Army Major Hasan: "I Am The Shooter"
BROOKE BALDWIN, CNN ANCHOR: "I am the shooter," the words of Major Nadal Hasan, his opening statement today lasting less than 2 minutes. He removed all doubt about his role in that 2009 shooting at Fort Hood. His trial opened today in a heavily, fortified courtroom at the military base. Let me take you back and remind you that 13 people were killed in that shooting spree, 30 more wounded and survivors have not at all forgotten any of the details. At least one says he won't be afraid to look this man in the eye.</s>SGT. ALONZO LUNSFORD, FORT HOOD SHOOTING SURVIVOR: During the initial act of the shooting in 2009 when I realized what was happening seeing someone that wears the same uniform that I wear that was shooting us and at the time not having a reason to shoot us, but by him yelling, I was hurt because in the military we all believe one color. We wear one color. Doesn't matter what your national origin is because we're fighting for a common cause. For him to turn on us that day and to start killing innocent people, it leaves you speechless. Now the other thing that's going to happen is that Major Hasan is expecting because we suffer from PTSD or TBI that we are going to be afraid to stand in front of him, but I will share this with you from the heart, we will show no fear in the face of the enemy. We will not allow Major Hasan or anyone that's following him or anyone that he has followed strike any fear on our beloved citizens of the United States of America.</s>BALDWIN: CNN's Ed Lavandera is covering this for us from Fort Hood. Ed, back to Hasan and back to this 2 minutes or less than 2 minutes opening statement, what did he say in that little time? What was your reaction to it in the courtroom?</s>ED LAVANDERA, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, it was fascinating because the prosecutors had just spent the previous hour meticulously detailing how he carried out the massacre not too far away from where this trial is going on and how the 13 people were killed and more than 30 others were wounded. It was in precise detail and it was very painful to hear it at one point. In fact, prosecutors had talked about one pregnant victim who was pleading for the life of her unborn child as she was shot and hurt -- describing what one witness said, I heard "My baby, my baby" and then the voice went silent. So you've spent an hour listening to that kind of emotional testimony and then Hasan stood up and in a matter of moments took away all of that attention and said he claimed to be the shooter just right out of the gate. Took away any pretense about whether or not this trial would be about his guilt or innocence. Hasan basically declaring he is the shooter. He also went on to say that the evidence will show one side of the story here. That the evidence will show that I was on the wrong side being a U.S. soldier and that I switched sides so clearly Major Hasan trying to use this trial as a platform to try to espouse his religious beliefs. Prosecutors say that his motive for the shooting was that he was going to be deployed to Afghanistan towards the end of 2009. He did not want to be deployed. He felt it was his Jihad duty to kill as many U.S. soldiers as possible -- Brooke.</s>BALDWIN: Ed Lavandera for us in Fort Hood. Ed, I want to talk legal sort of what we can expect in the coming days and perhaps weeks here. Criminal Defense Attorneys Monica Lindstrom joins me from Phoenix and Dennis Cevallos from Philadelphia. So it's good to see both of you. Let's just begin with what we just heard from Ed in Texas to sort of juxtapose the prosecution, you know, detail, meticulous, one hour opening statement with this, you know, 2 minutes from Nidal Hasan. Is there any I don't even want to -- I would say what's the strategy in that, but is there even any strategy, Danny?</s>DANNY CEVALLOS, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Well, what's fascinating to me is that the judge usually tells jurors that opening statements and closing statements are not themselves evidence, however, what a unique situation where the actual -- someone's representing themselves pro se and they stand up and they make an admission. I almost think this is one of those exceptions where this is evidence. He has admitted that he is the shooter. However, I think what we're going to see is a rambling sort of contrived justification that he believes in his mind he had to shoot because he had some greater good that he had to achieve or some form of defense of others. Who knows though? When someone represents themselves pro se, anything can happen.</s>BALDWIN: And, Monica, I think not only clearly is he admitting he did this, he had offered to plead guilty. The judge, the prosecution said, no, because they want this jury to ultimately convict him because had they accepted this guilty plea, the death penalty would have been off the table, correct?</s>MONICA LINDSTROM, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: That's absolutely right. I think Danny brings up a really good point. When you get to a high level crime like this and the defendant chooses to represent themselves I think it's really a form of arrogance, maybe some narcissism, and they usually have an agenda, some theories they want to put forth. They just want it as a pulpit for them to just say whatever they want to say. And one thing that the judge did in this case is the defendant wanted to try to argue that he was defending others, his brothers over fighting for the Taliban, et cetera, et cetera, and the judge said, I'm not going to let you say that because that is not valid here. You can't use that as a defense. So I think we're going to hear more about his theories and how he feels, not really a defense at all.</s>BALDWIN: Danny, how have you ever seen someone in this high profile crime representing him or herself? Has this ever been done before?</s>CEVALLOS: Yes, actually, it has. I mean, a couple examples. Ted Bundy, I believe, represented himself, but there have been instances where people represent themselves. I mean, Charles Manson certainly spoke for himself many, many, many times during his trial. You see this a lot, they will fire a lot of their private counsel and tried to proceed pro se, but believe me, to proceed pro se the court will not do it willy-nilly. They will ask them 200 times. Are you sure? Are you super duper sure? Before they let someone represent themselves, but ultimately it is a constitutional right to represent yourself pro se.</s>BALDWIN: I just appreciate hearing from, you know, Sergeant Lunsford saying I'm ready to look this man in the eye and testify. Monica Lindstrom and Danny Cevallos, thank you. We'll be following this, obviously, in the coming days and continue this conversation. Meantime, let me just give you all the heads up. Any moment now, we are expecting to hear from a family member of those two little boys, the 5 and 7-year-olds who were killed yesterday by a python during their sleepover. They were living above this pet store. Somehow this python escaped, made its way through the ventilation system, fell through the ceiling and then, according to police, strangled them. We're going to take that news conference as soon as we see it live coming up.