Return to Transcripts main page

One World with Zain Asher

Tennessee Death Row Inmate Conscious After Botched Execution; Frustration Mounts On Cornell Campus Amid Gang Rape Allegations; Rescued Hostage: Suffered Psychological Abuse From Hamas; Aired 12-1p ET

Aired October 07, 2026 - 12:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:00:29]

ANNOUNCER: This is CNN Breaking News.

ZAIN ASHER, CNN ANCHOR: All right. Coming to you live from New York, I'm Zain Asher.

BIANNA GOLODRYGA, CNN ANCHOR: And I'm Bianna Golodryga. You're watching the second hour of "One World."

Her lawyers call her recovery medically unprecedented. In Tennessee, attorneys for the death row inmate who survived a botched execution head to

court this hour seeking to preserve evidence.

You're looking at live pictures from the Nashville courthouse. Christa Pike's lawyers say that she is now conscious and speaking but faces a long

recovery. They add that she remains handcuffed and shackled to her hospital bed despite damage to her arms from two lethal injections last week.

The state of Tennessee argues that it already is bound by long-standing court order to preserve evidence.

ASHER: Yes, Pike would have been the first woman executed in Tennessee in 200 years. She has already served 30 years in prison.

In the mid-90s, the then 18-year-old Pike and her boyfriend were convicted for the brutal murder of her classmate.

CNN's Ryan Young is following the story for us from Nashville. He filed this report a short time ago.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

RYAN YOUNG, CNN SENIOR U.S. NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Of course, a lot of conversation about this case even across the world. People trying to figure

out exactly how Tennessee will move forward. We're still waiting to hear from the governor's office and state officials about what the next steps

are.

Executions in this state have been banned for the rest of the year as this investigation continues. But today inside this courthouse, they'll be

talking about preserving the evidence in this case so they can see if all the protocols were followed and what missteps took place.

But then we got that extraordinary news that Christa Pike is actually awake, conscious and talking. So hopefully when we get a chance to talk to

the attorneys, we'll be able to figure out how she's communicating with her attorneys and what her next steps are.

But a lot of questions remain about this case. Take a listen to the attorneys talk about what they've been able to do so far and how they feel

about the victim in this case.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

STEPHEN FERRELL, CHRISTA PIKE'S ATTORNEY: Nothing that anyone can do will bring back Colleen Slemmer. Nothing that anyone can do will make this right

for May Martinez, her mother. I can't give any better solution than the fact that Christa has been, and may very well continue to be, severely

punished. I don't think that attempting another execution is going to bring justice.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

YOUNG: And I should stress again, we'll have a chance to talk to the attorneys, but they did put out a statement that said, "Against all odds,

Christa Pike is conscious speaking and continues to receive critical medical care. Despite the severe damage she endured to her arms, she is

still handcuffed and shackled to the bed. Her recovery is medically unprecedented. Her prognosis remains unclear, but at a minimum, we expect a

long recovery."

You got to think about this. So far, no one's been able to see someone actually survive two doses spread over 40 minutes and now she's back awake

and breathing. In fact, her attorneys thanked the hospital for all the care that she received once she's there.

So many more questions to be answered at this point. So many people trying to figure out how this state will move forward. One person running for

governor in this state has actually suggested that they go back to using the electric chair. So, we'll continue to follow all the details.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ASHER: All right. Let's take a closer look at this case with Areva Martin. She's a lawyer and legal affairs commentator as well as a civil rights

attorney.

Just want to, Areva, just first of all, just get your reaction to this. You know, this is, as Ryan Young was saying there, medically unprecedented,

this idea that we've seen two botched execution attempts and also that she is now conscious, breathing. She has survived, obviously, the most recent

botched execution attempt.

And her lawyers are describing this as essentially cruel and unusual punishment, especially because there were so many warnings in place that

this could happen, you know, just given that it might be difficult to find her veins, et cetera.

What should happen at this point in time? And what is likely to happen? Obviously, her lawyers are calling on the governor to essentially abort her

position on death row and just sort of demote her, if you will, to life in prison without the possibility of parole.

AREVA MARTIN, attorney and legal affairs commentator: Yes, an extraordinary set of circumstances, unprecedented across this country to see someone who

is facing the death penalty and two failed attempts by a state and have someone to go through what had to be just the most grueling and horrific

process you can imagine and now be alive to talk about it.

