Return to Transcripts main page


Pressure Grows on Anthony Weiner; Gadhafi Defiant

Aired June 7, 2011 - 22:00   ET


ANDERSON COOPER, CNN ANCHOR: Good evening, everyone.

We begin tonight with growing pressure on Congressman Anthony Weiner to step down. He says he's done terrible things, but nothing to warrant quitting. But some of his sexting partners are now coming forward, casting doubt on his claims that he thinks he did all of it on personal time, not the people's time. We're "Keeping Them Honest" tonight.

But, as we said, the pressure is growing. Details of his raunchy online messages to women around the country emerging, a call for a House investigation from his own party leader. She's now made it official. Members of the opposition calling for his resignation.


REP. ERIC CANTOR (R-VA), HOUSE MAJORITY LEADER: I think it's up to Congressman Weiner and his constituents to make that decision. I don't condone his activity. I think he should resign.


COOPER: Republican House Majority Leader Eric Cantor.

Late today, we tracked down Congressman Weiner here in New York, got this reaction.


REP. ANTHONY WEINER (D), NEW YORK: He is entitled to his viewpoint.


QUESTION: Would you consider it?

WEINER: I'm not resigning, no.


WEINER: Excuse me, guys.


QUESTION: Congressman... QUESTION: How did you feel when you woke up this morning?

WEINER: Thanks, guys. Appreciate your patience.

QUESTION: How did you feel when you woke up this morning?


COOPER: Well, as for his party leader in the House, Nancy Pelosi, she sent this brief letter to the ranking members of the House Ethics Committee asking for an official investigation.

Now, apart from that, the silence from fellow Democrats today was pretty deafening, except for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, who might have said worse than nothing.


QUESTION: You didn't say whether you thought Congressman Weiner should resign, did you?

SEN. HARRY REID (D-NV), MAJORITY LEADER: I am not here to defend Weiner.

QUESTION: What do you think (OFF-MIKE)

REID: That's all I'm going to say.

QUESTION: What advice would you give him if he asked you?

REID: Call somebody else.




Also today, two House colleagues who received campaign money from Congressman Weiner said they were now donating that money to charity.

The question for the ethics inquiry is, did the congressman abuse his office for his extracurricular and extramarital affairs? Here's what he said about it yesterday.


WEINER: My BlackBerry is not a government BlackBerry. My home computer is usually where I did these things.

QUESTION: Usually?

WEINER: I don't have the knowledge of every -- every last communication, but I don't believe that I used any government resources.


COOPER: All right. Well, in almost the same breath, he hedged that, saying this.


WEINER: Congressional time could theoretically be anything. Congressmen work long hours. But I don't believe I did anything here that violates any law or violates my oath to my constituents.

I don't believe that I did anything that violates any law or any rule.


COOPER: So, he's leaving himself wiggle room there.

However, one of his online friends, I guess you would say, Meagan Broussard, tells ABC News the one time he went offline and called her instead, she says the call came from a number associated with his New York congressional office. She says the call was made on May 18, a Wednesday, in the middle of the workday.

And just two weeks earlier, on May 5, also a workday, Broussard says she asked for and he sent her this picture of himself to prove it really was him -- again, a workday mid-afternoon, again according to ABC News.

Now, there's also the question of whether Congressman Weiner coached any of the women about how to handle the media if their online relationships became known.

Here's what he said about that in regard to the woman he sent the crotch shot to.


WEINER: At no time did I or any member of my staff try to do anything to cover anything up. She did reach out to me and express what -- how she had been set upon and I expressed my apologies to her, but there was no coaching of any sort going on.


COOPER: Did he coach any of the other women? That remains to be seen. Presumably, the Ethics Committee will look into it.

But even if it doesn't find any wrongdoing there, there's always this, right at the beginning of the House ethics manual, rule number one, which calls on members to -- quote -- "conduct themselves at all times in a manner that shall reflect credibility on the House."

Now, in theory, evidence Congressman Weiner breached this rule is all the House needs to impose sanctions. In practice, though, it rarely happens that way. Dana Bash has been covering this since practically -- well, before the beginning. She joins us now. So does Democratic strategist Paul Begala and senior political analyst David Gergen.

Dana, what's the latest on the ethics investigation? It seems there's a real pressure now coming from the top Democrat to go ahead.

DANA BASH, CNN SENIOR CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, the only thing the other committee is commenting on is that they're not commenting. They're a very secretive institution and committee.

But there's -- it's just impossible to imagine, Anderson, that they won't be looking into this, given the fact that there have been public calls from senior members of Congress to do so.

But one thing that is interesting -- and you touched on it a little bit -- I talked to several experts on ethics rules today, people who actually have worked on this committee, and they say it's not that cut and dry, given what we know now, emphasizing what we know now, that Anthony Weiner can be punished for any -- for violating any rules.

For example, you talked about the fact of sort of most common one, that he seems to have violated the fact that members of Congress should be -- should act in respectable ways, for lack of a better term.

Nobody has been punished for that in and of itself. It's gone along with other things. Even the whole concept of sending these pictures or sending texts on official computers or phones, that is not necessarily a cut-and-dry, clear violation. There are loopholes allowing for some personal use.

