The MacNeil/Lehrer NewsHour

MR. LEHRER: Good evening. Leading the news this Thursday, there was an acquittal in the McMartin preschool case, Pres. Bush called a Social Security tax cut proposal a charade and the U.S. cost of living last year was the highest in eight years. We'll have the details in our News Summary in a moment. Judy Woodruff is in Washington tonight. Judy.

MS. WOODRUFF: After the News Summary we focus first on U.S. aid to El Salvador in the wake of last [FOCUS - AIDING EL SALVADOR] November's killings of six Jesuit priests. We have a News Maker interview with El Salvador's President, Alfredo Cristiani, then we debate the aid question with Republican Sen. John Warner and Democratic Congressman Sam Gejdenson. Then the [FOCUS - TRYING TRIAL] McMartin Preschool Case. We get a report on the history of the case, the course the trial took, and reaction to today's verdict. Then we have an interview with a man who has presided over the courtroom the past two and half years, Judge William Pounders.NEWS SUMMARY

MR. LEHRER: The longest criminal trial in U.S. history ended today. It was the child molesting trial known as the McMartin Preschool Case, the verdict "not guilty". The trial began nearly three years ago. On trial were 63 year old Peggy McMartin Buckey and her 31 year old son, Raymond. They were charged with 65 counts of molesting children at their preschool in Manhattan Beach, California. The jury found them "not guilty" on 52 of those counts. No verdict was reached on 13 others. Jurors spoke to reporters afterwards.

JUROR: The children were never allowed to say in their own words what happened to them, and to me, that was crucial. When the interviewers interviewed the children, all the questions were leading. They never had a chance to tell their story.

JUROR: There were portions of it that there believable and there were portions that were fantastic, yet, the two were so intertwined there was no, at least for me, easy way to say, well, some magic scalpel that you can use to cut the fact from the fiction.

MR. LEHRER: We will have more on this verdict after the News Summary. Judy.

MS. WOODRUFF: Pres. Bush entered the fray today on the question of eliminating the new Social Security payroll tax increase. He criticized a recent proposal by Dem. Sen. Patrick Moynihan to cut the tax. Reporters asked Mr. Bush about the Moynihan plan at the start of a White House meeting with the president of Turkey.

PRESIDENT BUSH: This is an effort to get me to try to raise taxes on the American people by the charade of cutting them or cut benefits and I am not going to do it.

MS. WOODRUFF: On another economic matter, the Bush administration offered advice to the Federal Reserve. Presidential Spokesman Marlin Fitzwater said cuts in interest rates are justified by current economic conditions. Administration officials rarely comment on Fed policy, but Fitzwater said, "It is important occasionally to point out that lower interest rates are normally good for the economy." He also said that today's report from the Commerce Department on housing starts showed that interest rates were too high. New housing construction fell 8 percent in December. That left the annual figure for 1989 down 7.6 percent. And the Consumer Price Index was also announced today. Prices rose .4 percent in December, bringing the annual inflation rate for consumers to 4.6 percent, an 8 year high.

MR. LEHRER: Israel's Defense Minister said in Washington today he expected no cuts in U.S. aid to his country. Yitzhak Rabin was responding to a proposal from Sen. Minority Leader Robert Dole. Dole had suggested reductions in aid to Israel and four other countries in order to meet new U.S. responsibilities in Eastern Europe. Rabin told reporters he discussed the issue with Sec. of State Baker.

YITZHAK RABIN, Defense Minister, Israel: I would raise the needs of Israel to continue to maintain the same level of support to Israel because it when it comes to the Middle East, the glasnost is not direct. The Soviet Union continues to supply arms to the radical Arab countries. When it comes to fiscal year '91, I have the reasons to believe that there will be no reduction in the support to Israel.

MS. WOODRUFF: The crew of the space shuttle Columbia spent their last full day in space, making sure all systems were go for their return to earth early tomorrow morning. The astronauts were awakened during the night when a faulty navigation signal sent Columbia somersaulting. Commander Dan Brendenstein had to steer the shuttle manually until Mission Control in Houston could correct the signals. The five astronauts assembled this morning for a phone call from Pres. Bush who congratulated them on a job well done. Columbia is scheduled to land at Edwards Air Force Base in California just before 3 AM Pacific Time.

MR. LEHRER: The Soviet Union called up more troops today because of the violence in Azerbaijan. The Soviet Defense Minister said army reservists were being mobilized to help the 11,000 Soviet troops already in Azerbaijan. The troops have so far failed to end the fighting between Azerbaijanis and Armenians. We have a report from Armenia by Bill Neely of Independent Television News.

MR. NEELY: Armenians arrive at the border to fight their neighbors in Azerbaijan. The two sides have exchanged fire and attacked each other's villages for five days. Last night according to these men the shooting was intense. They face Azerbaijanis who've succeeded in tearing down fencing on the Soviet/Iranian border. That's just six miles from here. The guns and ammunition will reinforce the Armenian border tonight. Today the latest casualty was buried, a 33 year old Armenian killed on the border when Azares opened up with machine guns. His father, a Soviet soldier in World War II, supports the Armenian raids in Azerbaijan. In the middle, Soviet troops. Slowly detachments are arriving at each flash point. These men escorted us into Azerbaijan, where they're protecting a village burned by the Armenians in revenge for the latest killing. The Soviet army is well armed here. The men wear full combat uniform with bullet proof jackets. They've been instructed to shoot civilians in self defense. On the border, Soviet army lorries are stopped. The Armenians look inside for their Azare enemies. It's a mark of how much order in this region has collapsed that civilian vigilantes can stop the Soviet army doing its job. Minutes later, three Soviet soldiers returning to barracks from Leif are questioned at the border. There are reports tonight that just hours after these scenes were filmed, Armenians were killed in an exchange of gunfire with Azerbaijanis.

