as they were playing, katherine notices a man with dreadlocks walk by. and she notices this man has nothing in his hands. she continues playing when all of the sudden, ladies and gentlemen, the unthinkable happens. boom, boom, boom, boom, boom, boom, boom, over and over and over again. >> a prosecutor describes the shots that hang out as little sherdavia jenkins ran for her life. damon darling is accused of holding the ak, firing the ak,

the bullets from which went into her neck. she's dead. he's on trial, and he's not the only player in this case. it is all coming up right now on "open court." good morning everyone. welcome to "open court." i'm ashleigh banfield. it's nice to have you with us on this wednesday morning. i wish it were under better circumstances. the fair that we bring you is never pleasant. little shea jenkins dead. a a little girl playing outside on a saturday afternoon in the summertime, takes a bullet to the neck in something described as gang land violence. who is cruising around a housing complex with an ak? if the allegations are correct against this man, damon darling,

and another fellow who pled out in this case, also with a gun, not an ak but a .44 mag. the bullets went flying and there were kids in the cross fire, kids who knew well enough that when those soinds rang out, they were indeed gunshots and you need to run for cover. little kids who know this. enough about that, that complex itself is a story unto its own. this particular story, going live in this trial in miami has a lot of different issues that you will wickedly be able to chew on. here is beth karas with the details. >> it's not easy when you lose a loved one, especially in a senseless way like this. >> reporter: david jenkins's daughter was playing outside her home in a miami housing project when a gun battle erupted nearby. 9-year-old shef dave yeah jenkins was struck by a lull let from an ak-47, her death causing outrage in a neighborhood already riddled with violence. >> i'm asking everyone, if you

know something, please come forward. take back your community. take it back before it's too far gone and too late. >> reporter: two men were charged with second degree murder in the girl's death. prosecutors say lee row larose and damon darling were involved in the deadly shootout, and it was darling, they claim, that fired the fatal shot. defense attorney jonathan meltz claims his client shot in self-defense. >> what are you faced to do faced by the barrel of a gun? you can run and get shot in the back, you can beg for your life or you can meet force with force. >> reporter: larose has pleaded guilty to second degree murder and agreed to testify against darling in exchange for only seven years behind bars. darling could face a life sentence if convicted. but for the parents of little sherdavia, that is little consolation. >> why you took my baby? she didn't do nothing wrong. she did not do nothing.

>> on the contrary, shea jenkins did everything right in her life. she was a little honor role student and she was one of the highest scorers in grades in her class. the rest of her siblings, same story, all overachievers, from a family trying to make ends meet and ultimately get out of the projects. joining us is beth karas live in miami at the courthouse where the trial got under way live yesterday. beth, we started to see the witnesses lining up for the prosecution, including the sister of shea who was present when those gunshots rang out as well as her mother. it must have been a very emotional day in the courtroom as they began the case. >> reporter: well, indeed. testimony began yesterday and it will resume shortly. katherine jenkins, sherdavia jenkins's younger sister, 11 years old, she did testify. she was outside playing on that

fateful day with her sister and a friend when she says she saw a man with dreadlocks walk by. >> when is the next time you looked up? >> when i heard gunshots. >> where was the man with dreads at that point? >> past us, facing away from us. >> where did your friend josette go? >> in her house. >> where did you go? >> in my house. >> what about shea? >> she tried to run, but she didn't make it. >> so it turns out ha the man with dreadlocks that she saw walk by and then heard shots fired is leroy larose, also known as "yellow man." he was one of the two defendants in this case. two weeks ago he took a plea to the top count of second degree murder. he is expected to testify for the prosecution. he says he was firing in self-defense. cher dasherdavia jenkins fell a threshold of her apartment pleading profusely from a wound to the right side of her neck which the prosecutor yesterday

in opening statements characterized as an internal decapitation. and she died in her mother's arms. >> she was paralyzed as i understand by that bullet as well. did the medical examiner not extract that bullet from her spine? >> reporter: well, it was extracted i believe from her spine. her spine must have been severed. we'll hear that testimony later in the week. >> and katherine jenkins, as you said, she's three years older than she was at the time of the shooting. i think she was eight at the time of the shooting. but she seemed to be remarkable as a witness on the stand. this is not the first time that she's taken the stand and been in a courtroom under this kind of stress and pressure. >> reporter: that's right. although it's the first time she testified in front of a packed public gallery and a jury. she did testify two weeks ago at a hearing on this motion to dismiss where the defense wanted all the charges dismissed against darling because he was standing his ground, was firing in self-defense and had a right

to do so and that the shooting isn't a murder as a result, that he was justified. he lost that motion, obviously. that's why the case moved to trial. she did testify as the first witness at that hearing, did a very good job then as well. her testimony was pretty similar. it was -- what was elicited was the same facts each time. >> so she told the story of what happened to her, to her sister, when the gunfire began. but ultimately, beth, was she able to say anything about the man who is standing trial for the second degree murder of her big sister? did she identify him? did she see him carrying the ak? could she say that's damon darling and i saw him shoot my sister? >> reporter: no. she did not make an identification. he would have been, i would argue, a little too far away. also she's running for her life inside and darling would have been to her back. >> it's never easy to cross examine the witnesses who are family members or friends of the

victims in the case. but how did that cross examination go over? was it delicate? was it's moeshl? was it straight to the point? how did little katherine hold up? >>. >> reporter: well katherine wasn't cross examined. she and her mother who followed her in testimony were not. they certainly portrayed the scene, the trauma of that day. but they don't really advance the case against darling. they don't make identifications of darling. it is important to establish the shooting and what happened and the attempts to save her life. all of that is relevant. but in terms of the defense and what the defense needs to elicit in this case, they didn't need to cross examine and didn't cross examine mrs. jenkins or katherine. >> that is fascinating. i'm thinking back to the testimony that i saw from her on the stand in the pretrial motion to dismiss. and she was asked those specific questions. there was pros examination. in that sense it was by the prosecutor. >> right.

actually she was called by the defense in that case. sometimes tactics are different in front of a jury. the defense doesn't want to be seen even in a mild cross examination to be doing anything to cause further discomfort to family members. if it's not necessary, why bother. >> a very good point you make. you're right. it just also underscores how much a trial is actually a production and also a show. joining me now is tim back can't, a former brooklyn prosecutor, now a law professor at west point. he's kind of smart. he co-wrote the "guide to criminal procedure in new york." you wrote the book on criminal procedure literally. there's also that aspect shah is sort of unwritten, and that is how to appeal to the senses of the -- there are only six in this case -- the six men and women who will sit in ultimate judgment of this defendant. you've got to be very, very careful about those poor people left in the wake of this tragedy. >> you do from both the

perspective of the prosecutor and the defense. in this case we see a defendant claiming self-defense. but in claiming the self-defense he has to say he possessed an ak-47 rifle. as you probably know, ashleigh, from your time in afghanistan and my time in afghanistan, there are loads of them around and they're not used for hunting. they're not used largely for self-defense. they're used for hunting people, not animals certainly. and so the defense in this case has to be able to say that my client can possessed a weapon that he was using to hunt people. but at the same time claim self-defense. it's a little bit of a contrary defense. >> especially when you're a convicted felon. >> he has a bad record from the past. but his record from the past unfortunately for the prosecution will not come out unless he testifies. i would suspect he would not testify. so the defense and the jury will be left with saying that for

some reason this defendant had an ak-47 walking down the streets in florida in miami and he just happened to need it. it's a difficult defense to make on one hand. on the other hand, the prosecution still has to say, once the defense is asserted, that this defendant did not need to use particular self-defense. and the witnesses they have to be able to say that are very suspect, especially the witness with whom they made the deal. >> i'm glad you mentioned the afghanistan, not only because it was great that you have been there, you did all that time in kabul, you're right. there's an absolute nexus between what i'm about to say in this trial and what we saw in afghanistan. everybody is armed other than the journalists. if you're not an afghan armed with the knock-off, you are in big trouble. the reason many of those people have them is because they do fear for their lives and security because of their unpoliced zones.