And actually technology has surpassed the actual rules that are laid out in the Ethics Committee. I'm told by many, many sources that this is much more of a political issue for him at this point than a legal one, especially since these committee investigations, if they do go on, take years sometimes.

COOPER: Paul, if this had been a Republican, the Democrats would be talking a lot about it, and you probably would hear silence from the Republicans. You hear some stuff from Republicans, but really virtually nothing from Democrats, except for Nancy Pelosi.

Is this just all about politics for people on Capitol Hill?

PAUL BEGALA, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, everything is about politics with people on Capitol Hill, so yes, of course.

But it's also -- I guess I kind of disagree. The Democrats have taken the lead on this. You're right, Nancy Pelosi particularly. She is their leader. There's a couple of things going on here. First, Congress is not in session. And so if they were here, that would be worse for Anthony Weiner, because his colleagues would be here. They would all be complaining to each other and then someone would break and call for him to resign. Second, I have talked to several members of Congress today, all of them Democrats. They're not hearing a lot about this from their constituents, because constituents, I think sensibly, are more worried about jobs, Medicare, their own lives.

And, then third, there is this process, OK, which is the Ethics Committee. Any politician can plausibly -- not even hide behind it, but plausibly say, look, there's a committee. They're charged with doing this. They will look into it.

And then, finally, Eric Cantor, the Republican majority leader, big mistake politically in stepping up in that quote we just showed and calling on Weiner to resign. If he had been quiet, then the Democrats would have nothing to rally around. Now almost every Democrat I talked to complained about that and pointed out that Congressman Cantor never called for David Vitter, who was on the D.C. madam's prostitution list, customer list, apparently, to resign.

And so now they have at least some kind of a political foil in Cantor. Big mistake for Cantor. He should have been quiet and let the Democrats watch Weiner self-destruct.

COOPER: David, what do you make of this? Is this something that they are hoping will just kind of go away in time as the investigation continues in the Ethics Committee? Oftentimes, these ethics things go on for a long time and the end result is not quite as satisfactory as some people would like.

DAVID GERGEN, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: I think there are a lot of Democrats who would like to see him go away, not just this go away.

Had he come forward when this first broke, Anderson, made a clean breast of it, I think he would have survived. Showed poor judgment, but a lot of Americans show poor judgment. None of us can be -- is totally exempt from that.

And I think if he had clean breast of it, people would have said, that was stupid, but let's go forward . But it was the lying afterwards and the blatant lying that I think set him up for a downfall. And now it's very hard for me to see how he survives, given that -- you just start playing some -- and feeding things back into his most recent press conference, questioning his credibility even yesterday.

That's going to continue. There are going to be more things that are come out. Transcripts -- as transcripts come out that have a lot of explicit language in them, that will make a difference with the public. They may -- they may be -- yes, they're paying attention to their jobs.

But if they have that sort of read to them over the air, they're not going to be happy about it.

COOPER: Go ahead, Dana.

BASH: And, Anderson, I just want to actually pick up on that point, a couple points.

First of all, David is exactly right. Last week, when this was all unfolding and very murky and very weird, to be honest with you, I talked to a couple of members of the Democratic leadership who said that they were really making clear to Anthony Weiner, clean this up. Clear this up. Either talk and say what -- say what's really going on or stop talking.

And the fact that he didn't do that, didn't answer our questions, basically lied point-blank to Wolf Blitzer, has made this so much worse for him now within the Democratic leadership. No, nobody is publicly calling on him to resign. I am told there's no evidence of any private push to him to resign.

But on -- one other thing to make this point, though, that the Democrats really do wish he would go away, you showed at the beginning of the program a letter that Nancy Pelosi wrote formally asking the Ethics Committee to investigate, she didn't have to do that. It was -- technically, she didn't have to do it at all. It was political. And a Democratic source I talked to said that that adds pressure for him to go.

COOPER: Paul, do you think he can remain?

BEGALA: He can. He can. David and Dana make all the right points. It may be hard to prove and it may be technical, but a lot of members of Congress are going to look to this question of using public resources, government resources.

And I understand it's murky. And Dana's reporting is exactly right. But just I guess as sort of colleague to colleague, I keep hearing that a lot. God help him. If he lies, he's through -- anymore, if he lies to the committee or misleads them or covers up anymore -- but also this question of, did he use public resources?

If he did, members are going to be much less willing to stand for it. I think it's interesting. They have been silent in terms of calling for him to resign in my party, but they have also been equally silent in defending him. Nobody is rushing forward to defend him. And other Democrats who have been in trouble in the past have had people come forward and defend them.

But I do think that, as David pointed out, the performance that he conducted, being abusive to Dana and Tom (sic) Barrett, her producer, and then being dishonest to Wolf and the rest of the journalists he talked to makes it impossible for anybody to step forward and defend him.

COOPER: David, how long do you think this will go on for, an investigation like this?

GERGEN: Oh, the investigation could go on a while.

That -- I think the real question now is, how many -- how many legs does the story itself have? How many women come forward? What do they have to say? What kind of pictures do they have to display? I think the next three or four days are pretty crucial for this. If he gets by, if this storm passes, he could survive. I doubt it. I do think that there is a political aspect to this, Anderson, and that is there are an awful lot of Democrats who are mad at him because they thought they were on the offensive over Medicare and the Ryan plan.