[12:05:03]

We're not going to have to rely on those witnesses that were in the room who were administering the drug that should have led to her death. We'll

actually have an opportunity at some point, I believe, to hear from Christa Pike herself to tell us what it was like as they were struggling for over

40 minutes to try to administer this life-ending drug to her.

I think what should happen now is exactly what is happening. The governor putting a moratorium on the death penalty, not making any other attempts on

Christa Pike's life, and her attorneys going into court asking that all of the evidence be preserved in this case as to who's physically evidence,

written evidence, electronic evidence, everything related to the execution attempt be preserved.

I would not be surprised if we did not see a major federal civil rights lawsuit filed by her attorneys on her behalf in light of the botched

execution.

GOLODRYGA: It's just incredible, the -- the fact that she survived is now reportedly speaking with her attorneys. Perhaps, as you just noted, we may

hear her -- from her directly about what this experience was like.

The governor has ordered an independent review, but the state won't disclose where the drugs came from. So without that information, can there

be full transparency?

MARTIN: Not at all. And we'll see how long the governor's position holds. We know that this state is actually in transition and there will be a new

governor elected.

So, the governor that is responsible in this moment won't be there in January of next year, won't be there as this case continues. So, I'm not

sure that holding or trying to withhold that information will be viable for the state.

I imagine that the attorneys for Christa Pike are going to go into court and demand that that information be released. That goes to, I think, the

entire determination about what went wrong. Again, not just in Christa Pike's case, but in that earlier case where there was also a botched

execution.

ASHER: Yes, talk to us about what this independent review might entail. I mean, obviously, her lawyers, as we've touched on, are asking for all the

evidence to be preserved, that includes physical evidence. I imagine even the needles, because apparently one of the needles was bent at a right

angle.

Actually, I'm just being told we're going to actually listen in to the judge who's speaking right now there in Nashville.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: To the court's narrow issue for today. I will address that first. And depending on what the argument is on that, if you all are

prepared to get into the merits, the court will entertain that. But happy to hear from counsel on how we shall proceed.

All right. You may take the podium.

LUKE IHNEN, CHRISTA PIKE'S ATTORNEY: Good morning your honor Luke Ihnen from the Federal Defender Services of Eastern Tennessee here on behalf of

Ms. Pike.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Mr. Ihnen, I am having a little bit of trouble hearing you, so if you could speak into the mic a little bit.

IHNEN: I'm taller than I thought I was, Your Honor.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: OK.

IHNEN: It's great to be back in front of, Your Honor. I assume you want us to proceed to the jurisdictional issue first?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes, because, you know, if the court concludes it does not have jurisdiction, so let's talk about the procedural issues first.

IHNEN: Sure. And, Your Honor, I took the state's filing made yesterday as a stipulation that this court does have jurisdiction. Your order clearly

stated to brief that limited issue.

I -- I was not able to find any sort of substantive argument on jurisdiction in the state's response.

I'll just sort of reiterate generally the arguments that we made in our filing. First of all, the transfer statute which is the statute that this

court utilized to transfer the case to the Tennessee Supreme Court, 161116. That provides that if an original civil action is filed in a state or

county court of record or a general sessions court and such court determines that lacks jurisdiction, the court shall, if it is in the

interest of justice, transfer the action or appeal.

And, Your Honor, there are clearly two separate requirements to that statute. The first is that this court must find that it lacks subject

matter jurisdiction. And the second requirement is that the -- the transferring court must have been a court that the action could have been

filed originally.

There's a -- a Tennessee Court of Appeals case, Bruce versus Jackson. And the site for that, Your Honor, is 2019 Tenn. App. Lexis 234.

[12:10:07]

And in that case, and I'm looking at -- at page 17 of that case. In so holding, this court determined that the General Sessions Court had, quote,

complied with the transfer statute because two conditions of the statute have been met.

The plaintiff's claim could have been brought in the circuit court and it was in the interest of justice to transfer this case.

Your Honor, as we've argued in our filing, certainly the first requirement was met. This court determined that it did not have subject matter

jurisdiction at the time and it transferred to the Tennessee Supreme Court.