MR. LEHRER: Bulgaria's former hardline Communist leader was put under house arrest today. Todar Zibkov has been charged with receiving excessive amounts of public property among other things. Zibkov was in power for 35 years. He was overthrown after pro democracy protests two months ago.

MS. WOODRUFF: That's it for our News Summary. Just ahead on the Newshour, El Salvador, should U.S. aid be cut off and the verdict in the McMartin child abuse case. FOCUS - AIDING EL SALVADOR

MS. WOODRUFF: First tonight the controversy over continued U.S. military aid to El Salvador. Congress is about to return to work and the aid issue will be one of the first items on its agenda. Hearings are scheduled next week. Provoking the most recent Congressional concern about helping the Salvadorian Military in its fight against leftist guerrillas was the murder of a group of Jesuit Priests. It occurred at the same time as the military was trying to put down a guerilla offensive in the Capitol of San Salvador. The 6 Priests were murdered in NOvember. They were forced out of their home on the Jesuit University Campus in San Salvador and shot to death along with their housekeeper and her teenage daughter. Two weeks ago El Salvador's President Alfredo Cristiani announced that military men were responsible for the murders. Last weekend 8 members of the military were arrested. The highest ranking among them was Commander of the Country's Military School Col, Alfredo Benevitas. President Cristiani said Benevitas ordered the murders. Now to a news maker interview with President Crisitiani. I talked with him earlier this afternoon. We experienced some transmission problems and we were not able to get a color picture from San Salvador. Mr. President thank you for being with us. Let me just begin by asking you about the four military officers and four enlisted men who have been indicted in connection with the murders last November of the Priests. What happens to these officers and enlisted men now?

ALFREDO CRISTIANI, President, El Salvador: Well they are now under the judges order. The judicial process has started and hopefully we will end up with a conviction. Parallel to this our investigative unit will continue to support the process from any new information that is gathered from testimony during the process of the trial so that it may be investigated even further and may be that will provide more evidence. But we think that there is sufficient evidence now both testimonial and technical evidence to have the judicial process go ahead.

MS. WOODRUFF: Will justice be done in this case?

PRESIDENT CRISTIANI: Well we think that this is the first time that an investigation has not only testimonial evidence supporting the result of it but rather for the first time we have technical evidence like ballistic tests and calligraphy tests that support the testimonial evidence of those who were present at the scene of the crime that night. Therefore we think that there is a strong case and hopefully the judicial process will be effective in punishing the culprits.

MS. WOODRUFF: Will these men be tried in a military court or a civilian court?

PRESIDENT CRISTIANI: No the Supreme Court since the beginning of the case instructed a civilian court to be the one that over looked the case and they have continued with the same civilian court now that we have sent the indicted persons to the process.

MS. WOODRUFF: But is it not true that the civilian judge who in charge of this case is the same judge who has been in charge of the Bishop Romero murder case and there is nothing that really has been done on that case in the last ten years. What makes you think that it is going to be any different with this one?

PRESIDENT CRISTIANI: Well first of all I am not totally aware if it is the same judge but even so the problem, I think, though in this case the investigation was readily gone about. In less than 60 days we had technical evidence and testimonial evidence coming directly from those involved in the assassinations. Whereas in Arch Bishop Romero's case there was practically no investigation done immediately or following that and it has been a more erratic type of process. Here we think that we have a more of a clear cut case. I repeat with both testimonial and technical evidence supporting it. And therefore I don't really think that its necessarily the judge who is blame in either of the case or pre judge the judge but rather that in one case there was practically no investigation and in this case there is a thorough investigation and it has been done will everything is still present and fresh.

MS. WOODRUFF: You say it is a clear cut case and virtually every one we've read who has looked in to the details of the case say it looks to them like it was such a well coordinated operation that they believe that some one higher up than a Colonel had to have been involved. Are you convinced that it doesn't go any higher than Col. Benevitas?

PRESIDENT CRISTIANI: Well we can't say either way at this point and time. We can only go from the evidence that we have been able to gather during the investigation and from the testimony that has been gathered up to this point. There is no clue as to anything saying that it came from anywhere higher. Col. Benevitas was the Commander and Chief in that area and this unit was under his direct command and therefore it could very well stop there. And like I say at this point the junior officers are saying that they received the direct order from Col. Benevitas where Col. Benevitas is denying he gave the order. He was still indicted because of the testimony of the three junior officers.

MS. WOODRUFF: And yet a Diplomat I believe in San Salvador is quoted in the New York Times this week as saying he believes the Colonel is a scape goat for higher ups?

PRESIDENT CRISTIANI: Well there are all sorts of opinions that can gather. We can only go from the investigation itself and we think that it has been very thorough. The unit tracked down those involved, who they were and under whose command it was and in interrogating the officers who were at the scene of the crime while the crime was being committed. It wasn't the officers who did it but the sergeants that we there say that they received a direct order from Col. Benevitas. Certainly we are not going to use any scape goats in this case and I think that may be the diplomat is with out the information and he is just simply stating his own personal opinion.

