[Miles O'brien, Cnn Anchor:] Welcome back to the CNN center in Atlanta, this is LIVE FROM and I'm Miles O'Brien.
[Betty Nguyen, Cnn Anchor:] I'm Betty Nguyen in today for Kyra Phillips. Here's what's all new this half hour. Kofi Annan's son answers questions accusations that he was part of the oil for food scandal, a story you'll hear only on CNN. Also a low tech but maybe a very effective way to ease suffering for thousands of people. Only CNN can take you there for the story and we will.
[O'brien:] And Samuel L Jackson will play him in the movies but you'll meet the real Coach Carter and hear his inspirational story in a few moments. But first, here's what's happening now in the news.
[Nguyen:] President Bush is still restocking his cabinet. Today he nominated Michael Leavitt as health and human services secretary. Leavitt currently heads the Environmental Protection Agency. Now, if confirmed, Leavitt would tackle such projects as a prescription benefit for seniors and Mr. Bush has only one more cabinet opening to fill. Jurors deliberating the fate of Scott Peterson are back at work. They asked to review some of the evidence presented during the trial earlier today. The jury is deciding whether Peterson should get life in prison or the death penalty for the murders of his pregnant wife and unborn son. A guilty verdict in a high profile murder trial in New York. Electrician Daniel Pelosi is convicted of second degree murder in the death of Long Island investment banker Ted Ammon. Pelosi was romantically involved with his wife at the time of the killing three years ago. A violent day in Iraq. A suicide car bomb exploded at a military checkpoint outside the Green Zone in Baghdad. Eight people were killed and 15 others wounded. The green zone is home to Iraq's interim government and the U.S. Embassy.
[O'brien:] The son of United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan is speaking out on reports linking him to that oil for food scandal. Kojo Annan has now given his lawyer a statement about his work for a firm with a contract under the now defunct program. That program you'll recall let Iraq export some oil in return for food and humanitarian supplies. CNN's Jeff Koinange in Lagos, Nigeria has seen the statement. He joins us on the line now Jeff.
[Jeff Koinange, Cnn Correspondent:] That's right, Miles. It's the first time that Kojo Annan, the 31-year-old son of the embattled UN Secretary General Kofi Annan has spoken. That is, through his lawyers. He issued a statement to us now because we've been trying to get an interview with him. He says he's completely refused any on-camera interview but this is basically what he said in the written statement. He said and I quote "I am not ready to speak for now. I am already cooperating with investigators and would want them to finish their work before making public any statements on this matter." Pressed further, Miles, I asked the lawyer why the sudden attention on his father. Why the U.S. legislators calling for Kofi Annan to resign. In the statement, Kojo Annan went on to say, and I quote again, "I feel the whole issue has been a witch-hunt from day one as part of a broader Republican political agenda." Then I asked him what was Kojo Annan's role in Cotechna, this Swedish multinational that did profit from the venture. The $64 billion oil for food program. What was Kojo's role in that? And basically what he says, and I quote again "I have never participated directly or indirectly in if he business related to the United Nations." So tough words coming from the son of the United Nations Secretary General, Miles. He also expressed confidence that the ongoing investigations of which he has been questioned for several hours, he says countless hours in his words. He says in the end he will be found not guilty of any wrongdoing, Miles.
[O'brien:] CNN'S Jeff Koinange in Lagos, Nigeria. Thank you very much Betty.
[Nguyen:] Ukrainian opposition leader Victor Yushchenko is back in Kiev. He is talking about his poisoning diagnosis which may prove political poison for his rival in the upcoming presidential runoff revote. CNN's Jill Dougherty joins us by video phone from Kiev with the latest twist in the story that just continues on and on. Jill?
[Jill Dougherty, Cnn Correspondent:] It does, Betty. The latest here is that the parliament is going to launch an investigation into those charges that actually as Yushchenko has alleged all along, that there was some type of government involvement in the attempt on his life. What he believes was an attempt on his life. We do know that the doctors over the weekend in that Vienna clinic, Vienna, Austria, said he was poisoned with dioxin, that it was probably introduced into his system through some type of liquid, something he drank perhaps or some soup and they also believe that there was a third party involved. Now, that's where these investigations, and there's another one that the prosecutor here in Ukraine will be launching, as well. Which is where did the poison come from and who did it? Mr. Yushchenko all along has said it was the government. But he has not said specifically who did it. Today, on CNN, his chief of staff Oleh Rybachuk did give some details and he said back in July at the end of July, they were getting warnings from what he called ex- secret service police officers that they would try to quote, "get rid of or take care of Yushchenko and that the prime way of doing it would be with poison. So they beefed up security, but obviously, he said, it wasn't enough. So at this stage, Betty, that's what's going to happen. More investigations. Yushchenko doesn't want it to happen, however, until after the election is over. He said it's very sensitive, and he is, again, not naming names. The elections by the way of December 26th.
