would be the preference. It's pretty great.

But being back, like Suni said, with our families and meeting and seeing the people face-to-face, really the ones that affected our docking, getting us to space station, and we had asked for several of them if they could be there, and they were. And to hug their necks and thank them face-to-face was probably the most special thing.

And that's the, you know, we're social beings created to be together. And, you know, though being together with these guys for nine months was fantastic, being together with the bigger team and interacting with them and hugging their necks and saying thanks is really the thing that's made that return the most special, just the thank yous that we've been able to relay.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SOLOMON: The restaurant chain Hooters has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy, but the company says that the brand name will actually live on. Hooters is mainly known for its chicken wings and its all- female waiting staff and orange shorts. It plans to sell all 100 of its company-owned restaurants to two franchisee groups.

Now, last year, Hooters closed dozens of restaurants, citing rising food and labor costs. They've also been involved in multiple lawsuits over claims of racial and gender discrimination.

Well, today is April Fool's Day, and if you can avoid the pranksters, we've got some cool perks to tell you about.

Dunkin' is giving away a million free hot or iced coffees or cold brews to reward members today. Customers can enter the code -- this is not a joke -- in the Dunkin' app. 8 O'Clock Coffee is offering a 15 percent discount online to customers using the code CUPPAFOOLS.

And 7-Eleven is unveiling its mystery donut. Customers can get one anytime this month, and guess the flavor? Now, the company won't guarantee that it's good, but it will guarantee that it's unforgettable. I don't know about that for a donut, but all right. If that's your thing, if that's your flavor.

All right, and here in New York, the Bronx Bombers have a new weapon in their arsenal. We'll show you how the New York Yankees are crushing it with these torpedo bats. We'll be right back.

[05:40:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SOLOMON: Welcome back. I'm Rahel Solomon. And here are some of the stories we are watching for you today.

The world is bracing for Donald Trump's latest tariff plans. The White House says that the president will make an announcement from the Rose Garden Wednesday, what he calls Liberation Day. It's expected to impose dollar-for-dollar tariffs on all countries that put levies on U.S. goods.

The bodies of three U.S. soldiers reported missing in Lithuania last week have been recovered. Search and recovery operations are underway now to find the fourth missing soldier. Their vehicle was found submerged in a bog. They had been on a maintenance training mission to recover another U.S. vehicle.

And in Washington, Democratic Senator Cory Booker has been speaking for nearly 11 hours on the Senate floor. He and other Democrats are protesting actions taken by the Trump administration. Booker has addressed issues like access to health care and government-funded programs and says that he will keep speaking as long as he is physically able.

And President Trump's second term is facing an early referendum as U.S. special elections kick off in Florida and Wisconsin today. Voters start heading to the polls in Florida in just under two hours, and the polls in Wisconsin open at 8 a.m. Eastern time. Right now, Wisconsin is witnessing the most expensive judicial race in American history. Liberal judge Susan Crawford is calling out mega-donors as a way to mobilize voters in the state's Supreme Court election.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JUDGE SUSAN CRAWFORD, WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT CANDIDATE: So let me talk just for a minute or two about my opponent, Elon Musk. This is about our Supreme Court. It is about our rights, and it's about our state. And we're not going to let Elon Musk take any of that away from us.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SOLOMON: As millions of dollars pour into the opposing campaign's conservative judge, Brad Schimel believes that Musk has leveled the playing field.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JUDGE BRAD SCHIMEL, WISCONSIN SUPREME COURT CANDIDATE: They are so wound up about the money in the race. You know why they're wound up? Because two years ago, they got all the money. And this time, we're more competitive. So their brains are exploding over this.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SOLOMON: And in Florida, Republicans are battling to keep their congressional majority as two seats in deep red districts are up for grabs. Win or lose, Democrats are hoping that a damaging vote there will reflect a growing frustration toward the Trump agenda. CNN's Jeff Zeleny has more on why today's state elections have caught the scrutiny of the White House.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) JEFF ZELENY, CNN CHIEF U.S. NATIONAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Donald Trump and Elon Musk are not on the ballot Tuesday, but their prestige and their popularity certainly are on the line. And two special elections, the White House is watching very carefully.

In Wisconsin, the nation's most expensive judicial race ever has really come into significant attention. Of course, Donald Trump won Wisconsin last fall. It was the narrowest of all the swing states. There is a Supreme Court judicial opening on the ballot. It has always attracted outsized attention, but this year it is something extraordinarily different.