Remember that? And this has sort of blotted that out and they don't like to go into an election campaign with an albatross. And they -- both parties have lost a lot of seats in the past when there is someone who becomes sort of a pinata for the other party to hit during a campaign and say, this underscores what the ethics are like with the other party.

COOPER: Dana, Paul...


COOPER: Paul, go ahead. Sorry.

BEGALA: But that's 17 months ahead. I'm just not -- I don't think Democrats are terribly worried about it in the election. I think they're worried about it in the here and now.

But what they are -- they want now Eric Cantor, the Republican leader of the House, to say whether David Vitter should resign. If he's now going to be opining on each unfaithful or cyber-unfaithful husband, he ought to have to take a position now on whether David Vitter, the senator from Louisiana, who ran on family values and then got caught on the D.C. madam's list of friends, whether he should resign.

COOPER: Paul Begala, thanks very much, David as well. Dana Bash, thanks.

There's a lot more to the story, a whole lot more, that could be coming to light. Tomorrow on 360, we will talk with one of the women who claims she had an online relationship with Congressman Weiner.

Let us know what you think. We're on Facebook. You can also follow me on Twitter @AndersonCooper. I will be tweeting tonight.

Up next, though: massive new airstrikes on Libya and fresh new lies from the regime, even using an injured little girl for propaganda. We will expose the lies and have the latest from Tripoli on the airstrikes.

Also ahead: more damaging testimony in the Casey Anthony murder trial, testimony that puts a body in Casey's car and her parents' backyard -- details from inside the courtroom today, plus analysis from leading forensic and legal experts.

First, though, let's check in with Isha Sesay -- Isha.

ISHA SESAY, CNN INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Anderson, imagine doctors trying to cure a 5-year-old boy because he plays with dolls. Imagine the government using taxpayer money to fund it. It happened. We will show you the results. Don't miss our special report, "The Sissy Boy Experiment: Uncovering The Truth," when 360 continues.


COOPER: "Keeping Them Honest" tonight: new lies from Libya's dictator as the airstrikes on his regime accelerate, NATO firing more than 60 missiles at targets in Tripoli, 60 missiles, rare daylight strikes that continued into the evening, targeting command-and-control centers, say NATO, including Moammar Gadhafi's compound, but apparently not getting him.

A recording of the dictator running today on Libyan state television. Listen.


MOAMMAR GADHAFI, LIBYAN LEADER (through translator): We will not surrender. We will not give up. We have one option, our country. We will remain in it until the end. Dead, alive, victorious, it does not matter.


COOPER: Well, in addition to the daylight strikes, NATO is also using attack helicopters to try to more precisely target pro-Gadhafi forces and try to minimize civilian casualties. The regime, though, is claiming otherwise, that many civilians are dying.


MUSSA IBRAHIM, Libyan Government Spokesman: Today has been one of the most horrific days of attack on our nation. The forces of evil attacked with full power.


COOPER: Well, for one thing, he made no mention of the siege of Misrata, which has been going on for months, nor the regime's claim at the outset that they would go after the opposition like rats.

And for another, when it comes to proving their claims of massive civilian casualties, the regime puts on basically kind of a dog-and- pony show. Sunday, they brought correspondents, including our own CNN's Dan Rivers, to Coptic church they said was hit by a NATO bomb.

They took him to a hospital where they showed him a little girl in a coma. She was badly hurt, they said, by the blast.

Well, later, Dan learned that the girl was the victim not of a NATO bombing, but of a traffic accident. As for one of the munitions found in another damaged civilian area that the Libyans took the media to, it appeared to come not from any NATO country, but from Russia, a leading weapons supplier to the regime. That is according to "The New York Times." With us now in Tripoli is Dan Rivers. Also joining us, Retired Army Major General James "Spider" Marks, and Princeton University's Anne-Marie Slaughter. Until recently, she was director of policy planning at the State Department.

So, Dan, Tripoli hit today by some of the heaviest NATO bombing that we have seen since this campaign began back in March, and during the daylight. What's the latest there tonight?

DAN RIVERS, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, well, there's been a lull, Anderson, in the last couple of hours in the airstrikes. But it has been the most intensive day of airstrikes since this NATO campaign began.

We counted more than 50 separate explosions that reverberated across this city. Officials here telling us that Colonel Gadhafi's own compound was hit, that other military installations were hit as well. NATO still haven't given us a full rundown of exactly what and where they hit, but certainly we were seeing plumes of black smoke billowing up across the skyline behind me here and we were left in no doubt that this is clearly entering a new, much more intensive phase.

COOPER: Yes, General Marks, what do you make not only of the increased bombing campaign, but also now the use of these attack helicopters?

BRIGADIER GENERAL JAMES "SPIDER" MARKS (RET.), U.S. ARMY: Anderson, what that means is that Gadhafi's command-and-control and specifically his air defense capabilities have really been sufficiently degraded, so that you can use those kinds of capabilities with an increased precision, and you can fight attack helicopters much more so than you can use fixed-wing aircraft to strike very precise targets.

So, what it means very specifically is that Gadhafi has a decreasing ability to resist and to defend against these attacks that are coming against him.

COOPER: The danger of using the attack helicopters, though, is they're flying lower. They're slower. They're more vulnerable to RPGs, to other kind of projectiles.

MARKS: Of course. The example of what happened very tragically in Somalia almost 20 years ago still is in our minds.