The Tennessee Supreme Court, as we put in our filing, has reminded us that it is not a court of original jurisdiction.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: if I remember when you all were here on the motion to dismiss, we had a very robust conversation about whether or not the Supreme

Court was a court of original jurisdiction.

And when the court looked at the rule, 12E -- 12.4E, you know, I remember that discussion and the court's, you know, thoughts that there was perhaps

not the proper procedure in order to get a case as Ms. Pike's to the Supreme Court for the new implication of 12.4E. Do you recall that?

IHNEN: That's correct, Your Honor.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: And so I sent the case anyway versus dismissing it.

IHNEN: That's right, Your Honor. And then, you know, I frankly didn't hear anything else until I received your motion.

So, it's the court's understanding, from just looking at the procedural timeline, that the Supreme Court in fact dismissed the case?

IHNEN: Yes, Your Honor. If we could just back up for a second. I believe part of the -- the argument we had on that original motion was the

plaintiff's confusion over how the rule applied, whether it applied, when it applied.

And -- and to be frank, Your Honor, I'm not sure that the Tennessee Supreme Court order denying Ms. Spike's relief on her Rule 12 motion clarifies that

any further.

But turning back to -- and -- and to answer, Your Honor's question, so the Tennessee Supreme Court dismissed that case without prejudice to filing a

Rule 12 motion, which Ms. Pike did.

And -- and as we put in our pleadings, as we were briefing this matter before the United States Supreme Court prior to her execution, the state

repeatedly reiterated that that type of relief, the Rule 12 motion was interlocutory in nature.

It was limited to the -- the stay posture, the stay of execution, and that the trial matter remained pending in this court.

And -- and so I think --

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: But didn't the Supreme Court actually dismiss the transferred case? And -- and this, frankly, came a bit of a surprise to the

court. It appears that -- on or about May 12th, 2026, the Supreme Court dismissed the case.

And so that's where the court is kind of, you know, who has jurisdiction at this point is this a rule 60.025 kind of discussion that we need to have?

Or procedurally, where are we?

IHNEN: I think, and, Your Honor's right, it was a -- again, when the -- the state was briefing that issue at the United States Supreme Court, the

argument that they were making was -- were a surprise to us as well. I --

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: They said that the case was still open down here. Isn't that --

IHNEN: That's correct, Your Honor, multiple times as we put in our -- our briefing.

And so I think that there are multiple ways that this court can -- can maintain jurisdiction over this case. We -- we've argued that both

requirements of the transfer statute aren't met. And there was a case that I cited in my brief, I believe it was the Auten case, A-U-T-E-N.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I read it.

IHNEN: I don't have that cite in front of me. But the Supreme Court actually, in that case, remanded an improperly transferred case back to --

to the trial court. That, of course, did not happen here, but I think the - - the posture of the cases is -- is similar.

Also as we briefed in our -- our motion, the statute 16.1.102 allows this court, and this -- I'm looking at part six, to control its process and

orders.

I think the -- the -- the case that was closed on the Chancery Court docket administratively could certainly be reopened under your -- your equitable

powers.

And -- and then I think we can look at rule 60.02.5. I'll put that here as a motion to -- to reconsider. Sorry, Your Honor.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[12:15:00]

GOLODRYGA: We've been listening to Christa Pike's attorney there in court in Nashville, Tennessee. I want to go back to Areva Martin, the legal

affairs commentator here for CNN as well as a civil rights attorney.

So, Areva, just break down what we've been listening to and what specifically Christa Pike's attorney is asking for.

MARTIN: So, it's important to note that this motion, before the court, is about preservation of evidence. So, Christa Pike's lawyers filed a motion

asking the court to issue an order forcing the state to preserve all of the evidence related to the botched execution.

But before the court will even rule on that substantive motion about preservation of evidence, the court says, you first have to convince me,

Christa Pike's lawyers, that I have jurisdiction, that I have the power to even hear this matter.

So this is a court in Davidson County, Tennessee. And this is a very technical argument. You can hear the lawyer citing to particular statutes,

citing to particular case law, again, trying to establish before this court that this court does have the legal jurisdiction to hear the underlying

motion, which is about the preservation of evidence.