that is life in afghanistan. not so much in miami. it is not normal in miami to have an ak, as you mentioned. and these six jurors are going to know damn well that there's something wrong with a guy who happens to have what they call a chopper in that kind of a housing complex. they're not going to be a whole lot sympathetic to somebody who says i was just trying to defend myself, are they? >> they won't be. but that can work to the defense's favor. >> how? >> because in this case, there's going to be somebody testifying against the defendant who was presumably just as bad as the defendant. in fact, he pleaded guilty and took seven years on a second degree murder conviction. it's going to be slightly difficult for the prosecution to come in and say that, if you have a choice between two people, pick the defendant that we want you to pick as the guilty person even though we've made a deal with someone who we think is not quite as guilty.

now, clearly they're both guilty of something. and the one that the prosecution picked has already pleaded guilty to murder. the jury is going to hear that. it's not going to hear about any prior crimes of the defendant. so i agree with you completely that the defense will be put in a tough spot because people in miami don't have guns. but the reality is the jurors will come from the neighborhood and they'll understand that there are a lot of guns in miami and that there are some people who use the guns for self-defense. >> it may be normal in the pork n beans complex where the shootings are fast and furious and in broad daylight. >> beth karas, i want to bring you into this question. we touched on it yesterday. i think it's significant in this case, specifically for the defense in this case. what tim says and in every case it's very hard to bring in prior bad acts, hard to bring up the fact that the defendant is a convicted felon unless he takes the stand and opens himself up to it. in this particular case you have

a charge whereby the ultimate defense for this guy is he was just standing his ground. but in the law in florida, in order to say that you legitimately can stand your ground in self-defense, it says a person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity. but damon darling from the get-go by holding that gun as a convicted felon, an unregistered ak, is engaged in that kind of activity, unlawful activity. how are they going to reconcile this in this courtroom? >> reporter: well, the judge is permitting the prosecution to introduce one, not both, certificate of conviction of a prior felony from the year before the shooting, possession with intent to sell marijuana. that will be to to refute the "stand your ground" defense because the prosecution says he was engaged in unlawful activity. if he can't assert "stand your

ground," he had a duty to retreat under the regular self-defense. according to the state, he provoked the situation. he wasn't firing in self-defense anyway. so the jury is going to learn, assuming he continues to assert "stand your ground" that he is a convicted felon. >> unless the jury doesn't hear well or unless the prosecutor doesn't explain it well, it's going to be right there in black and white for everyone to see. stand your ground requires you to be a law-abiding person at that moment. and this guy at that moment was not. that's clear, isn't it? >> that's clear, right. the jury is going to know, he was a convicted felon at the time he was possessing that weapon and firing it. now, the defense is also going to fall back on necessity. what are you supposed to do, if you're a convicted felon and somebody is firing at you, let them just shoot you? he armed himself and fired in

self-defense, that is their position. >> well, i think some of the testimony we're going to hear, beth -- i don't know. i'm waiting for it, is that he armed himself before any bullets started flying. there's all sorts of testimony that's going to be coming up that he asked someone to get him a chopper or someone provided him with a chopper well before bullets started flying. in any case, 9-year-old sherdavia jenkins was just playing outside in the middle of the day with her sister and friend when she was caught in deadly cross fire. we hear similar stories on the news almost every day. in baltimore, a 5-year-old girl shot by a spray bullet during an argument by two juvenile offenders. last week in new york city a mother struck and killed by a stray bullet from a gang fight. she died trying to shield her 9-year-old son from the gunfire. today's question of the day, how can you keep your children safe in this dangerous world like we're seeing unravel in this case?

logon to cnn.com/crime, click on open court. write up a brief answer. let us know what you think. if you do a great job, we'll read responses throughout the day from facebook. this particular question of the day, you'll see your words up on the screen with your name and state. join the conversation. hit become a fan, too. join that whole group. back after this.

when i ar r50i6d, rooifd when i arrived there were a lot of people on the street. they were pointing to the house where the victim was. when i approached the i do, she was laying in the doorway bleeding from her neck, lifeless in her mother's lap. >> so the first responders saw that scene and, of course, her mother's lap was the last place that this little victim would ever be before she closed her eyes and died. the little victim, the age of 9. cross fire, gang land style

warfare in front of your house while you're playing with your friends and your little sister. in any case, that mother took the stand in the prosecution case, one of the first witnesses to lay out how all this happened for the jury. i don't know how she could have done it. but she did it. cher roane jenkins got up there, sat down and composed herself and told the story as the prosecutor asked her to of what happened on that day, july 1st, three years ago. >> good afternoon. please state your name for the record. >> cher ron jenkins. >> are you employed, ma'am? >> yes. >> how are you employed? >> fcaa, florida christian association of america. >> what do you do for the florida christian associates of america? >> aftercare. >> an aftercare teacher with them? >> yes. >> ms. jenkins, are you a mom? >> yes. >> how many children do you have? >> four. >> can you tell us their name

and current ages. >> cher ronda williams, 19, darrell petty, 17, katherine jenkins 11, david jenkins junior 8, sherdavia jenkins, 9. >> mrs. jenkins, when was sherdavia born, march 22nd, 1997. >> where? >> miami, florida. >> here in dade county? >> yes. >> did she live most of her life or all of her life in dade county sdm. >> yes, all of her life. >> i know this is a difficult topic, but i'd like to take you back to the day she died. that day were you home with your children? >> yes, i was. >> were all of your children home or only some of your children? >> some of my children. >> which children were home? >> darrell, katherine and sherdavia. >> what day of the week was it? >> saturday. >> was that july 1st, 2006? >> yes, it is. >> were the girls inside of the house or outside of the house? >> outside playing. >> were you watching them? >> yes, i was. >> and what were you doing?

>> i was inside folding up clothes and putting away other laundry. >> and where had you instructed the girls to stay while they played? >> on the porch. >> while you were inside did you check on them occasionally to see that they were on that porch? >> yes, i did. >> how often were you checking on them? >> about every 15 minutes. >> what was your address at the time? >> 1242 northwest 65th terrace. >> is that a residential area? >> yes, it is. >> how would you describe the area? are there a lot of families there? do children play outside and live and stay in that area? >> yes, there was a lot of kids. it was kind of quiet. it wasn't too much busy. >> at the time that the girls were playing outside, did there come a time that you heard shots ring out? >> yes, i did. i thought they were fire crackers. i didn't pay too much attention. >> this was july 1st. so was that around the 4th of july? >> yes, it was. >> was it normal in that area to hear fire crackers going off at that time?

>> yes, especially during the day. >> did there come a time where you heard a commotion in your living room? >> no, i didn't. >> what happened when you went to your living room? >> when i came past the living room, my oldest son said, mom, shea's been shot. and i didn't see anybody until after i saw her coming in through the front door, collapsed on the floor. >> were you on the phone with mr. jenkins, your husband at the time? >> yes, i was. >> where was he? >> at work. >> do you know what kind of job he had at the time? >> he was doing security. >> was he a security guard somewhere? >> yes, he was. >> was that nearby to your house? >> no, it wasn't. >> did you call 911? >> yes, i did. >> did you try to assist your daughter up until fire rescue arrived? >> yes, i did. >> what did you do, ma'am? >> i tried to do cpr, and i tried to get her awake to my responses.

>> was she responding to you? >> no, she wasn't. >> did there come a time where you tried to put towels on her injury? >> yes, i told katherine to bring me towels so i could put it toward the injury where she got shot. she brought me many towels and a couple of sheets there to put to her neck. >> may i approach the witness? >> yes, you may. >> [ inaudible ]. >> ma'am, i'm showing you a photo. do you recognize this photo? >> yes, i do. >> what is it a photo of? >> my daughter, sherdavia jenkins. >> does it accurately reflect the way she looked on the day she died? >> yes, she did. >> at this time, the state would move the exhibit into evidence? >> no objection. >> admitted without objection.