MS. WOODRUFF: Your Attorney General as you know has advocated openly that Priests who are active, who are advocating helping the poor should be sent out of the country. Do you agree with that point of view?

PRESIDENT CRISTIANI: No I don't and our government came immediately out of the statements saying that this statement was a personal one from the Attorney General. The Attorney General was not appointed by the Administration but by the National Assembly and that certainly he did not stand for the position of the Government. As a matter of fact in this particular case involved which is the two Arch Bishops of our Capitol City. We had previous talks with them with respect to the security they had asked to their offices and their quarters here in the city and we have gladly given them that protection. So it is certainly not anything that has anything to do with our position. We have been totally against that.

MS. WOODRUFF: Mr. President as you know one of the big questions surrounding all this certainly coming from the United States has been whether you are really in charge in El Salvador or whether it is the military, whether there are in fact two Governments in effect in your country. Are you confident that it is you who is running things and not the military which is going its own way?

PRESIDENT CRISTIANI: Well I don't think that the military as an institution is going its own way. If we can use this particular case as an example we have had the support of the high command of the armed forces since the beginning in carrying out this investigation. We have had also the understanding of all the commanders of the different military units in the armed forces and we feel that there is no difference of opinion particularly in this case. Certainly we think that the problem here is there might be individual elements in the armed forces that might go the wrong way in to committing such crime as the one of the Jesuit Priests but not the institution in itself. I think that the institution deserves some understanding that they have during this entire process have evolved and they evolved in to an institution that does support the democratic process in the country and they have been doing that for quite some time now.

MS. WOODRUFF: As you know the Congress is about to debate the question of aid to your country. How do you reassure, how do you assure members of Congress that this sort of thing will not happen again?

PRESIDENT CRISTIANI: Well all we can assure of is that any new incident that might arise with actions such as the one in the murder of the Jesuit case there are extremes in the country that might commit new crimes in the future. All we can assure them is that we are going to investigate with the same enthusiasm as we investigated this one and hopefully these people will understand that the Government is not willing to accept and let any body go free without being held responsible for their actions.

MS. WOODRUFF: President Cristiani we are going to have to leave it there and we appreciate your being with us.

PRESIDENT CRISTIANI: My pleasure.

MS. WOODRUFF: Congress has voted more than 3 billion dollars in military and economic aid to El Salvador in the past 8 years including one billion worth of military equipment. We now get two Congressional perspectives on the question of future aid. They come from Republican Senator John Warner of Virginia, the ranking member of the Armed Services Committee. He was in El Salvador last week. And from Democratic Congressman Sam Gejdenson of Connecticut. He is a member of the Western Hemisphere Sub committee of the House Foreign Affairs Committee. Senator Warner to you first. You were just in El Salvador as we said. Do youfeel confident. You've heard President Cristiani in this interview. You talked to him just a few days ago. Are you confident that he is doing everything that he can to get to the bottom of this murder?

SEN. WARNER: Yes I am. Senator Dodd the Senior member of the Connecticut Delegation was with me. He is an acknowledged expert on that area and I think that both of us came away after lengthy meetings with President Crisitani and our Ambassador and other that they are doing the best they can to turn around a system which has been fraudulent, particularly the military system for many decades, really. And Cristiani is a man of enormous courage and our President and indeed I think the American people have quite properly put our trust and confidence in his to change this system. Now mind you he is head of the Executive Branch. The Judicial Branch like our country is a separate branch. And we are hopeful that this case will be prosecuted to the fullest extent. We should not try and leverage that nation with our foreign aid because we could well jeopardize those cases. If we tried to do that we might jeopardize the very case that we want to bring to conclusion and determine the guilt or the innocence.

MS. WOODRUFF: Alright I want to ask about that in a moment but let me turn now to Congressman Gejdenson are you confident that President Crisitiani is doing all he can do?

CONGRESSMAN GEJDENSON: No I think that it is clear that there are multiple of power centers in El Salvador. There is clearly the Military left the FMLN, those on the left who want to negotiate and would like to become a part of the political process and then the Government there is the elected government and there is also the military a part of which may be loyal to President Crisitiani but a substantial portion of which is not and the mistake that we have made through all these years of the last decade is that we have not made American aid dependent on real reform occurring in the military. We were always told by the Reagan Administration when we demanded certification that there had been an improvement.

MS. WOODRUFF: An improvement in what?

CONGRESSMAN GEJDENSON: In human rights in El Salvador. An improvement is simply not solving one case. Bringing to justice the murders in this case is not an improvement in El Salvador's human rights operation and its government just because the microscope comes in. It has to be a process change.

MS. WOODRUFF: You are saying it is not an improvement?

CONGRESSMAN GEJDENSON: It is not an improvement.

MS. WOODRUFF: Even if they go after the guilty parties?

CONGRESSMAN GEJDENSON: Absolutely not because what happens is you can't have that Government operate in a proper and decent way only when the United States media and Congress puts all of its focus down there. We were told by the Administration the dollars that went to training troops would improve human rights. This battalion has been trained with American tax payer dollars. The only way to make this work I believe is for the Congress not to appropriate any funds when we go back and then to appropriate funds on a 120 day basis.

MS. WOODRUFF: Senator Warner he is saying even if they investigate this case fully it doesn't make any difference that their human rights record is abysmal? I guess that is what he is saying.