So, we're going to hear arguments back and forth from Christa Pike's lawyer. Presumably the state's going to get up and take a position. They

may take the position that this court doesn't have jurisdiction and then the court will have to first determine the jurisdictional question before

moving on, if at all today, to that issue about preservation of evidence.

ASHER: So, two questions to you. How does the court now determine whether or not it has jurisdictions, as that the sort of procedural issue that

we're focusing on at this point in time?

And then when it comes to the evidence, I was actually asking you before we went to the live sort of proceedings in the courtroom, I was actually

asking you about some of the evidence that is in question here, it is electronic evidence, emails. It is physical evidence. It is the syringe,

the needle that was potentially used.

What are the types of evidence that need to be preserved? And how will they factor into the process of an independent review?

MARTIN: Well, let's start with the jurisdiction question. The court has to determine if the filings that have been made by Christa Pike, even before

this motion today, if those filings indicate that this case is in the right venue.

And we are hearing from the lawyers that there's already been some decisions made by the Tennessee State Supreme Court. We heard the lawyer

also say that there was -- they were in the process of filing some kind of action before the U.S. Supreme Court.

So, there have been lots of motions filed on Christa Pike's behalf in various courts. So, this -- this court -- this judge that we're listening

to is trying to determine, based on all of the previous filings made in this case, again, is this the proper venue for this particular motion?

Keep in mind that Christa Pike's lawyer -- lawyers were feverishly trying to prevent the execution from happening. They were appealing to every court

possible, including the U.S. Supreme Court, trying to stop the execution. So, there's been a lot of legal activity on this case, even before we get

to today.

And in terms of that evidence, yes, again, I believe that the preservation of evidence is being sought on two bases. One, for the lawyers to make a

continuing claim that this execution should not happen again, that there should be -- that Christa Pike should be allowed to serve out the rest of

her time for the -- the murder that she was convicted of in a prison without the opportunity for parole, but that she should be removed from

death row.

The other reason, I believe the preservation of evidence is so important, is because the potential of a civil federal violation, civil lawsuit filed

by her attorney on her behalf using the Eighth Amendment as the primary basis for their lawsuit, which prevents cruel and unusual punishment by the

government.

So, this evidence is going to be critically important, I think, again, both in trying to prevent her from being executed at all and then in a potential

civil suit where she'll be seeking monetary damages.

ASHER: All right. So her lawyers, as you noted, are trying, at this point in time, you know, after the jurisdiction question is established, they are

trying to lay the groundwork for a potential lawsuit against the state of Tennessee over how this execution was carried out. And that's one of the

reasons why they're also trying to preserve evidence.

And also, as you point out, the other reason is to prevent her from being executed or an attempted execution again.

Areva Martin, thank you so much for breaking that down for us. We'll be right back with more after the short break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:20:27]

GOLODRYGA: OK. We're going to take you back to the courtroom in Tennessee where the state is now presenting its case after attorneys for death row

inmate, Christa Pike, who survived a botched execution, are seeking to preserve evidence. Let's listen in to the judge now.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: What you call requested from this court?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, that was requested. And so far, is the court lacked jurisdiction to issue injunctive relief that would have implicated the

Tennessee Supreme Court's execution order? The state did not take the position that there was no jurisdiction to entertain declaratory relief.

And so the state's position, as to dismissal, was related to the interplay between the Tennessee Supreme Court's execution order and Rule 12.4E, which

as the court later clarified, is designed to facilitate this kind of collateral litigation by allowing a plaintiff to file a motion in the

Tennessee Supreme Court for a stay of execution, and, if necessary, a special master to conduct factual findings, which of course is what wound

up happening.

And a special master was appointed. A hearing was held in August and then the Tennessee Supreme Court later denied relief, denied a stay, and the

execution went forward.

But the state's position is consistent today that the -- the court did lack jurisdiction to issue any injunctive relief with respect to that impending

execution that would have affected the method or timing of that execution.

And as the Tennessee Supreme Court made clear in Black versus Strada last year, that's impermissible. And so what 12.4E is designed to do is allow a

plaintiff to get a stay of execution so that they can pursue litigation in a court like this one.

And -- and the state's position has been consistent throughout this litigation that because this court never entered an order of dismissal

following the transfer, the case remained live.