[Nguyen:] That's kind of odd he wants to wait till after the election. Because couldn't this prove to be political ammunition for Yushchenko?
[Dougherty:] It could, but again it can cut both ways. It could help him, certainly his supporters think that he was poisoned and that always have thought that he was. It might engender some type of sympathy vote for him and an anger vote against the government if the government were to stoop to something like that. It has denied that, of course, and then on the other hand, though, listen to the comments that are coming from his opponent in this race and that is Viktor Yanukovych who is saying, look, this is a sick man, a very sick man. So it could be that some people would say I don't want to go for him because is he sick. Now, the doctors have said that he is capable of carrying out the responsibilities of the presidency but it does have a definite down side, Betty.
[Nguyen:] CNN's Jill Dougherty in Kiev for us. Thank you, Jill Miles.
[O'brien:] In other news around the world, with, all the ballots counted, Bucharest Mayor Traian Basescu is claiming victory in Romania's presidential election. More than 51 percent of the vote. He is promising to fight corruption and to prepare Romania to join the European Union by 2007. Down under underwater. Severe weekend thunderstorms have left vast tracks of farmland be flooded in Western Australia. One resident there says waters rose six inches in a half hour. The government has declared several areas natural disaster zones. A fifth Israeli soldier has died from an attack by Palestinian militants in a checkpoint between Egypt and Gaza. The attackers set off a bomb in a tunnel under the checkpoint Sunday and then fired on it. Hours later Israeli helicopters launched missiles at targets in Gaza City in retaliation.
[Nguyen:] Well, this holiday season the children in Togo in western Africa with receive a life-saving gift. Starting today, several international organizations will distribute mosquito nets that will help protect against malaria. The infection causes thousands of death each year. And Jerry Jones, vice president of the American Red Cross joins us now by video phone live from Lome, Togo. Thanks for joining us, Jerry. Let's talk about the situation there on the ground. You are there. Describe how desperate this situation is.
[Jerry Jones, Vp American Red Cross:] Well, yes, I was here and what I'm seeing is a tremendous and great African public health success story. Today when you go out into villages across Togo, you see thousands of volunteers working with Togolese health professionals in sites all over the country reaching out to mothers and children to provide them protection against four life-threatening illnesses. The most important of which in this country is malaria, something that can be solved by the distribution of insecticide treated bed nets, which is what this community effort is doing right now. We're also working against measles and we're also providing vaccinations against polio and against parasitic diseases. This integrated approach against these four life threatening conditions is a really a tremendous step forward. It's going to save 21,000 lives over the next three years.
[Nguyen:] And let's talk about this plan, this program that you have in place in Togo. Why Togo specifically?
[Jones:] Well, Togo faces a very high incidence of malaria, and Togo has over the past six months to 12 months been working on an enormous collaboration between the local institutions here, the Ministry of health, the Togolese Red Cross Society and international health organizations around the world, including the American Red Cross Canadian Red cross and others to collaborate together on this partnership to mobilize at the grass-roots level, to mobilize resources and to solve these problems that are very, very solvable if we put in the effort and resources to do so. And that's what's happening here in Togo over the next week.
[Nguyen:] Making a difference. Jerry Jones, vice president of the American Red Cross in Togo for us in Lome, Togo. Thank you. Miles?
[O'brien:] As we've been telling you all morning, the jury in the Scott Peterson case has been deliberating life or death for Scott Peterson. CNN's Rusty Dornin is in Redwood City, California, with news on that front. Rusty?
[Rusty Dornin, Cnn Correspondent:] Well, Miles,: big surprise, we first heard that he jury was going to lunch, only moments later it was announced there is a verdict in the Scott Peterson trial. They have decided the final punishment for Peterson for killing his wife and unborn son. It will be announced at 1:30 Pacific Time. Just shortly before that, the jury had requested seven different pieces of evidence, including aerial photos of San Francisco Bay where his wife's body and the body of his unborn son had washed ashore in April of 2003. Also some original medical records of Laci Peterson, as well as autopsy photos. Those were the things that were requested. It was very shortly after that that they said they were breaking for lunch and now we hear there is a verdict. Miles?