>> may i publish it to the jury, your honor? >> yes, you may. mrs. jenkins, were you present when fire rescue arrived and tried to assist your daughter? >> yes, i was. >> did there come a time when they took you out of the house? >> yes. they told me to come outside so they could ask me questions of what happens. >> did there come a time later in the day where you learned your daughter had died as a result of her injuries. yes, later he said lisa, you know sherdavia is dead. >> i don't know -- again, i'll repeat it -- how she does it. but she is doing it. and she's doing a great job of testifying. don't forget, this woman has had

to wait three years for justice in this case, and she's not getting it yet. this trial is just beginning. kim bakken, how do you bring a mother of a homicide victim to a courtroom and how do you deal with these kinds of questions? how do you prepare her to make sure that it's not just going to be a disaster? i don't think i could do it. personally i just don't think i could do it. >> it's very difficult because the mother has a tendency, and relatives have a tendency to think about the individual as still living. but you're asking her to testify essentially about someone who is dead. one of the closest persons to her. >> her baby. >> you see this testimony from here. and it sounds a little bit kurt and scripted in a way. vic times in these kind of cases and their families are only able to go on through compartmentizing their tragedy. so this mother in testifying for

the prosecution might seem as though she's not responsive to the questions, but she's doing her best to get out minimal bare facts about her daughter. >> the prosecutor brings this picture over to her and says who is dead. >> very difficult. that's the main purpose for this witness testifying, that is to say, a person who was killed was my daughter. you need that technically for identification purposes to establish that there was a death in the case. it's a very simple thing to do. you could do it in a minute, but the prosecution in the trophies and talking a little bit about her life is trying to bring out for the jury that this was a real person who died and not some entity -- >> statistic. >> -- that we sometimes have a tendency to think about, murder equals death. a person died. this a real person. the mother can do it and it's very difficult for her. >> beth karas, if you can jump in on that. you and i talked yesterday briefly about the history and

the background of little shea jenkins, the background of her entire family. these were really good american family members. they were leaders in their school. the family was hard working. they were really making it in this world and s7trying, as lie shea's grandmother said live on this program, to eventually get out of the poork n beans complex because it was so dangerous. this jury is not going to hear a lot about little shea and her background. why is that? >> no. it's usually not relevant in a case like this, a murder case. murder case is basically an assault where the victim dies. in an assault case you'd have the victim on the stand. they would learn about her only if they stick around, if they convict damon darling and stick around for sentencing when victim impact testimony or statements can be delivered to the court. but it's really -- it's not relevant and can be prejudicial to the defense for the jury to learn what a great little

student she was and she was a chess champion at 6 years old and extremely well mannered and well liked. she was acing all kind of exam ts and she was particularly good in math and she wanted to be a web designer with a lot of artistic talent. for the jury to learn that, it would outrage them perhaps even more and more likely they'll convict. it's too prejudicial for the jury to learn. victims have fought for years and now have the right to give victim impact testimony or statements to the court at sentencing. they have a voice. but that voice is either at a the penalty phase in a capital case or at sentencing in other cases. >> the mom is just about the best way to try to convey, as tim bakken just said, just who this little girl was and what exactly happened. and maybe through some way they'll be able to see through this woman who is clearly so affected by this and see how damaging this crime has been to

her and her family. it's also very damaging to the community. none of us needs to hear a story about little children playing on their front yards and being shot in cross fire by aks. so why is it then? why is it so hard to get witnesses to talk? why is it so hard to get beyond this snitch phenomenon, especially in communities like the pork n beans. we'll have a special guest with us, the executive director of the miami-dade crime stoppers is going to address that question specifically in just a moment.

i'm asking everyone, if you know something, please come forward. take back your community. take it back before it's too far gone and too late. take it back before it claims the life of more innocent children. >> they rallied around this crime trying to clean up, not only this community, but others. how question of the day, how can you keep your children safe in a dangerous world? just logon to cnn.com/crime. click on "open court," and have your say. we'll read some of your comments

later on. live on the program also we're reading facebook comments. if you haven't done so go to facebook.com/tvashleigh. we have great comments that have come into our facebook page. one of them, i can't believe this mother has to sit there and go through these details. i know she has to, but how awful for her. just some of the comments hearing that testimony. not only that, it's difficult for this whole community in more ways than one as it turns out. joining me now outside the florida courthouse is richard masten, the executive director of miami-dade crimestoppers, also the former miami shores police chief. thank you so much for taking the time to talk to me about this case, sir. i have to ask you, one of the things i found so surprising was that one of the witnesses to this case was actually jailed because she didn't want to testify. it's shocking to me. but i guess it's not so shocking in certain communities.

can you sort of help me get through that? >> absolutely. good morning, ashleigh. there is pervasive, pervasive attitude of noncooperation with the police in these cases. it's i think as a result of a number of things. you can go on the internet and buy the no-snitching t-shirts and caps. it's a prevalent theme. and a number of music individvit has been embraced by this generation, they do not want to give information to the police under any circumstances. i believe the retaliation is talked about a lot. but i believe, as much as the fear of retaliation, it is the culture of noncooperation with the police. >> richard, does that culture of noncooperation with police, is it so entrenched in that community that it would actually super seed the devastation over the death of a child, a child

who took an ak bullet to her neck. wouldn't that dissipate in the wake of the realities of this crime? >> well, unfortunately i believe it does. we've seen it in a number of cases, unfortunately, even after shea's murder. it does seem to be a more powerful attitude, and certainly in this particular case where they actually -- the one witness was faced with jail, that was quite unusual. but i think it was on the part of the state attorney trying to send a very strong message that you do need to qucooperate. if you have information about a crime, you do need to come forward. it's everyone's responsibility. >> so in the case of the woman who was jailed, it's thought that she -- i'm not going to speak for her at all. but it is thought that she feared, like you said, the retaliation aspect, more than she feared the idea of being a

snitch. that there is such a panic among what can happen to you if you at all lend a hand into incarcerating someone. is there any way to get beyond that? is there any way to protect these people? is what exactly does exist out there for witnesses of violent crimes in order to make sure they don't become the next victim? >> well, certainly there are witness protection programs available on the federal level, the state level and somewhat on the local level. it is -- it's a very expensive proposition to provide round-the-clock witness protection, but i don't think you really can put a price on things when you're talking about these kind of tragedies. there are these protection programs. how do we change it? we've got to change the thinking, change the culture. we have to get the message starting with our young people -- get the message out to our young people that you do need to cooperate with the authorities if you have information in crimes like

these. that's the starting point of turning things around in the neighborhoods. >> richard, let me ask you, you mentioned young people. i have a facebook comment from casey watching our show right now live. she's writing into me. my cousin was murdered a year ago. the trial is coming up and her children who are 11 and 13 -- one of theness withes we just heard from yesterday, shea's sister is now 11 and she took the stand. back to casey. the children, 11 and 13, have to testify. it will be hard for the whole family. i guess it has to be done to put this person away. but i wish there was another way. again, that's a facebook comment from casey. richard, is it something that 11 and 13-year-olds also fear, retaliation or the snitch culture? i mean kids this young? >> oh, absolutely. certainly when it comes to the no-snitch culture that we see particularly in the music

industry and the entertainment industry. and they've heard it and they've seen it. and really in the innocence of their youth probably wouldn't embrace it. but it is so pervasive. it's not surprising at all. >> so with the crime stoppers set up, most people should know by now your brand is pervasive. you can't watch television today without seeing something about crimestoppers, it is anonymous. the tips are anonymous. it doesn't mean you're going to get a phone call from the police. there are rewards. are these messages somehow being lost in communities like this? >> it's difficult to get the message out often enough. but it is absolutely the case that someone who calls the crimestoppers tip line will never be asked their name or any information. they will only be asked what they know about a particular crime. they'll be able to in many cases

collect a reward. but we need to get more of the message out there. it's still doing battle with this no-snitch culture and has been for some time. >> this is probably an unfair question. i know back in 2006 when this crime happened you were not with crimestoppers. do you have any knowledge about whether tips did come in about this particular crime or whether crimestoppers was able to assist the police in investigating? >> ashleigh, you say you're posing an unfair question. let me give you an unfair answer. >> that's fair. >> central to the success of crimestoppers is that we don't make comments about tips we receive. we go that far. we don't talk about whether we have or we haven't. and it was a couple of years before i was here. so i have the -- i guess the advantage of saying i don't really know. but we are very regularly

subpoenaed and asked by the court to give them some about our tipsters, even as recently as last week i had a federal case where they were trying to get to the information about our tipster. and it's -- for me it's fairly easy, i can't tell you something i don't know. that is the working mechanism of crimestoppers all across the country. we do not require information. >> i completely appreciate that answer. i expected that answer. hopefully that answer will help other people realize how serious you mean business when you say it's anonymous. there are rewards. it's a great program. if you have seen these kinds of things. if you can help in an investigation. if you fear retaliation. if you fear the snitch culture, you can still go to crimestoppers and let them help the police. richard masten, i can't thank you enough for that. i hope you can stay because i have a bunch more questions as we continue on through that? can you stay beyond the break? >> yes. i'd be happy to. >> that's what i like to hear.

