tell us what happened. well, we were going through the security checkpoint, and i was asked to take off my shoes, as we all do here in the u.s., but they also said that there was an image on the heel of my shoe that might tell them that there was either explosives or drugs in the heels of my shoes. so they took us to a tiny office. they say anti-narcotics. and we wanted to go with my producer. we want to be both of us together and they didn t want us to be together. they said, trying to make fun of us, they made a comment like, they probably are a couple. they probably are a couple. that s why they want to be together. when i was transferred to this tiny room, my producer went to
flashlight to go back where you just ran. do you know what i m saying? do you recall you and investigator singleton questioning you about that. yes, sir. about there could possibly be an inconsistency about what the evidence showed? i think he was using his words to clarify. and by the way, while we re at this point, mr. o mara asked you about videotaping. do you recall that you had questioned the defendant about videotaping and you showed him the victim s camera that was at the scene near where his body was. do you recall that? yes, sir. and you stated, i believe, on direct and cross examination that you were bluffing him. you were telling him that the victim had potentially videotaped the whole thing? at that point that was a bluff. correct? yes, sir. and you knew that not to be true, correct? at that point, yes. and my point is, and the defendant made a comment like,
guilty of potential misconduct. one of the jurors admitting he felt pressured to go along with the other jurors who he believed made up their minds before the deliberation. before the trial was over, but started deliberating, did anybody ever say to you or in your presence or suggest that they heard enough evidence, they made their mind up and they were going to vote one way or the other. yes. quite a few. comment like, we know he s guilty, let s just seen it paperwork and go on. megyn: that s not good for those trying to uphold this verdict. joining me to discuss it. joey jackson and mercedes colwin. the defense was tipped off by an alternate jurors and now we have the actual jurors being cross-examined by the judge. that one, michael st. john got
trained soldiers could become a band of killers. and so we identified a guy, and gibbs, gibbs makes a comment like, hey, do you guys want to wax this guy or what? and that he would set it up. he grabbed the guy. reporter: this corporal accused of killing three afghan civilian men, two by shooting, the third which is described to a military investigator was literally a set-up, he set by the platoon leader staff sergeant kelvin gibbs. what did he do? we had this guy by the compound. we walked him out and set him in place. stand here. was he fully cooperating? i mean, yeah. was he armed? no. not that we were aware of. where did he stand him? next to a wall. yeah, it was kind of next to a wall where gibbs would get, like, behind cover after the grenade went off and then placed the off over here and clean line
drew griffin for the latest. drew? ali, more gruesome efds of thrill killings in afghanistan pup said, not by taliban terrorists but u.s. troop ps some of the army interrogation tapes yesterday. american soldiers detailing in their own words cold-blooded killings. soldiers high on opium laced hashish and prescription drugs. u.s. soldiers. now new details in my investigation. reporter: in the tapes obtained by cnn the soldiers accused in their own words are not denying anything, but trying to explain how highly trained soldiers could become a band of killers. and so we identified a guy, and gibbs gibbs makes a comment like, hey, do you guys want to wax this guy or what? and you know, he d set it up so we could grab the dude. corporal jeremy morlock accused of killing three afghan men, the third a setup he says