SEN. WARNER: We recognize that but what is the alternative I say to my friend a blood bath. To have those immigrate to the United States and take jobs away from our folks. I mean we are a nation that has got to provide leadership in this hemisphere. We madean enormous investment already in dollars and in time and the people are beginning to slowly but surely come in behind President Cristiani and he can not like a great mighty ship turn it a 180 degrees over night. He must be given a reasonable period of time. This case is a frightful one. I walked through the very area where those Priests lived, saw the ground on which they were slaughtered with Senator Dodd and it left a lasting impression. If ever two men came away effected and wanted to turn against the system I am sure that it was the two of us but we must show restraint and understanding for Crisitiani and his deputies to try to change this system.

CONGRESSMAN GEJDENSON: I agree with you except we have had 700 people killed in one instance in 1981. In 1983 more killings. Every year there are instances that bring about American outrage and we say we are now going to be determined to take some action. The Congress gave the Bush Administration an President Cristiani a year. We went out there and said this is a new Administration. It is not the Reagan Administration that certified improvements of human rights even when there was none and over some of our objections they got their way. What happened? The Military ran wild. We've got to tell the military in El Salvador--

MS. WOODRUFF: What do you mean the military ran wild?

CONGRESSMAN GEJDENSON: Well the military ran wild. In this instance alone, I mean, there are other instances but this is the most dramatic.

SEN. WARNER: The Senior Military freely acknowledge that is a stain on their professional reputation. This is the minister of defense and the Colonel who is incidently the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs. This is the first time that a President of El Salvador has ever had the guts and courage to really get in there and see that discipline is brought to the army. It is the first time.

CONGRESSMAN GEJDENSON: I don't think that we can question President Duarte's commitment or courage his body was disfigured by torture. This man had his own relatives kidnapped. He doesn't have the leverage.

SEN. WARNER: You mean Duarte or Cristiani?

CONGRESSMAN GEJDENSON: Duarte didn't have the leverage.

SEN. WARNER: But he tried hard.

CONGRESSMAN GEJDENSON: Yes he did. And Crisitiani doesn't have the leverage. Why? Because the big fat check came from the United States no matter what happened in El Salvador because we were worried about Moscow 6500 miles away from El Salvador. There are changes in Moscow. We can be a little more cautious in our policy in El Salvador. It is not just six important religious leaders who are dead. It is people being killed continuously by a military that is out of control. The left is out of control and the right is out of control.

SEN. WARNER: But the guerrillas came in in the fall and killed 3000 mostly innocent people.

CONGRESSMAN GEJDENSON: The FMLN has been absolutely brutal and irresponsible.

SEN. WARNER: Correct we agree on that.

CONGRESSMAN GEJDENSON: Absolutely but it is not financed by American tax payer dollars.

SEN. WARNER: It is Cuba and Nicaragua.

CONGRESSMAN GEJDENSON: You can find the money where ever you want. You are probably right on those but the answer here is America is responsible for what happens in the military in El Salvador. We train these people, we finance these people, we equip them and we have got to tell them that unless there real reform. unless they come under civilian control. In a decade not one conviction of an army officer and the money is cut off.

MS. WOODRUFF: So you are saying no matter what they do in this case even if they find all these fellows guilty and send them off to prison for ever or whatever that is not good enough?

CONGRESSMAN GEJDENSON: Right. I think that what we have to do as a Congress because President Bush hasn't been willing to pay attention to what happens in El Salvador.

SEN. WARNER: Oh yes he has. He came in strongly behind Crisitiani.

CONGRESSMAN GEJDENSON: Strongly behind Cristiani but not constant attention to make sure that the military understood what was going on. I asked the Bush folks to please let us make the money contingent on human rights before this massacre. So that the army got a continuing message. That is what we have to give them.

MS. WOODRUFF: Specifically Congressman what money are we talking about? What money is at stake here? How much money and for what purpose are you saying we shouldn't give El Salvador?

CONGRESSMAN GEJDENSON: I think what we should do with the Assistance for El Salvador both military and economic is appropriate it in Congress every 120 days. Every quarter if the situation improves every quarter if the situation improves them we can look at continuing the funding. I think that we ought to reduce the funding no matter what. Under a 100 million dollars and we probably have got six months in the pipeline. So we are in no hurry to appropriate new funds. Let's see if President Cristiani can get these people under control, can make some differences and then we can talk about new funds.

MS. WOODRUFF: Is that kind of a short leash Senator, Is that the approach?

SEN. WARNER: I certainly feel that the human rights issue should highly influence the decisions made by the Congress. If we can take this trial and for the moment assume that it is going to be properly handled and don't link our aid to this particular trial for the fear of jeopardizing it and then proceed in a logical and careful manor working closely with President Cristiani and his government to do what we can to support him in his continuing efforts to clean up that army and I agree with you that historically it has been fraud. The professional military in central America are first businessmen, secondly politicians and third military people. Now we have to make that change.

CONGRESSMAN GEJDENSON: And the only way to change that and it is not only El Salvador. It is Guatemala it is all through the region.

SEN. WARNER: That is correct.

CONGRESSMAN GEJDENSON: The military runs the country and if the President steps out of line he is gone and what we have to say here is unless there are major improvements. This isn't a matter than has been evolving for days it has been decades.

SEN. WARNER: It will take some time but the alternative is a blood bath that we could precipitate there.

MS. WOODRUFF: So Senator just again to be specific you are saying see how the trial comes out?

SEN. WARNER: No let there remain in isolation and continue to go in their judicial process. It may take some time but then we can set our appropriations for military as well as economic aid to El Salvador based on human rights, progress that Cristiani is making. So indeed we go in steps.