[O'brien:] All right. Obviously we don't know the verdict. And the reason we're waiting this long is to allow people to gather in the courtroom. Is that correct?
[Dornin:] That's right. They said they were going to clear the courtroom with the bailiffs and talk about and also bring the families in and assemble everyone in the courtroom so they can announce the verdict. But it's very interesting and I think shortly we'll be speaking with Chuck Smith who's going to be talking a little bit about what the evidence that they requested was, what that could mean in this case because they asked for the autopsy photos and that sort of thing. And that could have a lot of meaning as far as which way this will go.
[O'brien:] All right. So Rusty, do we know that that evidence that they requested, did all of that get to the jury or was a decision made before all of that got inside the place where they were deliberating?
[Dornin:] Well, we think that they were able to bring at least those because they were simply photos and some medical records. We do believe they were brought into the jury before it was announced. We heard that they had requested this evidence after they had requested it and perhaps after they had actually received the evidence. They only came into court to tell us that these were the things they had requested. So they may have taken a short time, taken a look at these photos, the very gruesome autopsy photos of Laci and the baby that washed ashore and made their decision shortly after that.
[O'brien:] So based on your I don't want to put you on the spot on mathematics here, but at this point, how long do you think they deliberated in the sentencing phase, roughly?
[Dornin:] Roughly about 11, 11 12 hours, almost four2 hours longer than they deliberated to convict Scott Peterson of first degree murder of his wife Laci and second degree of the unborn child.
[O'brien:] Sitting beside you is one of our legal analysts, Chuck Smith. Chuck, can you hear me okay?
[Chuck Smith, Cnn Legal Analyst:] I hear you just fine, Miles.
[O'brien:] All right. Chuck. The fact this is unusual, isn't it, to have a jury spend more time deliberating over the sentence as opposed to the verdict itself?
[Smith:] It is usual, Miles. And we've been commenting on that these last few days while we've been through this. This jury didn't take much time despite six months of evidence and hundreds of exhibits and witnesses to find him guilty. Now they've deliberated longer on the issue of penalty. But along the lines of what you were discussing with Rusty, this morning they got the most gruesome photographs from this trial. And they also got the very sad photograph of Laci Peterson all by herself at a Christmas party when at that same time from the evidence, Scott Peterson was at a different Christmas party with Amber Frey. This was one of the most touching sad photographs. They asked for that along with these gruesome autopsy photographs and gruesome photographs of the bodies when they were discovered by the bay. We were presuming and I think we're correct that probably people inclined towards a death verdict wanted to get those photographs and that evidence to put in front of the people that were advocating for life without parole and say to those people, look at these photographs again. Look at the horrific nature of what he did. Don't you think he deserves the death penalty for doing this to this beautiful woman and her child? That's the analysis. I don't know if we're right or not, but I would predict there's going to be a death verdict in a couple of hours.
[O'brien:] OK. You're going to be that definitive about it. Clearly it's difficult to flip it around. And wonder if people were holding out for life, they would request that particular sort of evidence. I suppose if they were asking for pictures of a young Scott Peterson, some of the things brought in as supporting evidence about his character, you might go the other way. To what extent, Chuck, are you surprised at all by what you think is going to happen here in a little while?
[Smith:] Well, I am surprised. I've said all along I thought this was going to be life without parole. It could be, if you want to flip this around, the other way to analyze that request is, let's say this morning it was 10-2 or 11-1 for life. And let's say the one or two holdouts in their last attempt to win over other jurors, they were the individuals who said, "give us those autopsy photographs. Bring us those gruesome photographs," and maybe they tried, the other jurors looked at those and said no, as bad as it is we still advocate for life and maybe the holdouts for death came on board. That's the other way to look at it. I don't know. No one knows at this point. It's just a moment of just tension and just anxiety that just really can't be described what those people must be going through at this point.
[O'brien:] Let's assume for a minute and we're getting deep down into speculation here. Let's assume that they were and many people have suggested it would be a large number of people suggesting death and then a few holdouts. If in fact that still were the case and they were hung, they probably would still be talking or asking the judge for further instructions, wouldn't they?