But the point that is being made is that his military has been degraded quite considerably. And any air defense capabilities have been degraded, if not totally wiped away. So, of course there's a risk of what you described, but that's minimal.

COOPER: It also allows them, I guess, to go after smaller units and vehicles which from the air they couldn't differentiate for a while between what were Gadhafi vehicles, technicals, and what were -- what were anti-Gadhafi forces.

MARKS: Absolutely, Anderson. What you have is the ability of what I would describe as a fighting capability, where you have got an aircraft, it can engage multiple targets, it can loiter in place, it can move very slowly, it can move very quickly, and it can do its own battle damage assessment or determine the effects of those attacks itself.

COOPER: Anne-Marie, NATO may be deteriorating their air capabilities, but are the opposition forces learning fast enough how to actually fight? We have seen amazing, remarkable bravery and fighting, I guess acumen, that they have learned in Misrata, but in places like Brega, in places -- for the forces coming from Benghazi, it hasn't been up until now very impressive.


On the one hand, you're tightening the noose on Gadhafi, essentially by letting the people around him know that their days are numbered, and now by striking at internal security facilities, which makes it easier for the population to rise up.

In other words, we're now attacking the secret police, those who control them. On a separate track are the opposition. Those are -- the opposition is getting better, but it's not directly connected to our degradation of the military forces. We're essentially working to see if people will rise up in Tripoli or the people around Gadhafi will decide they're really not interested in being martyrs, even if he is. They either defect, or, ultimately, they could overthrow him directly.

COOPER: Dan, we have started to see some -- continue to see some high-level defections just over the last couple of weeks.

When the regime, they took you to that hospital where they said this little girl had been injured in an attack, and then you learned through sources of your own that actually she was injured in a car accident -- how aggressive is the regime in terms of trying to point out things which seem demonstrably not true?

RIVERS: Oh, they were furious when that story broke. In fact, it was a Reuters journalist who first wrote up that story. One of the journalists in the press pack got passed a note by a hospital staffer, basically saying this girl was injured in a car accident. It's nothing to do with NATO.

Once that story broke and we started running it, they were absolutely furious that we were calling into doubt their -- really their propaganda show that they put on for us. And then, since then, they have constantly been trying to sort of intimidate journalists here into retracting that story as well.

I mean, the question of civilian casualties, there has been no real evidence that we have seen so far of widespread civilian casualties. We have been taken out, as you saw, to areas where we have seen craters near houses. We have no way of knowing if these were caused by NATO or if this has been staged.

But I don't think, you know, OK, there might have been the old rocket go astray here, but there's -- there's no evidence of widespread civilian casualties so far. From what I have seen, the NATO airstrikes seem to have been pretty precise so far.

COOPER: General Marks, this is probably an unanswerable question, but how long do you see this going on for? I guess it goes on until something happens to Gadhafi.

MARKS: I think that's exactly the answer. It's an all-or- nothing type of proposition.

As long as Gadhafi is alive, irrespective of the amount of control he has or doesn't have, there will be an engagement to make sure that there is some end state that allows a peaceful transition. And that's where you get to the discussion of, what does that look like after the NATO strikes? Does that include boots on the ground? I would suggest yes, if for no other reason than to facilitate this movement to a Libya after Gadhafi.

COOPER: Anne-Marie, I saw you shaking your head. You say no way have boots on the ground.

SLAUGHTER: Well, Anderson, I don't think that -- certainly the United States is not sending troops on the ground.

COOPER: You're -- you're talking from a political standpoint. I think General Marks is probably talking more from a strategic standpoint.


COOPER: But why do you say it's not going to happen?

SLAUGHTER: So, politically, I don't think there's any support for troops on the ground.

And I do think, once we put troops on the ground, then the old Colin Powell "you break it, you own it" comes into play, because this is going to be a complicated transition, and probably will take a number of years before Libya develops the institutions we want. There's a lot of tension between the east and the west.

COOPER: Right.

SLAUGHTER: So I agree. In an optimal world, I would send in some kind of U.N. force, but it's not going to be a U.N. force and I don't see NATO troops going in. But we're going to do everything we can to get him out.

COOPER: General Marks, briefly, do you want to comment on that?

MARKS: Yes, I sure do.

I would say that it doesn't necessarily have to be the United States, and I would not suggest that the United States do that. But at the end of the day, there is going to be some incredible score- settling that is going to take place. And that will be a catastrophe of another sort that we want to try to prevent. That's going to require somebody in between these two forces, making sure that it doesn't get out of hand too badly.

COOPER: General Marks, appreciate it.

Dan Rivers, very well -- stay -- stay safe, Dan.

Anne-Marie Slaughter, as well, thanks for being with us.

SLAUGHTER: Thank you.

COOPER: Coming up: the Casey Anthony murder trial, focusing again on the alleged dead body smell in the trunk of Anthony's car. This time, it wasn't a scientist doing the sniffing. It was a dog. A lot of testimony about that today. Will the jury buy today's testimony, though, from the dog handler? We will get the latest from Gary Tuchman in Orlando. And the defense will actually raise some interesting points about chloroform and the use of it or lack of it. We will have that ahead.