CONGRESSMAN GEJDENSON: Do you do it in trenches?

SEN. WARNER: Pardon.

CONGRESSMAN GEJDENSON: Do you do it in trenches?

SEN. WARNER: We possibly could look at that but I don't want us to appear as indirect intervention in that country's affairs.

CONGRESSMAN GEJDENSON: It's not intervention. It's what we do with American taxpayer dollars. If we want to give them and support their policies, we give them the money. What we tried to do last year is break the money up in two parts. You get your first six months of appropriation and authorization. If everything is going well, if there is improvement, another vote in the Congress, and then there's a second amount of money. I don't think you're going to get that out of this Congress. This Congress for a decade has suffered through El Salvador with promises that things are improving. And I think the Senator is right. It's not the resolution of this case. I mean, us putting the focus on that case and saying convict these guys or let them go, whatever you do, isn't the answer in El Salvador.

MS. WOODRUFF: Well, if that case is not going to be the telling point one way or another, Senator, what is in your opinion?

SEN. WARNER: It's the progress that this president, this courageous president, makes over a period of time.

MS. WOODRUFF: Just in general you mean?

SEN. WARNER: In many ways. Human rights. I was shown a document, a classified document, that is now being used by the army to drill into their minds the necessity to observe human rights. At the same time they're prosecuting a war against guerrillas so it's difficult to combine the two but they've got the courage and the determination to do it.

MS. WOODRUFF: But what about the timetable that Congressman Gejdenson is describing, that we ought to do it every quarter?

SEN. WARNER: Well, what he's suggesting is I think every 120 days.

CONGRESSMAN GEJDENSON: Every quarter.

SEN. WARNER: Wait a minute, one at a time here. Possibly we'd do it like we do a defense budget, maybe fence some funds, but we've got to do it in a manner that we don't put Pres. Cristiani and his government on an unstable wicket so that his opponents can destabilize him and therefore lose the funds from Congress.

REP. SAM GEJDENSON, [D] Connecticut: I appreciate your concern, but I think it's the opposite actually, that Cristiani gets leverage if he can say to the military if you don't stop violating human rights, if you don't start respecting the elected government, I'm not going to be able to pass you that money whether I want to or not. The FMLN and the government is now at the UN. I think we need a little leverage on our guys as well. We ought to go to the Soviets and try to cut some of those funds. Maybe we can cut a deal with the Soviets. Stop sending money to Cuba, we'll stop sending money to El Salvador, we'll get them all at the table.

SEN. JOHN WARNER, [R] Virginia: Well, be careful because we've got lives at stake, a great many lives of a very proud and struggling independent democracy in that country, and therefore I think we've got to move gradually and carefully and impress upon the army that our funding is dependent on their advancement in human rights, and they've got to stop concentrating on the churches. It's frightful, the way, their history in persecuting the religious people of all denominations.

MS. WOODRUFF: Just quickly.

SEN. WARNER: Yes.

MS. WOODRUFF: Do you think that justice will be done in this particular case, the murder of the six priests?

SEN. WARNER: We can only judge the facts that we now have in hand, one, that this president had the courage to force the justice system to take this case and begin to move swiftly. That's all we can say thus far. We'll have to watch it and I think anyone that now tries to predict the outcome is on shaky ground.

MS. WOODRUFF: So even after you've just been there in the last few days.

SEN. WARNER: It makes no difference whether you've been there or I've been there, this is a very mercurial situation down there and it has been for many many years and, therefore, I suggest patience and prudence but firmness in backing this courageous president.

MS. WOODRUFF: A quick last word from you, Congressman.

CONGRESSMAN GEJDENSON: Well, I think that's the failure of El Salvador, that after a decade and almost $4 billion, we don't know if the president of a country can force a criminal case to justice.

MS. WOODRUFF: Congressman Gejdenson, Sen. Warner, thank you both for being with us. FOCUS - TRYING TRIAL

MR. LEHRER: The McMartin child abuse verdict is next tonight. A jury in Los Angeles today ended the longest criminal trial in U.S. history by acquitting Peggy McMartin Buckey and her son, Raymond. Both were charged with lewd and lascivious conduct for children at the preschool they ran. There were 65 counts in all. The jury found them "not guilty" on 52 counts and were unable to reach a decision on the other 13. We begin our coverage now of the verdict with this report from Los Angeles by Jeffrey Kaye of public station KCET-Los Angeles. [COURTROOM SCENE]

MR. KAYE: Not guilty on the remaining 52 counts. The Buckeys' reactions were restrained. Outside the courtroom shock response from many of the parents who sent their children to the McMartin preschool, the school where the molestations allegedly occurred.

PARENT: He is totally not guilty?

MR. KAYE: You heard the verdict. What's your reaction?

ARVIN COLLINS, Parent: Anger, disappointment, that this country doesn't believe that child abuse is going on every day. This is not a blanket indictment of daycare centers or churches, but it's happening out there every day.

PARENT: If you're a parent and you have to choose between a rock and a hard place, you know, do I let the molester go out and molest more kids, or do I put my kid on a stand again, that's a real tough decision.

MR. KAYE: Seven jurors who sat through the 2 1/2 year long trial said they believed molestations occurred but they thought the prosecution couldn't meet the legal requirement to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

REPORTER: Are you completely convinced that Ray Buckey is innocent?

SALLY CORDOVA, Juror: I never voted innocent; I voted not guilty.