our 13th juror question today as well. did the testimony of the victim's family help the prosecution in this case? logon to cnn.com/crime, click on 13th juror. no numbers on the board right now because they're yourts to make. click on the 13th juror button. you'll be the first numbers up there, folks. we're back in three. (announcer) listening to you.

it's how we save you money nationwide insurance. my name is sandy garza and i am on your side. only nationwide gives you an on your side review. you tell us about your life and your insurance. sometimes you don't have enough coverage. or you may even have too much. we'll let you know. we listen and build you a custom policy of just the coverage you need at the right price for you. (announcer) only a nationwide insurance agent can give you an on your side review. call this number to save up to $523. we take a look at the policy and look to see if there's any gaps in coverage. you know, in addition,

we talk about discounts that are available. and we try to save you money. i mean we really do. (anncr:) call this number now or call a local agent. switch today and save up to $523. listening and saving you money is how... ♪ nationwide is on your side ♪

she was very articulate. sweet as far as good personality, very smart. she was quiet, quiet in her own way. she enjoyed things that most little kids her age would not. she enjoyed reading. she was an expert chess player. she was an artist, just a granddaughter that every grandmother wants. >> every grandmother would want a granddaughter like shea jenkins. that is her grandmother talking about her. we had a facebook question about whether this mother was going to be able to manage getting through this trial. in fact, you were right on facebook when you made the comments that yesterday the grandmother actually mentioned that the family members are not going to be able to be there for every moment of that trial. the mother likely will not be present in court when some of that more difficult testimony is elicited on the stand.

god bless her for even being able to walk into that courtroom and give the testimony that she did. arnold yen on the other hand, a bit of a pro, csi guy, crime scene investigator for the miami police department. he's no stranger to the way it works. you arrive on the scene and start to process everything from fingerprints to guns to shell casings. that's what they lay out right here. you'll see cross examination right now of mr. yen as he answers the questions of the attorney jonathan meltz. have a look. >> while we're discussing the apartment, i believe you told the jury that you went into 1303. >> that is correct. >> you found a firearm in there? >> a firearm. >> it was a shotgun, determined to have nothing to do with this case? >> correct. >> tell the jury what you found within apartment 1300. >> we did not go into 1300.

>> tell them what you found in 1301? >> we did not enter. >> 1304? >> we did not enter. >> so let me switch with you. give you defense c. with regard to the items there, tell the jury what are they? what do you classify them for purposes of your investigation? >> a stool, a yellow plastic chair, a milk carton and what appears to be a half of a -- i would call it a footrest. >> small tan metal bench. >> metal bench. >> for purposes of the case, did you leave the stuff alone or did you take action? >> i impounded them. >> that means physically, you take them, box them and remove them? >> yes, sir. >> they're within the police department's property control right now? >> yes, sir. >> once you got back to the police department, did you just leave the boxes in the corner of your office or did you do anything?

>> no, sir. they were processed for fingerprints again. and once the fingerprints were [ inaudible ]. >> you say fingerprints again. >> no. related to the casing. >> okay. so now we're talking about two separate analysis or i guess how you call it trace evidence collection by you? >> correct. >> forget analysis. that's later on at the lab, right? >> yes, sir. >> you're responsible or impressed with the responsibility for trace evidence. could you tell the jury what that would be? >> trace evidence is any kind of hair fiber, blood samples, anything that's very small and cannot be detected. dna so far as trace evidence. >> pretty much deal with fingerprints, dna, hair, blood or serology, things like that. >> correct. >> so what did you do then with regard to this. you did fingerprints, you took fingerprints off all four of

these items? >> i believe so. i processed them. i believe i was only successful with the yellow chair. >> okay. what that means is you still took the time, the patience and the opportunity to try to get fingerprints off the stool, the bench and the crate. >> most definitely. >> but in some instances, some surfaces are just not, how do you call it -- >> conducive to prints. >> conducive to prints. so that was your trace analysis for fingerprints on those items. >> yes. >> you didn't stop there, did you? >> no. >> additionally you swabbed each and every one of those items for dna. >> that's correct. >> thank you, sir. >> and again, the dna -- now the

request for dna would need to go to the crime lab. is that correct? >> that is correct. >> is that your responsibility? >> to prepare it for transportation, yes. >> who makes the call saying, hey, let's get this analyzed? >> either, as i indicated earlier, the lead detective or the state attorney. >> that's off your plate, not your responsibility? >> until i get a subpoena to send it, yes. >> now, with regard to the casings that you found and you went through in the photographs, you actually were on your hands and knees to try to find those casings is that correct? >> correct. >> you wouldn't use a metal detector because it could give you maybe false readings.

>> the entire area where the casings were, i had a lot of water main pipes, metals too close to the area, the dumpster. and then, if i may step down -- if you notice on state exhibit a, i believe, 6-a, all these white posts around are metal. so my metal detector is going to give me a lot of false readings. all these are metal all along here, on both sides. >> thank you, mr. yen. >> okay. so that's the csi. now, do you ever wonder why some trials like phil specter's, say, are five months long and other trials that are also murder-related might be a week or two? maybe sometimes it has to do with resources. this man had a lot of resources. he had a very expensive defense team. maybe that caused the trial to be a little longer because there's a lot of evidence that

he wants to show. i don't know. tim bakken, is there an issue when it comes to resources and what prosecutors have, who they're meeting at the defense table and what the defense is going to bring to the table? >> yes. there's sometimes a great disparate between the defense and the prosecution. i'll address part of your question. there's sometimes a great lack of resources for prosecutors. in this country every year we have 16,000 to 25,000 gun deaths. the number has gone down, but nonetheless, the juries these days are expecting people in lab coats to come into and testify with certainly through dna evidence that doesn't exist that somebody committed a crime. >> molecular smoking gun. >> absolutely. it really turns out to be in most cases, the important thing is human potential and human work, detectives, prosecutors, witnesses and as the gentleman in florida was testifying, the ability of witnesses to come in and to get over various cultural problems. so all of that takes human

power. work, time, resources. >> gum shoe. >> gum shoe work as a professor of mine in law school once said, do you realize in this country we spend more on a cruiser for the navy than we do on federal courts in one year? in that kind of cost-benefit situation, spending so much on certain things and so little on other things, not to say that we don't need cruisers, we do. but to spend so little relatively on crimes in this country that cause more deaths than deaths in many wars in many circumstances. >> i'm glad you brought that analogy. you would know considering you teach at west point. >> at least i would indeed be aware of some of those issues. >> thank you so much for that. i appreciate you taking the time to join us for this hour as well. always thrilled to see you alive with all that work you do. >> it's mutual. >> tim bakken, hope to see you

back again. question of the day today, how can you keep your children safe in this increasingly dangerous world. logon to cnn.com/crime. we'll read the best comments a little later on in the program. /y/y/y/y/y/y/y/y/y/y/y/y