Also, a stunning story tonight about an experiment on a 5-year- old boy. This is part of a three-part investigation we're doing. Kirk Murphy was his name. His parents thought he had too many feminine traits. He liked to play with dolls. He was 5 years old. A government-funded research program at UCLA set about trying to change this little boy, punishing him for being effeminate.

Some have called it the sissy boy experiments. It happened in the '70s. But the research is still being used. Kirk's brother now speaking out -- he says this so-called therapy ruined his brother's life.


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The only thing they did was destroy our brother. They took him away from us. He was empty, nothing -- nothing there.



COOPER: In "Crime & Punishment" tonight: more testimony in the Casey Anthony murder trial.

A dog handler was on the sand today testifying that a cadaver dog smelled human remains in the trunk of Casey Anthony's car and in her parents' backyard.

Gary Tuchman was there. He has the latest.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) GARY TUCHMAN, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Casey Anthony looked emotionally detached during this day of court testimony, except when her eyes focused laser-like on the prosecutor as she approached the defense table to hand over a document, the prosecutor, who believes Casey Anthony deserves the death penalty. The prosecutor, who called this man to the stand.

LINDA DRANE-BURDICK, PROSECUTOR: Were you called to assist in an investigation regarding the disappearance of Caylee Marie Anthony?


TUCHMAN: Orange County, Florida, sheriff's deputy, Jason Forgey, is a canine handler. His dog was trained to sniff for cadavers and has become a player in this high-profile trial.

FORGEY: Gerus is a German Shepherd.

TUCHMAN: After Caylee Anthony disappeared but before her body was found, Gerus was brought to Casey Anthony's Pontiac Sunfire, which had been impounded.

FORGEY: Gerus comes out of the trunk with his front paws, comes out of the trunk to the right rear passenger taillight, bumper area, and gives me a final train alert. He goes into a down position.

TUCHMAN: And that's the signal the dog gives when it's detected the scent of a dead body. Gerus was also brought to the Anthonys' backyard, where the same thing happened.

DRANE-BURDICK: Is this the area that you were describing where you got the alert?

FORGEY: Yes, ma'am.

DRANE-BURDICK: Trained final alert?

FORGEY: Yes, ma'am.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Casey Anthony's attorney wanted the jury to doubt the dog's accuracy.

JOSE BAEZ, CASEY'S ATTORNEY: There are such things as false alerts? Right?


BAEZ: Dogs are not infallible?

FORGEY: They are not perfect, no.

TUCHMAN: But the deputy says he had his own alert when examining Casey Anthony's car.

FORGEY: I smelled it clear as day. TUCHMAN (on camera): What's notable about this testimony is that, ultimately, it may not contradict the defense's case. During opening statements, Casey Anthony's attorney said that Caylee Anthony accidentally drowned in the backyard pool. And even though he's not supposed to deliver his closing arguments until the end of the trial, we may have heard a bit of that argument today.

BAEZ: I don't believe a dead body in the backyard is a disputed issue in this case.



TUCHMAN: Nevertheless, defense attorney Jose Baez continued to attack the credibility of Deputy Forgey and his dog.

Gary Tuchman, CNN, Orlando, Florida.


COOPER: Earlier I spoke with Jean Casarez, who's covering the trial for TruTV's "In Session," and forensic pathologist Dr. Michael Hunter.


COOPER: So Dr. Hunter, a dog handler today testified that his cadaver dog was able to sniff out human decomposition in the trunk of Casey Anthony's car, but the defense countered, saying that the testimony coming from basically a dog is unreliable. Just how accurate are these dogs pinpointing places with human decay?

DR. MICHAEL HUNTER, FORENSIC PATHOLOGIST: Yes, I think the defense really doesn't have a leg to stand on here. You know, the dogs are extraordinarily sensitive to this specific odor. It's some, I think, very good evidence in this case.

COOPER: I've -- I've spent a lot of time with cadaver dogs in a lot of places, and they don't alert on things like trash, which is sort of -- I think the defense was hoping that they could one of the handlers to say.

HUNTER: Right.

COOPER: They are, as you say, very specific.

HUNTER: They're very specific. I mean, you could have these dogs in, say, a dump looking for remains, and they can be successful in that setting. You know, they're very well trained.

Keep in mind that, just like myself, you know, I'm a certified forensic pathologist. These dogs are also certified. They have go through a series of tests to show that they have the ability to be both sensitive and specific for odors of decomposition.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Jean, do you think the dog handler's testimony was a strong point for the prosecution today?

JEAN CASAREZ, CORRESPONDENT, TRUTV'S "IN SESSION": Well, Anderson, you want to hear something really interesting? The Florida Supreme Court came down with a decision just weeks ago, saying that there can be reversible error. A case could be overturned on appeal if a dog is not competent.

So the prosecution today, Anderson, spent hours talking about the certifications and the training and everything that this dog had gone through, because I think they wanted to be prepared for any appeal on this issue.

COOPER: Because there are a lot of dogs which, frankly, don't have the certification, which are used or overused. You have to be very careful, from memory, as I remember, about how you use these dogs, how often you use them, because they do get tired, like anybody else.

Dr. Hunter, yesterday a scientist testified that he found shockingly high -- those were his words -- levels of chloroform. But today we heard from a chemist who said he found low levels of chloroform. How do you explain the discrepancy?