Now, it is true that the Tennessee Supreme court said in its order of May 12th that with respect to the transfer, when the court concluded that it

lacked jurisdiction, dismissal was the appropriate option.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: So, did the Supreme Court though have the authority subject matter jurisdiction to actually dismiss the case in toto? Because

this court did dismiss the case. This court transferred the case.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ASHER: All right. You've just been listening to the state attorneys for Tennessee, essentially also arguing that position over the execution of

Christa Pike, that botched execution that we've been talking about with.

[12:25:02]

Our legal affairs commentator, Areva Martin, who I have to bring back in.

So, Areva, just give us your take. You summed up right before the break what Christa Pike's attorneys themselves were asking for here. What is the

state asking for?

MARTIN: Yes, based on the -- the limited amount we were able to hear, the state is trying to distinguish between the actions that were filed to

prevent the execution. So again, as I said, there were a lot of motions filed by Pike's attorney trying to stop the execution.

And apparently what the state is saying is that there was a motion filed to stop for -- efforts to stop the execution, which were denied in trying to

distinguish those motions about stopping the execution from motions that are filed today, again, specifically with regards to preserving evidence.

I didn't hear enough from the state's attorney to determine whether they are in agreement that this court has jurisdiction to hear this preservation

of evidence motion, or if they are taking the opposite position that this court does not have jurisdiction. But clearly, the court has asked both

lawyers to address this issue before she will even get to the substantive question of preservation of evidence.

Seemingly, the court itself has some doubts about whether this is the appropriate venue for this motion on the preservation of evidence.

And at the end of the day, if this court decides that she -- she being the judge, does not have jurisdiction, it just means that this motion will have

to be filed in some other court that will have the appropriate jurisdiction. It doesn't mean that there's a failure of the motion. It just

gets shuffled around to the right court.

ASHER: All right. Areva Martin, live for us. Thank you so much for breaking down somewhat the complexities of this case for us. We appreciate it. We're

watching it very closely. Areva Martin, live for us there. Thank you.

GOLODRYGA: Well, frustration is mounting on the Cornell campus where students are planning a seven-hour sit-in beginning next hour to protest

how the university handled the alleged gang rape there.

ASHER: Yes, it comes days after faculty members submitted a resolution for a vote of no-confidence against the school's administrators.

Meantime, the attorney for the former student, known as Jane Doe, claims the fraternity had meetings to, quote, try to cover this up. And he says

his client is now receiving threats.

GOLODRYGA: CNN's Gloria Pazmino has more on the growing outrage on campus.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

GLORIA PAZMINO, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, that's right, Zain and Bianna, as we're learning more as these investigations are starting to get off the

ground, we're also, you know, really getting a good look at the mood here on campus.

We attended a student town hall yesterday evening which was organized by student organizations and we got to watch as students came together to

share information. Some of them share their own stories and experiences of sexual assault during their time at Cornell.

Students spoke emotionally about what to do next. They're having these conversations, trying to come together because they want to figure out a

strategy to get some more accountability from the administration.

And the reason they're doing that is because there's currently a dissatisfaction with how Cornell University has handled this, how it's

communicating with the public and the student body. And they're coming together to talk about that.

Also, very importantly, we have some new reporting about what the faculty and the staff of Cornell University are doing. There was a meeting that was

held yesterday afternoon. CNN has obtained a recording of that meeting where we could hear the president of the university, Michael Kotlikoff, try

to address some of the questions raised by faculty.

And you can get a sense of how the faculty is doing by the questions that they were asking. They wanted to know how the university handled Jane Doe's

incident when it happened. They wanted to know what role the law enforcement agencies on campus played. They wanted to understand what

resources are available to students.

And also, very importantly, we learned that two of the seven students that have been accused by Jane Doe actually are still on campus. The university

had declined to provide that information, but we learned about it because the faculty raised questions about how to navigate these really difficult

dynamics.

The fact that these students remain on campus, they have to be accommodated. And that is upsetting to some other students. So, it really

gives you a sense of how heightened tensions are here.

It's emotional at times, you know, watching these young people come together and talk about the change they want to see.

And we're seeing this frustration from faculty that feels that the university hasn't created enough open spaces so that dialogue and open

conversation can be had.