when is the next time you remember seeing shea? >> when she was in the house bleeding. >> do you remember helping your mom to get some towels to try to help her? >> yes. >> do you remember going to the police station that day and finding out that shea passed away? >> yes. >> a little sister takes the stand and discusses the moment she saw her big sister, sherdavia jenkins, shot. and the man on the left is charged withholding the ak and actually firing it, the bullet from which went into the neck of shea jenkins. damon dar ling is only facing second-degree murder in this case because no one thinks for the moment that he went out to

seek out a 9-year-old to kill that day. what the prosecution is alleging is he was engaging in gangland style warfare with another guy, maybe a third, probably going to come into this as well, but the person that is facing down these charges right now is facing them down because apparently, the prosecution says he discharged that ak. the bullet from that ak entered shea's neck, paralyzing her and killing her within minutes on the threshold of her very own home. she was actually running for cover because she knew it was bullets flying. our correspondent on the case, beth karas, is live in miami out if front of the courthouse right now. beth, if you could just get me up to speed on where we stand right now. this trial got under way yesterday. we have had a few witnesses take the stand. we are in the prosecution's case. lay the foundation for me, tell me where we are, where we are going. >> testimony will resume shortly with the cross-examination of the fifth witness to take the stand yesterday, arnold yen, the crime scene technician, but yesterday earthquake the jury heard from four others.

the second witness was sharon jenkins, sherdavia's mother. she took the stand to set the scene on that fateful day, saturday afternoon about 3:00. it was july 1, 2006. sher ron jenkins was home with three of her five children, one of them, her daughter, shea, she was there when shea was killed. >> when i came past the living room, my oldest son said, "mom, shea been shot." and i didn't see anybody until i just saw her coming in through the front door. collapse on the floor. >> was she responding to? >> no she wasn't. >> little she had dave ya was only 9 years old, bleeding profusely from the right side of her neck, her mother tried to render aid but daughter died in her arms. >> other testimony as well from the sister laid the foundation for what exactly the little girls were doing in the front

yard at the time that the shots rang out. tell me a little bit about catherine's testimony and what she was able to bring to this courtroom and to the story? >> catherine is 14 months younger than her sister, 8 years old at the time. she, she had dave ya and a friend what out really on what they call the porch it is a one-story building and the porch isn't a covered porch it is not raised up off the ground it is basically, you know, concrete at the doorway and they were told to play near that. mrs. jenkins says she watched the three girls every 15 minutes, she was keeping an eye on them but they were not allow to stray. however, they did ask permission to see the candy lady and bought not candy but other treats just before the shooting began. she had permission to go about a block away. they came back. they continued to play a game that she had dave ya had made up and it involved -- it's called "queen of the hole" and she had dave ya or whomever would dig three holes and bury her doll in

one of them. the others had to turn their backs and guess which hole the doll was in. she had dave ya was in the process of digging a hole for her doll at the time the shooting began. catherine jenkins said that they heard the shots and they all bolted she had dave ya was behind catherine and didn't quite make it. >> comments from one of our facebook poll brothers that game, the memory game. and our facebook community was very impressed these kids were playing that kind of a game. >> testing their skills. and that's really testimony to what these kids were like. they defied the odds, didn't they, beth? these kids, the jenkins family, they were not the typical family you would be expected to be living in a complex like this. they were doing great in school, receiving accolades, awards, the family was hard working. eventually, as the grandmother put it, was working to get out of there. >> that's right. you know it took she had dave ya's debt for the family to get

out of there, they did move shortly after her death. these kids were very creative. she had dave ya was extremely creative and had a lot of intellectual curiosity, very disciplined, from what i understand talking to family members, not just shea, but her sister, catherine, as well, but an older half-sister, a daughter of mrs. jenkins, in college now and also doing well. >> that bring mess actually to our next guest, dr. michael silverman is not only a psychologist and neuroscientist which already because of the syllables i know you are smarter than i am, wrote the book "unleisure dreams." there is a lot you know that i don't know about how the mind works. and i'm wondering what you can tell me. i know you just completed a paper on the topic, but about the effects of living in this kind of socioeconomic reality, the effects on the brain, the effects on how you actually conduct your life, the effects of living in literally an urban war zone. >> sure. and living in poverty. thank you for mentioning the paper. i appreciate that. >> you are such a smart guy got

to let it out there that you got the cred, right? >> we actually did. we conducted a very interesting first study of its kind, looking at the responses in the brain as a result of living in chronic poverty. and we basically had the thesis that living in chronic poverty was a chronic stressor and we know in the brain, i will just pull this up, the brain has stress circuitry and it runs all through the brain and it's what helps us deal in a sense with those momentary stressors, but long-term stress, living in poverty, breaks the system down and results in all sorts of effects. and we know that people that live in poverty die younger. and even when you control different things like access to health care, proper nutrition, they still die younger. and one of the reasons we conducted this study was to find out why this happens, what happens to the brain as a result of living in poverty?

and like i said, one of the issues is that the stressor, your circuitry breaks down. >> how is that stress different than, say, somebody who works in a fresher-cooker job, day in, day out, down on wall street? how is that different? >> the great question you still get to go home at night. >> you get a break? >> yeah and they are able to sort of let that go work is work, life is life, but every day, living in poverty, seeing what other people have in a sense, on the other side of the street, it breaks you down and it seems to be breaking these -- not everyone but seems to be breaking in a sense this circuitry of the brain down. >> and what does that mean, but wait? you say things are breaking down in the circuitry of the brain, how does that manifest itself in the way i conduct my life? >> right. so, one of -- >> i'm asking way too many questions. >> no, great questions. so, for a perfect example of what happens, there is an area right here in the front part of the brain called the an tiller jar singulate, helps us deal

with conflict, emotional control of conflict, so, when something really sort of just makes you angry, sometimes we can pull ourselves together, we can say, all right, that just wasn't the greatest thing to happen, but i'm gonna move on. when that gets broken down, all of a sudden, you start seeing more violence, more of these sort of violent behaviors. >> you mean i can't move on anymore, i have to lash out because my circuitry is mixed up? >> yeah. it's broken down. your ability in a sense to inhibit those behaviors is gone. >> so we are like -- evolutionarily speaking, it's not just that you are learning bad behavior in urban war zones like this in this housing complex where there are a lot of bad actors serving as, sadly, mentors as these kids but you're actually physically changing? >> well, that's what we see. and in fact, physically changing in that even these frontal regions of the brain so important, they actually make us

human, they actually start deceasing in size. >> that lobe begins decreasing? >> yeah. >> have you been able to actually study the brains of the deceased from -- who have lived in these sort of communities? >> that hasn't been done yet and -- >> because i said evolution, i was guessing, i was guessing at evolution here. sure. >> are you saying that actually could be happening? >> absolutely. we know that the size of the brain is shrinking in these frontal regions as a result of this chron inc., stress. >> passed down to their children or something that the children start fresh? >> we don't know. and we don't know if this is a sort of chicken/egg, in a sense, causality issue, mean sex the poverty causing the shrinkage of the britain or the shrinkage of the brain resulting in people staying in poverty? clearly in this family, this was an unusual family. here was a family that was resilient and looked like they were getting out and you do see that, not everyone in, you know, in this sort of situation stays. people do rise.

they can pull themselves up by their bootstraps. not everybody can and we don't know, is being in poverty, some people experience stress in different ways, some people in a sense, you know, you had an unusual experience on september 11th. >> right. >> you were down there. and some people can bounce back with their lives and, you know, we still work with people that have not sort of pulled themselves together yet. >> hey, you know what i will tell you, there is nothing wrong with anybody out there who has some kind of posttraumatic stress disorder from 9/11, even though we are almost a decade later. i struggled with it for a long time. no stigma at all. that is something that is really rocking our world here in new york. and i think across the country, we see these arrests of najibullah zazi, who all of a sudden wanted to bomb trains, perhaps, as the allegations are lining up against him and maybe bomb sports complexes, these are stressors that we are all now living w i have to take a break but i want to ask you about how people who are living in poverty who might be watching now can

actually get a break or do some repair on their own what can they seek to try to get out of this horrible situation that they might find themselves in and certainly the medical situation they find themselves in? we go to break, i want to update own 193th juror question of the day, did the testimony for the victim help the prosecution, do you think? well, yeah, 77% of you reported yes. 23% of you saying, no, i'm not going to be swayed by the emotion of family. i want the csi, i want the facts, i want the stats. still vote, cnn.com/crime. that vote will be going on all day. make sure you click on the 13th juror question. have your say. push those numbers around if you don't agree with them. maybe they will change. don't forget, just in the prosecution's case now, tend to have a bit of a change when you hit the defense. back after this.