HUNTER: Yes. It's easily explainable. The person who testified yesterday, the expert from Tennessee, he basically obtained a specimen in an airtight container, a portion of carpet, that maintained that specimen. Whereas today, the expert with the FBI received a sample to test that was in a container of cardboard material. Keep in mind that chloroform is highly volatile. It will dissipate. So it needs to be -- or that specimen needs to be in an airtight container to maintain it.

COOPER: Dr. Hunter, a CSI technician also testified that he took out a bag of trash that had been sitting in Casey Anthony's car. The defense suggested the odor in the car could have come from that bag of trash, which had food wrappers and a pizza box, but no actual food in it. Is it possible that smell could have come from the trash bag?

HUNTER: Anderson, there's no way. The smell of decomposition is so distinctive. It's so overpowering. There's no way you're going to mistake it from simple trash. So I think the defense has a -- has a very difficult time with -- with that type of issue.

COOPER: It is hard to distinguish between decomposing human remains and decomposing animal remains. So you could make an argument, I guess, if there was some sort of, you know, raw meat or meat, animal meat in -- in the garbage, that might be decomposing, but that wasn't in the trash.

HUNTER: Yes. No, I mean, think about what makes up human remains. It's a mixture of muscle, fat, skin, and it's really the fat that produces this very pungent odor. You're not going to initially see that with simple meat products.

And I can tell you, Anderson, I've seen hundreds of decomposed bodies. I've had the -- you know, the chance to examine them, and there's no way that you're going to be able to mistake those two things.

COOPER: Very distinctive. We've been hearing that from just about everybody on the stand, Jean, right?

CASAREZ: Yes, and Dr. Vass, his chemical composition, was now corroborated by the dog today, because the dog hit on the car.

COOPER: Jean, appreciate you being on tonight. Thanks very much. Dr. Michael Hunter, as well. Thank you very much.

HUNTER: Thank you.

COOPER: Still ahead, the sissy boy experiment. Uncovering the truth. A 360 special report about this little boy. His name is Kirk Andrew Murphy. Decades ago he received experimental therapy to make him less effeminate. He was just 5 years old at the time. The result, his family now says, was disastrous.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: He actually ate his lunch in the boy's bathroom for three years, where he didn't have to put himself out there, even just to have a friend.



COOPER: Tonight a 360 special report, "The Sissy Boy Experiment: Uncovering the Truth."

Now, over the next three nights, we're going show you what happened to a little boy who got enrolled in a government-funded study aimed at making effeminate boys more masculine. He was just 5 years old at the time, and decades later the research that was done on this boy is still being cited by those who think kids can be prevented from becoming gay.

The story begins in the early 1970s when the little boy was treated at UCLA's gender identity clinic under a synonym. His real name was concealed. His treatment at the time was called a success, and still many people consider that it was.

But now more than 30 years later, we finally know what really happened to this little boy. His name is Kirk Murphy. And for the first time on television, his family is sharing his story -- their story -- with us. And they're doing it because they want you to know who Kirk really was. They want you to know what he went through, and they want you to know what impact they say it had on the rest of his life.


MARK MURPHY, BROTHER OF KIRK: This is my brother, Kirk M. Murphy. This is what he was supposed to be. COOPER (voice-over): This is the last time Mark Murphy remembers his brother, Kirk, as a happy child. The photo was taken when Kirk was 4, a year before he was placed in experimental therapy at UCLA to treat what doctors identified as exaggerated feminine behavior.

MARIS MURPHY, SISTER OF KIRK: It left Kirk just totally stricken with the belief that he was broken, that he was different from everybody else.

COOPER: Kirk's sister, Maris, and brother, Mark, say Kirk was never the same after therapy.

MARK MURPHY: The only thing they did was destroy our brother. They took him away from us. He was empty, nothing -- nothing there.

COOPER: In 1970, Kirk Murphy was a smart, outgoing 5-year-old, growing up near Los Angeles. His mother, Kaytee Murphy, however, was worried about him.

KAYTEE MURPHY, MOTHER OF KIRK: Well, I was becoming a little concerned about playing with the girls' toys and stroking the hair, you know, the long hair and stuff. I was seeing effeminate mannerisms. It bothered me, because I wanted Kirk to grow up and have a normal life.

COOPER: Mrs. Murphy says she saw a psychologist on a local TV program talking about behavior like Kirk's.

KAYTEE MURPHY: He was naming all these things. If your son is doing five of these ten things. Does he prefer to play with girls' toys instead of boys' toys?

COOPER: The psychologist was recruiting young boys for a government-funded program at UCLA, part of which was designed to reverse perceived feminine behavior, what one doctor involved with the program later called Sissy Boy Syndrome.

KAYTEE MURPHY: Him being the expert, I thought, well, maybe I go ahead and take Kirk in. In other words, nip it in the bud.

COOPER: For nearly a year, Kirk was treated at UCLA, mainly by a man named George Rekers. Rekers was a doctoral student at the time but went on to become a founding member of the Family Research Council, which lobbies against gay marriage, adoption and laws that seek to protect the rights of gays and lesbians.

Rekers has also been a prominent proponent of the belief homosexuality can be prevented.