REPORTER: I know briefly, are you convinced that he is not guilty?

MS. CORDOVA: I am not.

REPORTER: You're not convinced?

MS. CORDOVA: I am not convinced he is innocent.

REPORTER: Then how did you, because the way the law is worded, that's why you voted "not guilty"?

MS. CORDOVA: I voted "not guilty" that it wasn't proven to me that he, on the "not guilty" charges, it was not proven to me that he did it. Whether I believe he did it and whether it was proven are very different.

MR. KAYE: The jurors who gave the press conference said tapes of interviews with children showed therapists at Childrens Institute International, CII, asking leading questions, and that made the difference.

JOHN BREESE, Juror: We had videotapes at CII and the interviewers at CII asked leading questions in such a manner that we never got the children's story in their own words.

BRENDA WILLIAMS, Juror: I think if CII tapes had not been entered into evidence and we had not seen those tapes, we would have, I would have been able to believe the testimony of the children a little more. The tapes is what really made me think differently.

MR. KAYE: Prosecutors in the case said they didn't fault their own tactics and they defended the early taped interviews done by the therapists.

LAEL RUBIN, McMartin Prosecutor: Whether they viewed, as some of them did, that some of theinterview techniques may have been overly leading and heavy handed and as a result, caused problems for them, that was their assessment. We had tried to establish during the course of the case that there were leading questions but that they in many instances were the only way to try and get the children to talk.

MR. KAYE: Peggy McMartin Buckey had an emotional reaction to the verdict.

PEGGY McMARTIN BUCKEY: No. We lost everything and my concern was for my son, you know, and to think what they've done to him hurts me terribly because my son would never harm anybody, and so my concern has always been for my son, not me, because it seems as if you're a male, they're going to, you know, think that they have done something more than someone else. And the thing that I cannot really understand is how anybody, if they really thought it through, as I was told, and of course I also know is how anybody could think of a child had been molested, I'm talking about, you know, raped or sodomized, how anybody could think that that child wouldn't have been torn apart, they would have, you know, been in pain, they would have cried, the parents would have known it. There is no way my doctor said that a child could be molested at the school and walk away or not cry out or be torn and it could have killed some of them. That is the thing I don't really understand that people, even the parents, couldn't logically think.

MR. KAYE: It's been nearly six years since the Buckeys were first brought to court. In 1984, the Los Angeles County Grand Jury charged seven defendants with more than 300 counts of child molestation. The seven including Raymond Buckey and his mother, Peggy, were co-owners and teachers at the McMartin Preschool.

ROBERT PHILOBOSIAN, Former L.A. District Attorney: To obtain their silence, these people told the children that their parents would be harmed and in order to back up that threat, small animals were actually slaughtered in the children's presence in order to frighten them into submission.

MR. KAYE: The sensational case announced by the then district attorney focused national attention on the problems of child abuse. Locally the investigation spread beyond the McMartin case. The school was located in the placid oceanside community of Manhattan Beach. Investigators claimed that as many as 1200 children from that area may have been molested, and eventually eight preschools there were closed down after allegations of sexual abuse. During the 18 month long preliminary hearing, the prosecution tried to show that the seven McMartin defendants raped and sodomized children, engaged in satanic rituals and mutilated animals. Fourteen children testified of sexual abuse and threats.

SPOKESPERSON: I must say that I think you all know that we're here on behalf of the falsely accused.

MR. KAYE: While the preliminary hearing dragged on, the accused molesters mounted a public campaign asserting they were victims of a witch hunt. In January 1986, the judge in the preliminary hearing ordered all seven defendants to stand trial but the prosecution changed tactics and decided to drop the charges against all except Raymond and Peggy Buckey.

LAEL RUBIN, McMartin Prosecutor: [January 1986] There is sufficient evidence to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt as to Raymond Buckey and Peggy Buckey, but that it has been our determination that there is insufficient evidence to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt as to the other five defendants.

MR. KAYE: As the case proceeded, there were more twists and turns. Before the trial began, a former prosecutor in the case quit the DA's office and convinced of the defendants' innocence sold his story to a Hollywood script writer, the mother who triggered the case died of an alcohol-related disease, and an investigator committed suicide. Jurors were impaneled after the trial began in April 1987, however, six regular and alternate jurors had to drop out, and with the minimum of twelve in the jury box, there were fears of a mistrial had one been unable to continue. According to the trial judge, William Pounders, the two and a half year long hearing began the longest and most expensive trial in world history. He says that was because the allegations covered a six year period and many of the charges dealt with children too young to express themselves.

JUDGE WILLIAM POUNDERS: Because of the inherent reluctance of adults to believe children, both sides have found it necessary, and I think it's appropriate, to establish all of the circumstances that existed over that entire six year period, so this trial has been largely a pursuit of the corroboration of the children, not only their direct testimony and their parents, but also anything in the nature of physical evidence that could prove or disprove what the children are saying.

MR. KAYE: Raymond Buckey was among 124 witnesses who took the stand. Nine of them were children. The prosecution claimed there was clear evidence of abuse. The defense contended that the children's stories were concocted by overzealous therapists and the medical evidence was unreliable.

PROSECUTOR: What the teachers did to these children is really unfathomable. It's hard to believe.

MR. KAYE: By trial's end the gravity of the case had taken such an emotional toll that two participants, the trial judge and a therapist, used painful dental experiences to describe their feelings.