i was basically thinking what was he thinking to have even imagined running through a community that's mostly

children, on a saturday, in the middle of the day, with a wea n weapon? hard to conceive. hard to even think about what was on their mind. >> boy, i'll say. that it's grandmother of shea jenkins saying imagine running through a community where kids live, carrying an ak-47. and then actually discharging it a couple dozen times? really? imagine that. that's the reality that she and her family is actually living with at this point and there's something else to this story as well, something happened yesterday that was somewhat unusual, it was a motion in limine brought outside the jury about a tv show, not ours, the cbs show, i believe it is a & e, i will ask beth about that a & e, thank you, mindy bloom, telling me in my air, a & e program "the first 48," we had a comment about it yesterday,

somebody who had seen the pork and beans complex on "the first 48." it is a tv show that poll flows reality style several police departments across the country, especially miami-dade and poll he lows the first 48 hours after a crime, the crucial moments to try to get as much investigative information as possible and this crime was featured. now the tapes of the crime are significant with regard to the motions -- the motion in limine that was heard yesterday. beth karas, i want to bring you in on this story to try to straight than out for me. i had heard that "the first 48" had featured crime with the lead detective in the miami-dade department and there's something that's being alleged as being nefarious with how tapes have been disvib by theed, it was in discovery? what exactly was the issue yesterday in court? >> no let me explain this episode was called "innocence lost" and it was one of two stories in an hour-long show and the other one with was a memphis, tennessee, case.

it aired several times, obviously during the pendency of this case n it, you see rolando garcia, who has yet to testify at the trial, but he is the lead detective, going about with other detectives and with arnold yen, there at the scene, appears to be footage of the day of the shooting not sure if it is real crime scene footage, you see david jenkins breaking down crying, learning his daughter has just been killed and see the detectives back in their offices getting phone calls, one from leroy larose, another man who pled guilty. the whole story is is two arrests are made within the first 48 hours, the critical time period for homicide detectives. yesterday, the prosecutor sought to limit when garcia takes the stand and cross-examine by the defense, wants to limit cross-examination about this episode to the actual interrogation of day mon dar limp, which is videotaped on the

day he is arrested, which is three weeks later. now we have learned, and i have seen the episode that this is a reality-type show that there are a lot of intentional misrepresentations because these arrests were not made within 48 hours. larose turns himself in five days later on july 6th and darling is arrested july 21st. so there are misrepresentations. the prosecutor concedes, she conceded in court yesterday that this is scripted. a lot of it is fictional it is not true to this story, the big picture is true, larose and darling arrested for killing sherdavia jenkins that day in that complex. she doesn't want her detective to be cross-examined about anything in that show because it's script and a lots of the's fiction, except for the interrogation tape, the police tape, which is the actual police interrogation. here's where the defense got a little concerned.

there's a section of the interrogation that appears in "the first 48" episode never turned over to the defense by the miami-dade police department. >> oh oh. it appears perhaps the "first 48" people rolled on it and taped it, but the police didn't and a for some reason, they didn't turn it over around it is the section where detective garcia is saying and totally within his rights in saying -- in lying to darling saying we know you shot in self-defense, i'm paraphrasing, we know you shot in self-defense we note other guy was trying to kill you, tell us what happened and darling explains, gets his side that he is shooting in developselves. that part of garcia saying that is in "the first 48" episode and not in the tape the defense obtained. of course, the defense wondered what else did you say and not record? i want to know what else you said, they are entitled to it

the judge is leaning toward only allowing questioning on that and not the episode, garcia, did you get fired? this is a reality show and you know that leroy larose didn't call you within 24 hours and turn himself in and damon darling isn't arrested within the first 48 hours, yet you are telling america what happened in this reality show it is not real. you are making an intentional misrepresentations in this active case. i mean, the judge may not let any of this come out. there are a number of misrepresentations in there, because i watched the episode. >> wow. are young me, beth karas, that reality tv suspect always completely real? beth? my tivo. >> they even have a photo lineup. in the episode on a & e, witnesses picking out -- [ inaudible ]

>> outline what the issues really are with regard to the "first 48." have a look. >> this is what the show gives us. it literally tells them, detective garcia, you are going to say this and detective silva, you are going to say this. now, i've asked the detectives if when this happened they gave them a script and they have explained that the time they give them a script but they don't keep them they don't keep them in the cases, they take the show as a complete different thing than real life. in fact, most don't watch the show and don't follow the show. now, that's the same argument as to why this should be kent out and any mention of the show should be kept out. >> this is the first time i'm

hearing about this see your motion last week and taking it up now, but i haven't even seen this tape. >> suggest would be a good start to watch the episode yourself. 'cause here's what happened. some of the parts i found quite amusing, because i did know from our case, detective garcia was home sleeping when the call came in and my client was arrested, however, on the show, there's three or four detectives huddled around the desk sort of like waiting for call saying, oh, yeah, you got him in custody, okay, we are right there i found that amusing. however, what i didn't find amusing was the part on the tape where he is interrogating my client. it is real, it is actual and it's happening and unfortunately or fortunately that part doesn't appear on the tape in evidence in the case. so, it's absolutely open. it shows all kinds of -- i won't say motive but it's relevant and it's directly on point i don't

particularly care that they were fishing one day when the call came in about the case. no. what i'm concerned about is that the interrogation of my client, and as your honor remembers, the hearing on motion to suppress the statement that as the tape went on to, tape went off. tape went on, tape went off. well, guess what tape was still rolling for "the first 48" but not the tape in evidence in this case. >> judge, i don't mind getting the court a copy, if the court wants to take it home and take a look at it. i also would say that any part of the defendant's testimony or interrogation with these detectives, so long as there's no narration by "the first 48" that is the issue. as the tape is rolling, their narraters from the show are talking and that is extremely suggestive and extremely inappropriate. i would argue that, you know, that basically, any conversation that is taped, the detective having lied to the subject that

that would potentially be admissible and i wouldn't have an issue at this point with maybe defense counsel, he wants to redact to, you know, but the -- being able to authenticate the entire tape or piece the officer with any narration statements or anything he even says on there that he can testify to was told to him via the script was a separate issue. >> all right. let me ask you this of this whole tape, because during the motion to suppress, i watched -- we watched one tape of the period of time of the interrogation. >> that's -- how would you say the defendant's final story, we will say the stories one two, and three in the final that were taped by the detective. >> so, what does this depict as far as the interrogation? >> this has some parts of the preinterview that the detective testified about and that part, so long as the narrater is not

involved, i don't have an issue with us if we are able to redact it. i do think that the court should watch it. i think we maybe -- maybe if defense counsel -- he has this motion, haven't told me this, we can possibly watch it tonight and discuss it, come to an agreement on that i think that is reasonable if he wants to bring in some part of the interrogation tape without the narration as issues with the preinterview, i don't have an issue with that at all. >> and doesn't that go to understanding limited? wouldn't that ultimately go to the jury being able to make this determination independent of whatever the court previously ruled as to the voluntariness of the statements? >> yes exso long as the narration is not involved and no statements that are part of the script that the detective was ordered to say. yes. >> your honor, just that last part, i don't care if is a script or an ad lib if he said to my client, it is relevant. why wouldn't that be relevant?