[Smith:] Well, you would think so because you know, it is one thing to be inclined towards death. And be convinced by your fellow jurors that a life without parole punishment as horrendous as it is and as bleak as that existence is is appropriate. So going down from death to life without parole, one can understand. However, if someone was not going to be party to an execution, they just said morally, philosophically, religiously in their core of their being they said it should be life, it's hard to understand how they could be swayed by even a majority of ten or 11 people to change their mind and vote for death. Mark Geragos made this argument.
[O'brien:] Didn't they vet out people that would be morally opposed to the death penalty already? Those people are not in the jury pool.
[Smith:] That is the wildcard, what we all must remember. Polling tells us that certainly here in California, it's around 5050 on whether or not people favor the death penalty. But this jury, 100 percent of them told us in jury selection months ago that they all believe in the death penalty, they all would consider the death penalty and they would all impose the death penalty in the appropriate case. So this is a group by definition prepared to render a death verdict if they feel this is the appropriate case.
[O'brien:] So going back to that last theory you just were putting out there, if somebody were saying, look, I'm morally opposed to it, that would be someone disingenuous when the interview was going on selecting the jury or someone who had a genuine change of heart during the course of the trial.
[Smith:] Someone who was either disingenuous and said that after listening to all this and listening to the evidence, the 39 witnesses that Mark Geragos called on behalf of Scott Peterson, someone who said, OK I believe in the death penalty, but this isn't the appropriate case. He's done enough decent things in his life. He's touched enough people in a human way. I don't think he should be put to death. He is not the worst of the worst.
[O'brien:] Just before we want to join Jeff Toobin in New York here in a moment. I want to ask you, chuck, before I breakaway. Just give us a sense of the atmospherics there. The mood there right now. I noticed just a lot of buzz where you are right now. Obviously a lot of tension associated with all of these things. What's the mood there right now, now that we know something's going to happen in a little more than an hour?
[Smith:] A few moments ago, a Rusty reported, when it was announced from within the courtroom that there was going to be a verdict read in a little less than two hours, the whole atmosphere, just everyone just was hushed. I think it will be a much more somber moment than it was three or four weeks ago when the verdict of guilt came down. This is, after all, life and death. This is not a verdict to cheer at least in my opinion. I don't think people should. The posit [PH] behind us going to start to fill up much the same way it filled up a couple weeks ago. And people are just very, very uncertain as to what's going to happen. Uncertain as to which way this is going to go, and the anxiety and the tension is just very palpable.
[O'brien:] All right. Chuck Smith along with Rusty Dornin, stand by. We'll be getting back to you shortly. Jeff Toobin, our senior legal analyst in New York now. Jeff, I noted with some interest this morning that the jury will announce its decision, but the formal sentencing doesn't occur till February. What happens in between regardless of what the decision of the jury is.
[Jeffrey Toobin, Cnn Legal Analyst:] It almost always works this way, Miles. The defense lawyers have the chance to file a variety of motions. Before sentence is imposed. Motion for a new trial based on juror misconduct, motion for a new trial based on evidence that should not have been admitted before the jury. Those motions almost always fail but they are always made and it helps preserve the issues so that the defense can raise them on appeal. They're nothing of great significance is likely to happen between now and the actual imposition of sentence. Those motions rarely make a difference but they're always filed. That's the reason why there's this gap.
[O'brien:] Now, in situations, capital cases, a lot of these appeals are automatic, correct?
[Toobin:] Absolutely.
[O'brien:] All right. But is there anything that you've seen in the course of this very long trial that is just screaming out for some sort of reversal?
[Toobin:] Well, the short answer is no. That I do not think there is something screaming out for reversal and even though we talk a lot about appeals, issues, it's very important to remember that the vast, vast majority of jury convictions are upheld on appeal. Reversals of convictions are by far the exception rather than the rule. If there is a death sentence, I would amend that a little bit. Death sentences frequently are overturned in California and everywhere. The appeals courts are very meticulous about making sure every death sentence is appropriate. But in terms of convictions, they're very, very rarely overturned. The one issue that I do think will get a lot of attention in appeals court is the dismissal of the jurors during deliberations. Now, remember there were two jurors dismissed during deliberations which is very rare. One of them, Geragos, the defense attorney, agreed to have this juror dismissed. So there won't be any controversy there. But another juror there was controversy and that I think will be an issue that an appeals court will want to look at.
[O'brien:] Tell me this, Jeff. On what basis, typically, we're, just to be clear with viewers here, we're not talking about the verdict here. We're just talking about the reversal of the sentence. On what basis do judges tend to reverse a jury's decision on a sentence?
[Toobin:] You mean an appeals court?