Elon Musk has devoted millions of dollars and so much of his time as well to campaigning there for the conservative candidate, Brad Schimel. Elon Musk has been giving out $100 increments to people who signed a petition that would lead them to vote, but he also gave away two separate prizes of $1 million each for people who supported the conservative position.

Now Democrats there are pushing back, trying to say that Elon Musk is essentially trying to buy votes. So this certainly is one of the first and biggest referendums yet of the Trump administration, the Trump presidency, not only what he has done in office, but also what Elon Musk stands for as well as his Department of Government efficiency. So all eyes here at the White House will be on Wisconsin on Tuesday for the special election.

Florida also hosting a special election to fill the congressional seat of Mike Waltz. Of course, he's the national security advisor who came under fire for the whole brouhaha over the group chat in Signal, leaking those military plans. But his seat also is up for grabs.

It's a safe Republican seat generally. Republicans have generally won this, but Democrats believe that they have a chance there to at least make inroads. We shall see.

So there's no doubt the first special elections here, the White House keeping an eye on them, it could be a harbinger of things to come.

Jeff Zeleny, CNN, the White House.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SOLOMON: And CNN's special election coverage begins tonight at 6 p.m. Eastern and continues all night long. Be sure to join CNN as we watch the results come in.

Right now to a high profile murder trial about to get underway in Massachusetts for now the second time. Karen Read is accused of hitting her Boston police officer boyfriend with her vehicle and letting him die on a cold winter's night back in 2002. Nearly a year ago, a mistrial was declared. Now prosecutors now have another chance to make second degree murder charges stick.

The high interest case now the subject of the documentary "A Body in the Snow" airing on Max, which shares the same parent company with CNN.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Karen Read is accused of hitting John O'Keefe with her SUV and leaving him to die in the snow.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Their relationship was not a happy one. Not a single witness actually saw this happen.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: There's a whole other side of the story.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: This is funny misery.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: They've got a guilty already.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SOLOMON: And just to be clear, we just said 2002, but it was actually 2022. Just to make that clear. A long list of prosecution witnesses have testified that Read and officer John O'Keefe were drinking and arguing before she ran into him, leaving him to die of head injuries and hypothermia. But the defense has argued that she was framed by O'Keefe's colleagues who attacked him during a house party and dumped him outside.

Read faces life in prison if convicted. Now since the first trial, she has amassed a huge fan club.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

CROWD: Free Karen Read!

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Second trial tomorrow, they won at the first trial, but she's innocent, she's factually innocent. There's no way she did it.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I hope it's a start of justice for Karen.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: There shouldn't be a second trial for starters, but I hope that the second trial has a positive outcome and arrives at the truth.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I hope the second trial, one frees Karen Read, exposes the bad procedures that the police department has right now. There's a lot of good police officers out there and we just want the bad ones gone.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We're standing up for her rights. We're standing up for our own rights.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

SOLOMON: All right let's get to CNN legal analyst Joey Jackson, who is a criminal defense attorney and former prosecutor. He is with us now from New York. Joey, always a pleasure to have you. Thank you for waking up early to be with us. Look, this first trial lasted more than two months. That's a long

time. Jury deliberated for five days. They obviously couldn't reach a unanimous decision. What do you expect to be different this time around?

JOEY JACKSON, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Yes, Rahel, good morning to you. So I think a lot will be different. We know that a special prosecutor has been appointed that is led by a defense attorney, right? And I think that what they'll do is they'll streamline the case.

It's a case about the battle of the narratives. On the one hand, you have the prosecution saying that she was drunk. They got into an argument. She hit him with her SUV and left him to die.

On the other hand, the defense says nonsense. There were other people who could have potentially been responsible for it. The forensic evidence would, according to the defense, tend to show that. And as a result of that, she's being framed. It was poor, bad police work. And as a result, she's not guilty.

[05:50:04]

So I expect the prosecution to streamline the case. I expect them to be all about the facts. Before it was -- before what happened, during what happened, after what happened. I think they'll hone right into it.

For the defense's part, Rahel, I think they will continue to make hay about the investigation, about the cover-up, and about the fact that there were alternative parties who could have been responsible. What narrative carries the day is a question for the jury.

SOLOMON: And what about the lead investigator here? I mean, this will also be a big difference. So this is someone who used to work for the Massachusetts State Police. He played a big role in the first trial. Joey, as you know, he was recently fired from his job after a state police board found that he had violated agency rules by sending texts about Read that they found derogatory. They also found he shared sensitive information about the investigation with people who were not law enforcement.

How does the defense use this? Because he's on the witness list for both sides.

JACKSON: Yes, Rahel, that's a great point. I think they'll use it to great effect. Whenever you attack an investigation and attack the propriety of it, you look at who the lead investigator is.