[12:30:05]

I've heard from a faculty member who told me that even though he was glad that the meeting was held, he felt that it was too much of a controlled

environment with the questions being previously vetted, people not having an opportunity to speak openly during the forum. And he felt that it just

created this one-sided conversation with university officials sort of controlling the flow of information.

So, we're just seeing that, you know, there's going to be a long road here for university officials to satisfy the demands of both faculty.

And the students, the last point I want to mention is that faculty also getting a step closer to taking that vote of no-confidence. We reported

that earlier this week that there is a resolution that's been introduced and that the faculty senate will consider taking a no vote, vote of no-

confidence on the administration's ability to handle sexual assault here on campus. Zain, Bianna.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

GOLODRYGA: All right. Our thanks to Gloria for that report.

Still to come on "One World," stories of pain and perseverance. Three years after the October 7th Hamas attacks in Israel, we check in with one of the

rescued hostages.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ASHER: In Israel, a profound day of remembrance as the nation is paying tribute to the more than 1,200 victims of the October 7th Hamas attack.

Today is the third anniversary of that massacre.

GOLODRYGA: Yes, at the start of the day, there was a silent commemoration as Israelis marked the exact moment the attack began.

Other memorials have been held at homes and roadsides across the country. Official memorials were held on Monday. The October 7th attack was the

deadliest in Israel's history.

ASHER: Highly emotional acts of remembrance have been taking place at the Nova Victims Memorial. Live pictures here from Re'im in southern Israel.

More than 370 people were killed by Hamas, by the Hamas-led gunmen at the music festival there. Another 44 were abducted.

[12:35:14]

GOLODRYGA: Andrey Kozlov was one of them. You're looking at the moment when he saw his mother for the first time in June of 2024, after eight months of

captivity in Gaza. He says he suffered intense psychological and some physical abuse at the hands of Hamas. I spoke to him back in 2024, not long

after he was rescued.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ANDREY KOZLOV, RESCUED OCTOBER 7 HOSTAGE: They started to ask our names. Like, Shem (ph), Shem. You probably saw it in the video.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: SHEM, SHEM. ANDREY.

KOZLOV: They're like, Almo (ph), Almo. Andrey, Andrey Kozlov. (INAUDIBLE) And some guy who was (INAUDIBLE). He asked me like -- like Andrey, Andrey.

He told me in Russian, I will translate to you. Like I will go with you, you will go with me, only with me, two meters maximum from me. We will

rescue. Today, you will be at home.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GOLODRYGA: And Andrey Kozlov joins us now. Andrey, it -- it's so good to see you. I can only imagine the emotions you feel when you see that video,

watch that video. In fact, in the moment when I spoke with you and interviewed you, it had just been a few weeks since you were rescued. And I

asked if you watched that rescue video. And you said repeatedly that you watched it time and time again.

Now, it has been three years to the day when you were kidnapped from the Nova Festival. I'm wondering how this day, this anniversary, feels knowing

that every single hostage, the -- the surviving and sadly those that -- that were killed, are now home and those that didn't survive are buried.

How does this feel relative to -- to last year's commemoration?

KOZLOV: It feels that story is kind of completed, but the global story is still not over. There is still a big conflict. And it feels that something

is still not said and conflict basically is not over.

But for people who got their loved ones and endlessly happy. And for those ones who lost somebody of their family, I feel very sorry.

But it's a moment we need to remember everything that happened and just to continue our life and to live and work and do all this stuff that we were

doing before, but with more knowledge about this world.

ASHER: Andre, you know, I imagine that every anniversary, for the rest of your life, it is going to bring up so many different emotions. And, of

course, one of the tricky things is that it's impossible for you to talk about, I'm imagining, it's impossible for you to talk about October 7th and

what happened without reliving it emotionally. I imagine that would be very difficult for you.

When you do talk about it, what is the emotion that is hardest to shake?

KOZLOV: First of all, it's not only one day of 365 days a year when I think about it, but yes, exactly today is the day when I think about it. I think

every minute from different sides and from different perspectives.

For the first year, I was thinking about it a lot, trying to imagine what I could do in a different way. I was thinking what I could do better. Maybe I

could rescue somebody or to help in some of the ways. But for the second year, I decided to kind of isolate myself and to be as much distracted as I

can.