JUDGE POUNDERS: When I first got the case within the first few months one way I relieve stress is by clenching my teeth, I broke a molar, split it in half, over the tension. And that was early in the game and it has been worse since then.

KEE MacFARLANE, Therapist: It's been a six year marathon root canal without any novocaine. It's been an incredibly difficult process, but I think about how it has affected the children and the families even more, and I think that's what has, that that's the greatest impact it has had on me, is watching how many lives it's put on hold, while it grinds its way slowly through the legal system.

MR. KAYE: Now with the trial over, the prosecution has the option of refiling on the deadlocked charges. Prosecutors said today they haven't made up their minds whether or not they'll be doing that. Prosecutors say they'll consider the comments against jurors among other factors. Here's an extended excerpt of that press conference by some of the jurors.

REPORTER: The jurors by a show of hands felt that the children had been molested but that there was not enough proof. Which felt the children had been molested and which felt the children had not been molested?

REPORTER: Some children? How many children have been molested?

REPORTER: All?

JUROR: In one sense or another, by someone, yes.

REPORTER: All the jurors indicate that all of them have been molested.

JURORS: Not all of them, some of them.

JUROR: We're just speaking for the ones that are here right now.

MS. CORDOVA, Juror: We're just saying that we believe that it's possible that these children were molested, and it may not have been proven that the defendants were the cause or if someone else was. It just wasn't proven to completion. I don't know how to say it.

REPORTER: Is there any of the jurors who voted guilty on any of the mistried counts who's here today? [Ms. Cordova raising hand] Okay. Could I ask you, do you feel that justice was served in the outcome of the case?

MS. CORDOVA: I feel we did the best we could and what they do with the mistrial charges is up to them. I did what I could and that's all I can say. I did vote obviously "not guilty" on the other, the "not guilty" counts.

REPORTER: Was there something missing from the case that could have resulted in a conviction on any one count?

MS. CORDOVA: You'd have to ask the people that voted "not guilty".

REPORTER: Let's ask the man next to you.

JUROR: We did not -- my first wife died during this trial and I'm happily remarried now.

JUROR: Myself, I work rotating shifts, and for me I got every weekend off. I'm used to getting one weekend off a month, working different shifts all the time and just having time off with my family was nice.

REPORTER: When you went into the jury room, were you already pretty much in agreement with each other, or was there a lot of arguments that went on, and the second part of the question, how did you approach this massive number of counts?

BRENDA WILLIAMS, Juror: First of all, there was no argument. The jurors got along excellently so contrary to all the horror stories you've heard about what happens in the jury room, it didn't happen with us. I went into the jury room as confused and uncertain as I was the day I first sat in the jury box, the first day of this trial. I felt that I had missed out on something, maybe I had dozed during some important testimony, and I was hoping that some of my fellow jurors had something in their notes that I didn't have in mine that could make it all come together and we just decided which count we would start on first and we just worked from there. And I think we thoroughly discussed the counts and we discussed them and discussed them and discussed them and then voted several times.

JUROR: When I walked into that jury room for deliberation -- [Momentary Network Difficulty]

MR. LEHRER: Now again to the judge in the case, William Pounders. He's with us for a News Maker interview from Los Angeles. I spoke with him a few minutes ago. What do you think of the jury's verdict today, sir?

JUDGE POUNDERS: I think it shows that the jury did a superb job in analyzing the evidence and doing a very methodical analysis of the physical evidence, and the testimony of the witnesses. They did a superb job, it took them nine weeks, and I'm very happy with what they've done.

MR. LEHRER: Was the end result what you expected after listening to the witnesses and examining the evidence?

JUDGE POUNDERS: There was no way to forecast what the jury would actually do. This kind of testimony, the conflicts that existed here, would support any decision by this jury whatsoever.

MR. LEHRER: So you weren't surprised that they acquitted him, right?

JUDGE POUNDERS: I wouldn't have been surprised at anything they did, no. This was as an appropriate a decision as the contrary would have been based on the evidence.

MR. LEHRER: You mean if they had found them guilty on these 52 counts, you wouldn't have been any more surprised than you were on what they did do, is that right?

JUDGE POUNDERS: That's correct. The evidence was there, the issue was credibility. The credibility was determined by the jury very effectively.

MR. LEHRER: Did the Buckeys receive a fair trial, Judge?

JUDGE WILLIAM POUNDERS: I believe they did. That was my jobover the last 2 1/2 years, was to make sure they received a fair trial. And I haven't heard any complaints from them so far.

MR. LEHRER: Why did it take two and a half years, sir?

JUDGE POUNDERS: I think the essential reason is that the allegations covered an entire six year period and the pursuit of the evidence over that period looking for the corroboration or the absence of it took a tremendous amount of time. The normal case takes place in a matter of seconds, a murder, a rape, a robbery is then and over. In this case, the children could not specify the time so we covered a six year period entirely, everything seven or more people did over six years.

MR. LEHRER: Were you consciously aware of the fact that my goodness, this thing is taking an awful lot of time, and did you try to speed it up in any way?

JUDGE POUNDERS: Absolutely. I knew obviously from the preliminary hearing which was the longest in California history that we would be faced with possibly the longest trial in California history. From the very beginning, from the very first day the case came into my courtroom, I limited the issues, I limited the number of witnesses, I limited the years that could be explored, and I finally set deadlines. Ultimately, I eliminated from the trial 50 witnesses that were requested by one trial or the other. A hundred and twenty-one testified and I cut out fifty more witnesses.