To treat Kirk's so-called sissy behavior, he was repeatedly placed in a room with two tables. He was observed through a one-way window. He was given toys to play with, and could choose between traditionally masculine ones like plastic knives and guns, or feminine ones like dolls and a play crib. He could also choose clothing to wear: an Army hat and military fatigues or a girl's dress, jewelry and a wig. Kirk's mother would be brought into the room and told to ignore him when he played with feminine toys or clothes and compliment him when he played with masculine ones.

In a case study he wrote, George Rekers noted that, when Kirk's mother ignored him, he would beg for attention from her, crying, even throwing tantrums. But Mrs. Murphy was told to continue to ignore him.

MARIS MURPHY: In this particular incident, they write that he becomes so upset. He's just beside himself that they actually had to remove him from the room. And after they remove him from the room, they come in and tell my mom that it's working, and then they bring him back in and start all over.

COOPER (on camera): Having read this -- this report, I keep coming back to the word "experiment."

MARIS MURPHY: Absolutely. Without a doubt.

COOPER: Because it doesn't seem -- this is not some proven treatment. This is...


COOPER: This is experimenting.

(voice-over) Experimental therapy even continued outside UCLA. In Kirk's home, his parents were told to use poker chips as a system of reward and punishment, to make Kirk act more masculine.

(on camera) Do you remember these chips?

MARK MURPHY: Yes, I do. Oh, yes, I do.

COOPER: Were you rewarded them, as well? You got reinforced?

MARK MURPHY: Yes, I was. My parents added me to it just so they could reinforce to my brother that, you know, big brother is doing it, too, so everything is OK.

COOPER: These are the actual chips?

MARK MURPHY: Yes. The actual real chips.

COOPER: So blue chips were for masculine behavior?


COOPER: And the red chips were a penalty for feminine behavior.


COOPER: So if Kirk played with one of your dolls, he would get a red chip?


COOPER (voice-over): According to George Rekers's case study, the red chips resulted in physical punishment by spanking from the father.

(on camera) Do you remember the beating?

MARK MURPHY: Oh, yes, sir, I do. Many times did I move the stacks around.

COOPER: How do you mean?

MARK MURPHY: I took some of the red chips and put them on my side. I did see the beatings. It was just like, you know...

COOPER: You would take Kirk's red chips?

MARK MURPHY: Yes, sir.

COOPER: The things he had been given for feminine behavior. You would take them yourself so that he wouldn't get beaten?

MARK MURPHY: Yes. We would come home from school, and you'd turn in, and that's the first thing that you did when you walked through the door, as you looked and what was the chip count today? What happened? What changed? How bad is it going to be? And it was always bad. A whipping every Friday night.

KAYTEE MURPHY: I do remember one time he spanked him so hard that he had welts up and down his back and on his buttocks. And I remember Mark saying, "Cry harder and he won't hit so hard." Today it would be abuse.

COOPER (voice-over): According to Kirk's brother and sister, his outgoing personality changed, and he began to behave in a way he knew his parents and George Rekers wanted him to. His family says the impact of the experimental therapy lasted his entire life.

MARK MURPHY: He had no idea how to relate to people. It's like somebody just walked up and turned his light switch off. And we got what we wanted, and we'll see you later.

MARIS MURPHY: He actually ate his lunch in the boys' bathroom for three years, when he didn't have to put himself out there, even just to have a friend.

COOPER: In his case study of the UCLA experiment, George Rekers called Kirk "Kraig" to protect his identity. He considered his work with Kirk a success, writing Kraig's feminine behavior was gone, claiming Kirk became "indistinguishable from any other boy."

In numerous other published reports and studies over his nearly three-decade career since, George Rekers has continued to write positively about Kirk's treatment, using it as proof homosexuality can be prevented. Kirk's family has only recently discovered Rekers' writings, and they're outraged. They say Kirk was gay, but because of the treatment he was subjected to as a child, struggled with his attraction to men his whole life.

MARIS MURPHY: He acknowledged himself as a gay man in 1985 on. He never had a committed loving relationship, because he wouldn't allow himself to.

COOPER: Unable or unwilling to have a committed relationship with a man, Kirk focused on his work and chose a career where being openly gay wasn't even possible. He spent eight years in the U.S. Air Force and then held a high-profile position with an American finance company in India.

MARIS MURPHY: Kirk, what do you think of your nephew?



KIRK MURPHY: Are you taking pictures?

COOPER: This visit home in June of 2003 was the last time Kirk's family saw him alive.

Nearly six months later, he took his own life, hanging himself from a fan in his apartment in New Delhi. Kirk Murphy was 38 years old.

MARIS MURPHY: I used to spend so much time thinking why would he kill himself at the age of 38? It doesn't make any sense to me. What I now think is I don't know how he made it that long.


COOPER: Well, tomorrow night, part two of our investigation. How does George Rekers now respond to the family's allegation that his therapy led to Kirk's suicide? We tracked him down in Florida to find out. That is tomorrow night on the program.

Still ahead tonight, the search for a blogger who calls herself Gay Girl in Damascus, who was allegedly abducted by Syrian government security agents.

Plus, a plea deal for Willie Nelson in his pot possession case.

And our "RidicuList" tonight, well, the people you don't want to sit next to at the movies.


COOPER: Check in with Isha for some of the other stories we're following tonight in the "360 Bulletin" -- Isha.