to get my client to talk? absolutely relevant. third person back in the studded yo saying, oh, oh, he's really got him now, that's not relevant, i agree, but what he says to my client is not relevant? >> judge america says to the client, i don't have an issue w what i have an issue with is what anybody else says or what the detective is saying on the show, separate and apart from his client. not giving his opinion or -- i mean, look, i don't -- >> are absolutely relevant. >> any interrogation that happens or any interaction between this detective and the subject that are live and taped i agree with, so long as the narration and the other things are not. >> i will tell you what then, the two of you really should look at it again and you would have to -- you want to show it, that portion, to the jury, would you have to come up with the

redacted portion and just transfer, if there's a way that can be done, the redacted portion of the -- of the tape or not transfer. seeker the problem is going to be, you can't use that tape. you would have to -- unless you put the -- because you need the sound up for conversation between the detective and your client. you're going to have to be turning the sound on/off, on/off, you are not going to know what portions to do it listen to it figure out which portion you want to use and come up with a way to accomplish that. >> we will talk after -- >> may have some ideas on how you can do that and, you know, make it work. but anything else but that portion of preinterview or through the interview is going to be excluded. all right?

so we are granted in part and denied in part. >> granted in part and denied in part. love those. i like that judge. i got a k from chuck. the guest that is speaking about living in chronic poverty, keep this guy around for a while. i want to learn more. okay, chuck, you asked. here he is again. dr. michael silverman with his brain. not only his own brain but your brain. what do you call that by the way? >> the brain? >> a special creepy name for it? nothing like that? when we talked last, if anybody is just joining us now the quick synopsis, you were saying this that front lobe -- what's it called what, is it called? >> frontal lobe. >> okay. right up here. the frontal lobe is actually seen in your most recent research to be shrinking in people who are living in chronic poverty due to the chronic stress that you can never escape from unlike this is a stressful job, but i go home and it ends and i get a break. my question as i left you last time was this, how is it then, if someone finds him or herself

in a chronic, stressful situation, maybe they didn't walk on wall street and go home to a divorce situation and it is chronically stressful, how can you break that cycle, how can you get out of that mental situation whereby your brain is shrinking? how can you stop that process? >> that's good question. well, one of the ways that we know can enhance these areas and actually build them back up is therapy. now with this population, what sort of therapy would you do and that sort of things, that is a whole other question. certain work can rebuild those areas. >> they are poor, they can't afford therapy. >> or the service aren't so available to them. and you bring up a very good question in terms of the worker versus living in port verity. so, there is -- the way when we conceptualize this research there is a way to divide, are you poor, are you not poor? but then there's another question, are you poor but do you see yourself as poor? >> oh. >> that is a very different

thing and the brain actually responds differently if you're in poverty but you don't see yourself as being poor. >> helps the therapy would be good because if you can try to bring someone out of chronically feeling as though they are down -- trodden and hate to say look at the bright side what, a crazy thing to say but glass half full, getting out of here,s on the mend, working toward something better that is actually helpful? >> absolutely. >> that's simple. >> well, in theory, it's simple. actually getting it done is a completely different story. you know, there's -- this's a lot of resources that are just not available to people living in poverty. >> yeah. and what about the person who is working a busy job, maybe not living in the projects but working a hard job, still dealing with student loans, the marriage isn't going so well, two young children screaming constantly, the stress doesn't go away you not able to sleep at night that kind of person. a lot of people in america, during this recession, we are all fighting it out there. some of us are losing our jobs, in fact. >> right. >> so what exactly are we to do?

how are we to sort of get that glass half-full attitude to stop our frontal lobes from shrinking? i'm feeling my shinging, by the way. >> sure what you're describing in a sense is sort of a situation of someone -- the chronic stress leading to a depression. and that's actually when we look at the brain and circuit try of the brain, the stress circuitry and depression circuitry are really the same. >> really? >> yeah. esensely, those emotions run the same circuitry and long-term chronic stress results in depression. le now, i don't want to -- one of the more -- >> you're scaring me. >> you know how much i get to go into this. >> i can't take it anymore. >> one of the most interesting findings we found in this research just published this month is people who are living in poverty who are not depressed, their brains respond as if they are depressed to things that would normally make us happy. >> what? so they are getting hit on all ends no matter whether the cup

is half-full? i'm completely confused how we can fix this problem without money. these people don't have money to get therapy, can't get a break from the stress and sounds to me like it is just a neverending cycle that is spinning downward. >> he need the resources. >> good god, what everybody says, need police, need resources, need therapy, need a safe place, need to get rid of young men who run around with aks. i think that is simple. and by the wake it's free, it's free to call crime stoppers. and you can actually get a reward. snitching is free. and it's not terrible when a 9-year-old girl is dead and bleeding. don't think the snitching is so bad, folks, think of it as cleaning this up mess that's killing you. when we come back after the break, this is not the only case whereby neighbors have went, crime scene tape gone up, police trying to assuage the fear, the

panic like this crossfire happens all the time, devastation across america. all this coming up. ww (pouring rain)

i had a great time. me too. you know, i just got out of a bad relatio... it's okay. thanks. goodnight. goodnight. (door crashes in, alarm sounds) get out! (phone rings) hello? this is rick with broadview security.

is everything all right? no, my ex-boyfriend just kicked in the front door. i'm sending help right now. thank you. (announcer) brink's home security is now broadview security. call now to install the standard system for just $99. the proven technology of a broadview security system delivers rapid response from highly-trained professionals, 24 hours a day. call now to get the $99 installation, plus a second keypad installed free. and, you could save up to 20% on your homeowner's insurance. call now-- and get the system installed for just $99. broadview security for your home or business -

full of black cats... hey, wait... no! to demonstrate the cleaning power of our newest pledge product. i'm gonna clean my couch with this pledge? not that pledge, leah. use the pledge fabric sweeper. it's quick and effective, removing as much pet hair... as 145 stinky lint roller sheets. wow! it really works! ooh, that is one big hairball. ( cat meows ) pick up pet hair. that's the beauty... of the pledge fabric sweeper. you'll find it where you find pledge. s.c. johnson, a family company. 9-year-old she had dave ya jenkins known as shea, an inspect little victim, killed in

the crossfire of a shootout, broad daylight. the miami housing project where she lived was notorious for violence, day and night. and sadly this kind of violence widespread across many of our cities in america. now let's take a look at similar cases were victims were killed because they are just in the wrong place at the wrong time. this week in chicago, the amateur video, i think you have seen it, it caught the brutal beating of a 16-year-old honors student. the attacker used wooden planks to hit him repeatedly in the head, then kicked him, people videotaping it, saying zoom in, zoom in. four teenagers have already opinion charged in darrian's death. local leaders spoke out as the victim's mother stood by. >> this afternoon, our hearts go out to the family, we wish them condolences, we have come to say that darry anna albert did not die in vein. we have come together to say stop the violence.

>> i will say. chicago authorities now offering $6,000 for information leading to any more arrests. and in atlanta,ed 2-year-old kathryn johnston became an inspect victim of the drug war. she was killed in a hail of bullets. and get this fired by police. the police thought they were raiding a drug dealer's home when they opened fire after going through her front door. the prosecutor said, here is where it gets ugly, police then tried to cover up what really happened that night. >> causing ms. johnson's death wasn't bad enough, it gets worse, ladies and gentlemen, because as she lie handcuffed down on her own floor, they planted trucks in her house. >> yikes. planted drugs in the house to cover up for the fact they were not in a drug dealer a's house. no, 392-year-old grandmother.