MR. LEHRER: Looking back on it now, Judge, should this time, this two and a half years, and the estimated $15 million that this trial cost be considered a waste of time and a waste of money?

JUDGE POUNDERS: Absolutely not. I think we'll learn a lot of lessons from the time this case took and the amount of money that it cost and we'll do a better job in the future. This is probably a point of departure from future trials. I think we'll always do a better job with this as a reference point.

MR. LEHRER: What lessons were learned from this trial?

JUDGE POUNDERS: There were probably many lessons learned. One is that I think the judiciary lacks sufficient tools to assure a short trial when a short trial is appropriate. Beyond that, I think also and probably the best benefit to society is an increased awareness of the possibility that this kind of crime can occur on a massive basis and so as a result, parents will not leave their children behind without checking out the circumstances.

MR. LEHRER: And yet some of the parents of the children involved in this case said today after the verdict that the legal system let them down. What would you say to them?

JUDGE POUNDERS: I think that's true and I'm not sure how that can be corrected. The biggest problem in the case with regard to letting the parents down is in analyzing the testimony of the children. That's going to be difficult in an adult arena no matter how we do it, but I think we can do it better than we have now, but it may take legislation to do that and a decision by the United States Supreme Court as to what systems are appropriate for that purpose.

MR. LEHRER: You mean the simple question of whether or not a child is a credible witness when he or she tells a story?

JUDGE POUNDERS: That's correct. The credibility of children is at issue and the way you get the testimony is an important aspect of that and whether or not the system is going to demand corroboration of the children. If a child's word by itself is not sufficient, I think we're in deep trouble.

MR. LEHRER: And do you believe that in this particular case that went to the heart of what the problem was, whether or not these children could be believed, and there was no way to establish whether or not they were telling the truth or not?

JUDGE POUNDERS: That is exactly the problem we faced in the search that was done over a six year period for physical corroboration of their testimony. What the children said by itself was sufficient to convict the defendants if it was believed. The credibility was the entire issue.

MR. LEHRER: But why is that any different than say an adult witness? An adult, it's the same story, is it not?

JUDGE POUNDERS: It's the same story but the adults that are sitting on juries tend to want something more from children than the mere statement of some crime. They look for corroboration of a child.

MR. LEHRER: Judge, during the course of this trial, you said, "The case has poisoned everyone who had contact with it. By that, I mean every witness, every litigant, and every judicial officer. It's a very upsetting case." Now do you still feel that way now that it's over?

JUDGE POUNDERS: Absolutely. At least two people lost their lives during this trial and I think because of the trial. One man committed suicide with a gun and we have his suicide note in exhibit before the court, not before the jury. I think the other death is directly attributable to this case as well. But that's the greatest suffering. Everyone else suffered in this case as well. I don't think anyone can say they came away unscathed.

MR. LEHRER: What about you?

JUDGE POUNDERS: I'm included.

MR. LEHRER: In what way were you scathed?

JUDGE POUNDERS: As a minimum, I lost contact with my family. Over the last three years and more, my family life has been distorted by the process that we went through here. The day to day stress was unbearable.

MR. LEHRER: But as a judge and a member of the legal profession, now that it's over do you feel that the process worked, or are you ready to throw up your hands and say, my goodness, we've all been poisoned and this was a terrible, terrible thing?

JUDGE POUNDERS: Well, we have all been poisoned, but I do agree that the process works. I'm not upset with the process. I think it can be refined. But the poisoning effect of the McMartin trial is something that we could never eliminate. If this kind of thing arises again, the same thing will occur.

MR. LEHRER: The exact same thing will occur?

JUDGE POUNDERS: I think so. The poisoning effect is tremendous. The allegation of molestation of children is something that hits at the heart of every American. We are very upset by that. The process that we undertook to reveal the truth in this case is something that can't be so substantially changed that people are not going to be affected by their contact with the case. Jurors don't want to sit on cases like this, I don't think judges are happy to try them. The people involved directly in the litigation are upset by it as well.

MR. LEHRER: Do you believe that the truth was revealed?

JUDGE POUNDERS: As much as it can be in any courtroom, yes.

MR. LEHRER: What happens now to the 13 counts that the jurors could not agree on?

JUDGE POUNDERS: On the 31st of this month, the District Attorney's Office is due back in my court with the defendants to determine whether or not there should be a retrial of those 13 counts. Depending upon what that recommendation is, the Superior Court and specifically the presiding judge and the supervising judge of the criminal division will make a separate determination. If the determination from both sides is to continue with another trial, that's what will take place.

MR. LEHRER: Judge Pounders, thank you very much for being with us tonight.

JUDGE POUNDERS: You're welcome. RECAP

MR. LEHRER: Again, the major stories of this Thursday, as we just heard, a jury in Los Angeles returned a verdict of "not guilty" in the McMartin Preschool child abuse case, ending a trial that went on for two and a half years. Pres. Bush used the word "charade" to describe a proposal to cut Social Security taxes. New figures showed the 1989 inflation rate was 4.6 percent, the highest it's been in eight years. It was fueled largely by higher food and energy prices. Israel's Defense Minister said in Washington today he expected no cuts in U.S. aid to his country and the Soviet Union called up more troops today because of the continuing violence in Azerbaijan. Good night, Judy.

MS. WOODRUFF: Good night, Jim. That's our Newshour for tonight. We'll be back tomorrow night. I'm Judy Woodruff. Thank you and good night.