Now, I kind of came back to this doing a few events and interviews, and I'm definitely a different person if to compare to person who I used to be.

Emotions that I feel is, again, some hurricane, very diverse mix I would say. And that's -- I'm not able to explain what I feel, honestly. It's too

-- it's too much sometimes.

[12:40:07]

ASHER: I'm sure. I'm sure.

GOLODRYGA: Andrey, no one can understand what you have gone through, what all of the hostages who were held in Gaza, what they went through and then

the emotional trauma, as you said, reliving it every single day.

I spoke recently with Evyatar David, who -- who said that for him, as you just noted, it's all about living life now. He, of course, was one of the

last hostages to come home last October.

You said something that stood out to me just a moment ago where you said it's all about living life, but you've also gained more knowledge about the

world we live in.

What have you learned about the world we live in since you've been back?

KOZLOV: For these two years, I was deeply thinking about it. And I kind of was expecting this question, but what I've seen it's the most cruel things

that humans capable to do. And I saw very diverse society in the world right now.

And what everybody is supposed to realize that we live on the same planet. We live on the same small tiny planet. Right now, we can reach any point of

this world for a few hours. Even 100 years ago, it was impossible.

And every conflict that we have, even if it's a small one, can turn to a bigger one. Bigger conflict can turn to even more bigger. And that's what's

scary. That's something that terrify me, to realize that sometimes we're very close to a global conflict.

And what we supposed to realize that as human beings that we are only human beings living in the same home.

And if you kind of follow some radical thoughts, some radical ideology, if you want to fight, if you want to argue with somebody, it's going to bring

only bad things to this planet. Only bad things to you personally, and it's not going to solve any issues that we have -- that we have between us. But

it's a very complicated issue, very complicated.

This experience made me think about a lot of things about solutions, about some decisions, about the way how we're supposed to live. And

unfortunately, I didn't find anything specific, trying to dig into my thoughts and some history.

But what we can do, what we can try is just to do our best and not to be so polarized, to try to be together if we can with people who were not to be

together to live in the same planet.

GOLODRYGA: Yes.

KOZLOV: It's hard to say, but we also have to find the common language. I mean, to find something that we can do to make this world better place for

everybody, because there are so many differences between us, but --

GOLODRYGA: Yes.

KOZLOV: -- that's only one place we have. That's the conclusion. That's it.

GOLODRYGA: You said it perfectly, Andrey. And as we thank you for joining us and tell you that -- that we are continuing to support you and all of

the hostages in their journey home and trying to rebuild their lives. You have found a voice through your art as well, so we were showing our viewers

some of the artwork that I know was so therapeutic and so important for you to express just some of what you did just now with us so eloquently.

It's great to see you again, Andrey. Be well. Thank you.

KOZLOV: Thank you.

ASHER: Thank you, Andrey.

KOZLOV: Bye-bye. Bye.

ASHER: We'll be right back with more after this quick break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:45:51]

ASHER: All right. Returning now to the three year anniversary of the October 7th attack. In 2023, Hamas-led gunmen stormed Israeli communities

across the border from Gaza.

CNN global affairs analyst Brett McGurk joins us live now for The Exchange. His new book, "Brink: Inside the Race to Free the October 7th Hostages," is

out right now. Congratulations on this book.

I have heard from Bianna that it is a riveting read. But just talk to us about what you learned from this experience and obviously through, you

know, your role in negotiations. What are the limits of American influence? And where does American influence still have sway, Brett?

BRETT MCGURK, CNN GLOBAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: Well, thanks. It's great to be here, again, on such a -- on such a somber day.

I mean, that's a -- the question you're asking can be answered in multiple ways. I think I'll answer it just based on your last interview with Andrey,

who, of course, was a hostage.

The kind of perverse equation of a hostage negotiation. I've done hostage negotiations with Iran. And in this case, of course, it was also an all-

encompassing regional crisis and horrific war ongoing in Gaza.

But what a hostage taker does is they put a -- they can put a price on the table. And over time, they shift the moral onus to the party trying to get

the hostages out. And that's basically what Hamas did here.