[O'brien:] Yeah, an appeals court, yes, yes, exactly.
[Toobin:] Appeals court judges, it can be any number of things. The most common area involves jury instructions, whether the instructions were precisely accurate under the law. The defense got a break here in the jury instructions on this lingering doubt instruction. I don't know if you've been discussing that at all. That's a very pro defense instruction in a death penalty case where the judge said, I know you found Scott Peterson guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. We wouldn't be at this stage if you hadn't. But if you have lingering doubts about the guilt of the defendant that is a reason why you can impose life without parole rather than rather than the death penalty. So that won't be something that Geragos can complain about, but jury instructions tend to be the most common reason for reversal.
[O'brien:] All right, Jeff, stand by. Let's get back to Rusty Dornin there in Redwood City. We should remind viewers what we're talking about here. Rusty, just bring us up-to-date on what we know has transpired so far today. A bit of a surprise. A few moments ago we were talking to you how the jury was planning on lunch and all of a sudden this happened.
[Dornin:] Well, they were planning on lunch. We were just leaving the area to go get something to eat when all of a sudden it was announced they had reached a verdict and it would be announced at 1:30 Pacific Time. This is following just about an hour ago the judge coming into the courtroom with Scott Peterson in the courtroom and saying that the jury had requested seven pieces of evidence from the guilt phase of the trial. That included some aerial photographs of San Francisco Bay where the bodies washed ashore, a picture of Laci Peterson, the last photograph of her on December 14 they when she went to a Christmas party the same night that her husband Scott Peterson was at a Christmas party with his girlfriend Amber Frey. Autopsy photos of both of the bodies, as well as the original medical records for Laci Peterson. I also wanted to go back for a minute. You were talking about some of the reversals in this case. From what we understand, this judge, Alfred Delucci who is from another county. This is not his jurisdiction that he's normally on. He has never had one of his cases reversed on appeal, apparently he's had six death penalty cases, six cases where they were sentenced to death and not one of those apparently has been reversed. Miles?
[O'brien:] Rusty, a question for you. Does the judge have the latitude in California to reject the jury's suggestion of, say, death and say, you know, based on my read of this, this is actually a life sentence?
[Dornin:] Yes. No, he can he listens to their recommendation if it's death. He comes back February 25th after reviewing it, and Chuck, of course, can speak to this, but he can reduce the death sentence to a life. But if they come back with a life sentence, he cannot elevate that to death. Am I right there, Chuck.
[Smith:] That's correct, Rusty. What you must keep in mind, we talk about this as a recommendation. It is not a recommendation. This jury is sentencing Scott Peterson. And the verdict form will read "we the jury set the penalty at death, we the jury set the patent at life without parole." Judge Delucci by law, if it is death, must review it, and has the power to reduce it, however, that decision if he does reduce it is appealable by the prosecution which is very unique. That is, the appellate court can look at it and say Judge Delucci's reasons weren't correct. We will elevate it back to death. The jury in a very real sense sets the sentence.
[O'brien:] So there's very specific guideposts, then, Chuck, on which direction things can go. If the jury comes back and says life without parole, the judge cannot elevate that to death. In that case, what can the appeals court do and what is the latitude there? They cannot elevate it to death either, right.
[Smith:] That's correct. The jury's word is final. Those 12 citizens, their word is sacrosanct and final if they say life without parole. No judge, no group of judges, no greater power exists. It's their decision if they say life without possibility of parole.
[O'brien:] So judges merely have the latitude to extend a degree of mercy, here, if you will on someone who has been convicted?
[Smith:] That's correct. But it rarely, rarely, rarely happens. I can't think of a case here in California where it's happened. You know, we have 630 men on death row. I can't remember a case and I've been here for 27 years in this state, I can't remember a case where the judge has stepped in after a death verdict by the jury and reduced to life without parole. Very slim likelihood.
[O'brien:] Chuck Smith with Rusty Dornin, Redwood City, Jeffrey Toobin in New York City, our senior legal analyst all helping to understand what is going on as best we can tell. We don't know an awful lot except to tell you that at 4:30 Eastern Time, about an hour and a half from now, we will know the answer to the question of what that jury in Redwood City has determined should be the fate of Scott Peterson. Will he spend his natural life in jail, or will he die by cause of execution? That will happen at 4:30. In the meantime, we'll be keeping you posted. Stay with CNN. We're going to take a break. We'll be back with more LIVE FROM in a moment.