ISHA SESAY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Anderson, in Texas, authorities now say they've turned up no evidence of any homicides at a home they searched after an anonymous person called in a tip. Earlier law enforcement sources said at least 20 bodies had been found on the property northeast of Houston.

It's unclear tonight whether the Syrian ambassador to France, Lamia Shakkour, has in fact resigned. Earlier today, a woman identifying herself as Shakkour announced her resignation by telephone on French television. But a short time later, Syrian state television and Al Arabiya television aired telephone denials from someone they identified as the ambassador.

Meantime, Syrian-American blogger and teacher Amina Abdullah has allegedly been kidnapped in Damascus. Abdullah had been blogging about the Middle East uprisings and what it's like to be gay in Syria.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel and her husband were honored tonight at a state dinner hosted by President Obama and first lady Michelle Obama. It's the fourth state dinner the Obamas have hosted.

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke said he's still optimistic the economic recovery will pick up again in the second half of the year. He also called the job market far from normal. His remarks following an onslaught of weaker-than-expected economic reports.

And Anderson, singer Willie Nelson has worked out an agreement in his 2010 marijuana case. His lawyer says Nelson will pay a $500 fine, and the judge will dismiss the case if Nelson stays out of trouble for 30 days.

COOPER: Thirty days? He should be able to do that.

SESAY: Well, in case you're wondering where he is, he's on the road. So let's see.

COOPER: All right. Thanks very much, Isha.

Time now for the "RidicuList." Tonight, we're adding my latest source of annoyance: people who talk and text at the movies. And I want to talk about one young woman in particular, a woman who was repeatedly warned to stop texting during a movie in Austin, Texas, wouldn't stop and was promptly thrown out of the theater. Then she left an angry voice mail for the theater, which has posted it on its blog for your enjoyment.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You know what? I didn't know that I wasn't supposed to text in your little crappy (EXPLETIVE DELETED) theater.


COOPER: All right, did I mention that the theater is called the Alamo Drafthouse and that they serve beer? Well, I'm not sure if I mentioned that, but indeed, I think our texter may have partaken a little bit, a little pre-party during the previews, perhaps.

Listen to her next offense.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: So excuse me for using my phone in the USA, Magnited [SIC] States of America, where you're -- are free to text in a theater.


COOPER: I love living in the Magnited [SIC] States of America, where you're -- are free to text in a theater. Now, that's a lady who knows her Constitution. What's all that freedom jazz about if some drunk girl can't constantly update her Facebook status while people are trying to concentrate on "Kung Fu Panda 2"?

Next, the text lady employs something I like to call the silent but deadly defense.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: And it was on silent. It wasn't on loud. It wasn't bothering anybody. You guys obviously were being (EXPLETIVE DELETED) to me.


COOPER: I'm sorry, drunk girl, but texting in a dark movie theater is like lighting a road flare. People are going to see it. You might not through your beer goggles, but everyone else will.

Drunk girl didn't give up, though. She's been hitting the law books, apparently, and comes up with two more arguments for her defense: a combo of the "I didn't know" defense seasoned with just a touch of the "I do it everywhere else" defense.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I was not aware that I couldn't text in your theater, all right? I've texted in all the other theaters in Austin, and no one ever gave a (EXPLETIVE DELETED) about what I was doing on my (EXPLETIVE DELETED) phone, all right?


COOPER: Now, maybe she has texted her way through every other movie theater in Austin. I wouldn't be surprised. But it turns out this particular theater has a well-known zero-tolerance policy against talking and cell phones. It's kind of this theater's crusade. And they have all kinds of creative announcements about it. Watch.


WILL FERRELL, ACTOR: Electric cattle prod. So I just -- if I hear someone talking, I'll give them not an aggressive shock but just a light shock. EFREN RAMIREZ, ACTOR: My name is Pedro Sanchez from "Napoleon Dynamite." If you vote for me, I'll make sure that everyone is very quiet in the theater.

MICHAEL CERA, ACTOR: You're watching a movie. Turn off your cell phones and beepers, please.

DANNY DE VITO, ACTOR: You can find out who they are and then go cut their tongue out.


COOPER: So I think it's pretty clear where the Alamo Drafthouse stands on this issue. And you know what? Maybe a theater with that kind of policy just isn't for everyone.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You know, I will never be coming back to your Alamo Drafthouse or whatever. I'd rather go to a reglear [SIC] theater where people are actually polite.


COOPER: Oh, yes. The reglear [SIC] theater are full of polite people, politely shouting at the screen, politely bringing screaming toddlers to rated "R" movies at 11 p.m. at night, politely talking and texting through the whole movie.

The CEO of the Alamo Drafthouse says he wants his theater to be different. Here's Tim Lee, great American hero.


TIM LEE, CEO, ALAMO DRAFTHOUSE: We wanted to take a hard stand and say that those people are not welcome at the Alamo Drafthouse. So we'll get rid of those people and just make it a better place for the rest of the movie-going public.


COOPER: I think that guy should win the Nobel Peace Prize.

So listen up, Magnited [SIC] States. News flash: a movie theater, it's not your living room, so don't act like it is. We're paying to see the movie, not your cell phone light, and we want to listen to the actors, not your lame comments and inane chatter.

Next time you're about to text in a film, remember the Alamo -- Drafthouse. Or you might end up on the "RidicuList."

More news ahead in the next hour. We'll be right back.