And when you have a lead investigator who is sending out texts to his family that were derogatory with respect to the defendant in this case, commenting upon how she looked, calling her various names, et cetera, that's a problem. Especially when they're arguing that that lead investigator may have planted evidence, specifically the taillight of her car and the actual items from that taillight that were found at the scene, what the defense is saying that he took it from the police lab and put it there. Why do I mention that? It's about credibility, as in any case. And so

to your question, I think the credibility of that lead investigator is going to be really pilloried by the defense, as is the entirety of the investigation, as he was not the only one. He may have been the only one fired, but there are others who are going to be called into question in terms of police investigators.

It had a lot to do with this case. The defense is going to play that up huge to suggest she was framed. It's improper. She's innocent. And we'll see what a jury ultimately does.

They're calling 250 jurors per day, Rahel, so that they can get a fair jury. It starts there. You have to get a jury that can hear the case to do so fairly, impartially. And if they do that, we'll see ultimately what they decide.

SOLOMON: Yes. And I want to turn to the jury selection in just a moment. But first, Joey, you know, what's so unusual about this trial is that there is a documentary. I mean, even the filmmakers behind it talk about how unusual it was to be filming this documentary as the trial was gearing up to start.

How does that come into play here? I mean, does that hurt her? Does that help her?

JACKSON: So, you know, I think it cuts both ways because I think there are both sides of the argument. You have one side, obviously, that says that she did it. She was drunk and they were arguing. She killed him.

And you have the other side that is distrusting of law enforcement is going against the investigation would be suggestive of her being framed. But the ultimate question is, with all this publicity, how do you get it done?

We live, Rahel, we know, in a new world. And in that world, we have social media everywhere. We have documentaries everywhere. We have the thirst of information and information that's readily available.

So the challenge is not really to find a juror who hasn't heard about the case. The challenge is to find a juror who, notwithstanding the fact that they've heard about the case, can put all of that aside and evaluate the evidence for what they hear in court, not on a documentary, not a soundbite outside the court, not on the news, not what Rahel says, not what I say.

SOLOMON: Certainly.

JACKSON: What ultimately the attorneys, through the witnesses, elicit in the court of law. That's the challenge. I think with so many people being called into court, they can do it.

And ultimately, they can get the facts and evidence to determine whether there's guilt here or the lack thereof.

SOLOMON: And just sticking with that for a moment further, Joey, beyond someone who can be impartial and neutral and maybe, you know, they've heard of it, but they can still listen to the facts. Give me a sense, if you might, really quickly, if you're the defense and if you're the prosecution of the profile, the kind of person you're looking for.

JACKSON: Yes, so what happens is, is you have jurors when you question them. And remember, both sides question jurors. And in questioning the jurors, the prosecution has its question. The defense has theirs, right? There's a jury questionnaire, of course, that they filled out to determine whether they're partial or impartial.

From the defense's perspective, you want a profile of a person who may be somewhat distrusting of law enforcement, doesn't have familiar relationships in law enforcement, doesn't believe that law enforcement is perfect.

At the same time, if you're the prosecutor, you want a law and order person who does, in fact, have belief in the system, belief in government, the belief in police. And how do you get that? You get that through questioning.

Last point in that is that both sides can challenge jurors. If you come in there and you say, I don't like police, you're out of the jury. If you come in there and say, our system of justice is corrupt, you're out of the jury. It's called a challenge for cause.

[05:55:00]

Then you have these other challenges called peremptory, where you could excuse jurors for any reason or no reason.

So the profile, essentially, on the one part are going to be law and order, prosecution, defense, conspiracy theorists, or not so much that. But people are distrusting of government, distrusting of law enforcement, and don't believe that the system is perfect by any means. The defense will center there around that.

SOLOMON: Yes, really fascinating. Jury selection, always fascinating, but especially even more so with really high-profile cases like this. Joey Jackson, appreciate you being here this morning. Thank you.

JACKSON: Thanks, Rahel.

SOLOMON: And thank you.

We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[06:00:00]

SOLOMON: The New York Yankees are knocking out of the park with their new "Torpedo Bat". So that looks a bit like a bowling pin. It's thicker in the part of the bat that's more likely to make contact with the ball. The Yankees have the most players using torpedo bats, and they just scored a whopping 32 runs in two games this weekend. Major league baseball confirmed that the bats are legal and other teams are not trying them out as well.

All right, that will do it for us here on EARLY START. I'm Rahel Solomon in New York. CNN "THIS MORNING" starts right now.