A year ago today, three years ago, they killed 1,200 Israelis and took 251 hostages. And their -- their position early on was, we'll return the

hostages if we have a guaranteed permanent ceasefire, we stay in power in Gaza, go back to the October 6 status quo, while saying to the world that

they would repeat the atrocities of October 7th again and again.

And Israel's position was after what happened three years ago today, Hamas could no longer ever stay in power in Gaza. So, you had these completely

irreconcilable positions.

That's what we were dealing with throughout the crisis and how you try to bridge that, both to bring the war to a close and to bring the hostages

out, which were totally intertwined, is really the story of the book.

Plus, of course, everything that was happening in the region with Iran, Hezbollah, the Houthis, Iraqis militias dealing with the Israeli government

with Netanyahu, with everything else, it's all there.

GOLODRYGA: Brett, as Zain said, and you and I have spoken about this book, it is incredible even knowing how things would end.

I was still surprised and learned so much about what those negotiations were like, what those years were like for you, the investment you put in,

blood, sweat and tears and sacrifice to make sure that every single hostage did come home. Sadly, several, many were killed, not only on October 7th,

but while they were in captivity.

And what you're able to do in this book is really capture the dynamics in terms of the relationship between the principals here, President Biden and

Prime Minister Netanyahu.

[12:50:07]

And you note that whenever Hamas saw daylight between the United States and Israel, they hardened their positions.

As you were just listening to Andrey. He spent 246 days in captivity. Many hostages were there for much longer. Was there an opportunity to bring them

home sooner, Brett?

MCGURK: Oh, Bianna, thanks so much. And I -- I -- I mean, I go through in the book, you know, we had a hostage deal a month into the crisis, people

forget this, for all women and children. The war stopped in November 2023 with eight days. The guns went silent.

And on the eighth day, Hamas broke the deal because they said, we're going to hold on to the younger women. Let's skip to the older men. And that was

again a moral dilemma. Do you keep the ceasefire going, skip to the older men who are also in very bad shape, or say no, you broke the deal, we have

to get the women out?

And the Israelis, it was their unanimous position that to skip the women, you might never get them out. And in retrospect, I very much agree with

them, but that was a key moment.

And we had some other key moments. I mean, at the end of May, we put an all-encompassing ceasefire deal down on the table. The Israelis accepted

it. And Hamas did not even answer for five weeks.

So, you know, this happened time and again. And I -- I -- I explain in the book, as you kind of go through this, it was very clear to me that Sinwar,

the mastermind of October 7th, who had been released in an earlier hostage deal, many years ago for the Israeli soldier, Gilad Shalit, he intended to

hold on to Israeli hostages.

At the end of this crisis, his aim was to have Hamas in power and still holding on hostages. And he believed the longer this went on that you would

eventually have a break between Israel and -- and the United States that would help that time, therefore, benefited him.

He did not care at all about the suffering of people in Gaza nor did Hamas. They were underground for much of the war. They did not allow civilians

underground. I mean, you know the story well, Bianna. Obviously, you covered it so well.

What I've tried to explain in the book is what it's like to actually be in the room and dealing with this. And, you know, I let a reader make

judgments at some of those key moments about what he or she might have done in that moment, because often there's no right answer.

And conflicting aims and objectives come in to the Oval Office or the Situation Room or the Negotiating Rooms all at once, all at once.

ASHER: And such an incredibly difficult task that you had on your hands just in terms of, as you point out, bridging those fundamentally

incompatible end states between Hamas and Israel through intermediaries, but obviously, it ended with a lot of hostages eventually being released.

Obviously, you talked about some of them, obviously, did not come home alive. But a fantastic job that you have done.

Brett McGurk, thank you so much.

We'll be right back with more after this short break.

MCGURK: Thank you so much.

GOLODRYGA: Thanks, Brett.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:55:48]

(CHEERING)

GOLODRYGA: Emotional fans bid farewell to football legend, Lionel Messi, in his final match with the Argentine national team. He ended his career on a

high note with Argentina winning three-nil in an international friendly against Benin.

ASHER: All right. And that does it for us here on "One World." I'm Zain Asher.

GOLODRYGA: And I'm Bianna Golodryga. Thanks so much for watching. "Amanpour" is up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:00:00]

END