former police officer arthur tessler seen here didn't fire a shot but found guilty of the coverup and sentenced to 4 1/2 years in prison. richard masten, speaking with him earlier, live at the courthouse with us in miami. he is the former police chief of miami shores. and currently the executive director of the miami-dade crime stoppers. so, i keep saying over and over and during your interview, a little bit later on, it's free to call you. it's free to call crime stoppers. it's free to lend a helping hand, to try to bring your community out from under this oppressive situation that, as our doctor friend has been saying, can actually shrink your brain, can cause a depression, can cause physical ailments in communities like this and yet still, richard, still we are having trouble getting beyond the snitch culture? >> absolutely. again, the entertainment industry caters to this, the music, videos, the constant stream of guns and drugs and

violence becomes so desensitized to it. in these neighborhoods, if you spend any time there it is just completely pervasive. you heard the yellow man yesterday talk about the reason he was in the neighborhood was to find some weed. so, there he is, the gunfire erupts and that has unfortunately occurred many times since this incident and the last six, ten months once again here. >> i want to explore what you just said, richard, kids and people are becoming desensitized to this kind of violence. we know that these little girs s knew it was gunfire when they heard the pop, pop, pop, as most people might think it was fireworks since it was july 1st and july 4th is only three days away, they knew right away what it was, knew the drill, run for cover, at the age of 9, these kids knew this, do you think that the decent tizization you speak of, the video games, the music culture, et cetera, has

made them perhaps not care as much? i'm trying to figure out whether it is fear of reprisal, distrust of police or maybe just really not caring 'cause that's just the way it is? >> i believe certainly fear and reprisal but the culture, you characterize it just the way it is, is just as powerful, again, as you pointed out, they knew what they were hearing, gunshots and in these neighborhoods, that's fairly commonplace, a sad commentary, but it is true. >> it is funny, thinking to myself, watching the video a while ago, the kids gathering round and there was this beating going on of this child in chicago and they were more interested with getting a better shot from the cell phone than they were with protecting him, helping him, stopping this vicious and violent and ultimately lethal beating and i just -- i don't know where that came from. i don't remember as a kid

growing up in the '60s and '70s, fights ever getting like it in the first place there were kids would have at it on the back steps of the school, but never anything like this, kids would standby and watch. i know that adults fear getting involve bud kids don't know the ramifications necessarily of getting involved and they can't figure out why this is somehow fun. >> you are absolutely right. and darrian albert case is probably the most difficult thing that i have certainly seen in years and years and years. but i believe the portrayal of violence and what children are used to seeing makes it part of their every day life and that is so sad. >> rich charged the comment made earlier regarding albert chicago is offering $6,000 for any

information that might lead to more arrest, they have four guys in custody now, but $6,000 is a lot of money s it enough? is it enough money to get beyond the threshold of what value is to some of the people who live in this community? 6 grand, yet my little sister might be killed if i talk to the cops? >> hard to say the question of increasing dollar amounts comes up from time to time, the national standard for crime stoppers reward is $1,000, in that community, they have had private fund-raising or some folks have come forward to increase that amount. i can tell you the same thing that people are raising money, can't afford it take second mortgages out on their house, run their credit cards up and you don't really want them to do that because it's just -- i believe a matter of an individual having the right motivation to make the call. in more cases than those where they are motivated by money. >> right.

and i fear some people who are motivated bay money maybe respect telling the whole story or at a least may be telling parts of the story not all true. i know you are good policing that stuff, the money is not giving out when the tip ain't perfect, airtight and actually leads to action but anybody who wants to know more about it i encourage to you google crime stoppers, look up your local chapter, in your community what you can do to help as well, a great program and led to a lot of arrests across this country and other countries as well. when we come back after the break, how can you keep your children safe? should be living in a world like this, especially if you are living in the pork and beans complex. how do you do it? the question of the day, great answers but still have, oh, a little less than three minutes to get your answer in if you want to be the one who beats everybody out and gets their answer read, your name, your state, on the air. back after this.

he is facial serious charges, including the death of a little girl caught in the crossfire. so, how do you suppose damon darling is going to defend himself? find out in 90 seconds. my name is sandy garza and i am on your side. only nationwide gives you an on your side review.

you tell us about your life and your insurance. sometimes you don't have enough coverage. or you may even have too much. we'll let you know. we listen and build you a custom policy of just the coverage you need at the right price for you. (announcer) only a nationwide insurance agent can give you an on your side review. call this number to save up to $523. we take a look at the policy and look to see if there's any gaps in coverage. you know, in addition, we talk about discounts that are available. and we try to save you money. i mean we really do. (anncr:) call this number now or call a local agent. switch today and save up to $523. listening and saving you money is how... ♪ nationwide is on your side ♪

is so, we asked you today in our question of the day, how can you keep your children safe in a dangerous world, especially like the one down in the florida pork and beans complex? our anticipate today comes from carolyn in virginia writes, the more information you have, the better prepared you are. as a parents, check state police websites for sexual predators, gang activity and other community information and then communicate, communicate, communicate. be honest with your kids. their lives may depend on it carolyn, oh, carolyn for mayor, may other of america that's great.

my mom always used to say communicate, communicate, communicate. is that you, mom, writing in as carolyn? probably not. i want to get knew the defense openings because there was something that was said by the attorney for the defendant in this case, jonathan melts, yes says, you know what, there is one thing and one thing only we need to focus on when it cops to defending day mon dar ling. here's what it is. >> this case is focused on one thing and that was damon darling's right to defend himself against leroy larose, who was staring at him down the barrel of a .44 magnum. >> and beth karas is following this case, gavel-to-gavel. she is live with us and continues to be live down in florida, in front of the courthouse. so, that's it i get it that this is a stand your ground kind of defense but i still don't get it because in florida, stand your ground requires their acting in a lawful way. just the very fact that the defendant had an ak in his hand as a convicted felon means he

doesn't get that protection. i don't understand how this defense is gonna work. >> well, they are going to assert it apparently and then alternatively argue, look, it was out of necessary that he fired and that it is not reasonable to say that because you're a convicted felon, if you're facing a barrel of a gun, deadly force, that you cannot defend yourself. now this area this particular statute, which went into effect in early 2006 is still being clarify and defined by, of course, a number of cases certified on appeal, on stand your ground. the prosecution's position is he wasn't doing something lawfully. so, self-defense, you could argue, applies but add duty to retreat, not stand his ground or even provoke the situation. now, there was a key witness, the defense would have considered her a key prosecution witness for their position, but she has recant and no longer in the case. and that's one of the reasons

why the prosecution gave leroy larose a deal and her name was mercedes dixon, she had called the police about four days after the incident, saying she had a tip, she saw the incident and she saw leroy larose with his gun out in the neighborhood and heard him yell, "everybody leave before i shoot this" and it was an expletive, but shoot this place up that sounds like leroy larose came in and incited the offense. dixon is not going to be a witness and she happens to be a relative of damon dar long. >> she has recanted and a relative of damon darling. curious. not going to see her in the courtroom initially. >> no, we don't expect to hear her, i don't know if the defense will, but not the state. but that was a key witness they had to prove their case against larose, larose said he fired in defense defense, passed two polygraphs but the prosecution didn't believe him, they had a

witness who are a gun out, now this witness has recanted. they had problems with their proof. >> i'm even more fascinated now, i speak to you what exactly this defense is going to say for damon dar ling, 'cause i don't get it i kind of think the only defense he had blew up in his face when he was a convicted felon carrying an ak. thanks to you, beth car ras, in miami. and to your right, richard matten in miami. and dr. michael silverman, our brain man here in new york, thanks for your input. fascinating stuff. time to check in with jack ford and find out what is coming up next on "courtside." >> so next, we are back inside the courtroom, going to get started, started calling witnesses, once again, the prosecution putting their pieces together, as you were talking with beth, leading us to a point where the defense is going to have to in a couple of days, make some decisions here, as with you, i'm very curious what the defense is going to do back in the courtroom, more witnesses, more dram mark as we get started. >> i got a couple seconds,

almost sounds the argument the defense is making one to the legislature, i know the law about stand your ground but was in real trouble. sounds like it is not an argument for court. >> i think they are hoping that one of the six jurors, only needs one to hang this up, one of the six say well i kind of agree with what they did here and see what happens. again, you're playing to one juror. or maybe one jury who just doesn't understand what it means, gets confuseded and says that is doubt. jack, i will be watching your show, my friend, as always. we will be back here tomorrow following the case again. thanks for being with us on "open court." > stay any 2, 3, or 4 nights between september 13th and november 22nd, and you can earn double, triple, or even quadruple points when you pay with your mastercard card. triple-a members can get even more.

better values, best western. for details, visit bestwestern.com.