when we buried them. we didn't bury them when we had the service on friday because i don't think they were done. that's when we buried them along with my dad on sunday. >> and alex, what'd you do the following week, that monday, tuesday, wednesday? >> starting when now? >> so the day after your dad's funeral. >> on monday i went to -- i went to grandma and papa t.'s somerville. >> at some point monday -- >> in the afternoon, you mean what did i do when i got up that morning? >> where did you stay? >> we stayed at greenfield sunday night, so we woke up at greenfield on monday.

>> and so -- and sunday night you were with the same family members, your brother and brooklyn and buster and -- >> that's right. >> and liz. >> and lizzie, and lizzie's mom and dad and i believe donny and paula was still there, but i can't remember when they left. >> and then you went to somerville with whom? >> i believe i went to somerville by myself, but i know -- in the car by myself. i can't remember if buster and i rode together, but i think we might have had separate cars. we probably did ride together that first day. i don't remember, but i know i went to somerville and buster was in somerville with me and grandma and papa t. >> and somerville is where maggie's parents live? >> that's right. that's maggie's mom and dad, maggie's mom is grandma and maggie's dad is papa t. >> did you stay with them for a

few days in somerville? >> i stayed with them longer -- in somerville? yeah, i stayed with them -- we stayed in somerville monday night, tuesday night, wednesday night, and then we went to greenville. >> okay. and what was in greenville? >> my niece. she was having a baby, and maggie had just been -- she's just been so excited, so she was just so proud of those girls.

she was so excited about the baby, and so the baby being born just came such a big deal to me. >> so was the baby born? >> yeah. >> okay. and you went up -- >> baby was born, beautiful little baby girl, beautiful little mom. >> okay. and then did you go up to the lake after that? >> we did. i mean, we stayed this lake, kiwi that you all heard about is really close to greenville. so when i say we went to greenville, we really went to lake kiowi. we went up there and when she

had the baby -- i want to say the baby was born shortly after thursday. i think it was saturday before we could go see them and see my niece and see the baby. that's where we went was to lake keowee, they live in greenville. on the morning of june 16th, i think that was wednesday, i think that's a wednesday, where'd you wake up? >> somerville. >> did you ever go to alameda on that day. >> on wednesday? >> yes, sir. >> i don't believe so. >> did you go to alameda at 6:30 in the morning? >> i know for a fact that i

didn't go to alameda at 6:30 in the morning. i was in somerville. i didn't go to alameda at any point early in the morning. i was in somerville, and i'm not positive about this, but i know those -- i know they did a -- i know in some of those records they have it was sometime before i left somerville. >> okay. did you -- did you ever take a -- during that week, let's just start with that week following your dad's funeral, did you ever take a tarp into house at alameda? a tarp, a blue tarp? >> the week following my dad's funeral? >> yes, sir. >> no, i did not. >> there's been -- i don't even know where it is in any of these

boxes, but this blue rain jacket. have you ever seen that before? >> never seen it before. never touched it, and don't know anything about it. >> okay. did you -- did you ever remember taking a tarp at any point in time over the house at alameda? >> i don't remember, i don't remember taking a tarp over there, but you know, i mean, shelly's got something in her mind about that and there may have been some point, but i certainly don't remember it, and it certainly wasn't anytime around my dad's funeral or the weeks following. >> we talked briefly about --

about your recollection of times and i just want to play, doug, from state's exhibit 517, which is the august 11 interview starting at 5 minutes and 52 seconds, if you can pull that up. i want you to listen to this. >> okay. >> tell me again what it is. >> it's august 11th interview starting at 5 minutes and 52 seconds. >> all right. can you go to 5 minutes and 52

seconds. >> who was at your house, and what time did you go to the office? >> we had been -- >> who was at your house when you left and what time did you go to the office? >> we had been to a ball game that weekend. i don't remember exactly what time it would have been. somewhere between 8:30 and 9:30 probably, 10:00 maybe at the latest. something like that. >> on this tape, were you being asked when you went to work on the 7th? >> yes. >> and you said 8:30 to 9:30 in the morning?

>> and this then i think i said 10:00 at the latest. >> was that correct? >> no, it wasn't. >> now you've seen all these records, what time did you go to work on the 7th? >> a little after noon. >> all right. if we'll go to the, doug, state's exhibit 243, which is the june 10th interview. >> you know, mr. griffin on that same date i also -- if you play that thing, and i don't know if it's right then, but if you play that further i also told them the best way to see exactly when i went in that door is to go and get my information from my law firm, and i told them that, you know, we have a -- you know how things are electronic now where you don't have a key, have key card, and you have a key card in your wallet, and so when you use it, it creates a like all this other stuff, a digital footprint, and i told david owens that he could go get it

from my office, you know. >> and was that common response of yours when you're asked about specific times that you would give them your best estimate, but i would point them to where they could find the most accurate data? >> yes, sir. >> you did that more than once? >> yes, sir. >> so if we've got the june 10th interview, which is state's exhibit 243, and doug, i'd like to go to 9 minutes and 59 seconds. you're asked when did paul arrive at moselle? >> roughly what time in the afternoon? >> you know, it would be somewhere in the 5:00 range. it was broad daylight when we were -- it wasn't dusk, dark, or late. >> okay. you know, and we rode -- you know, we just rode around. >> so did you tell him on june 10th that paul got there at 5:00 time period? >> yes, sir. yes, sir, i obviously did.

>> and was that incorrect? >> yes, sir, it was incorrect. >> and looking at the record now, what time did it look like paul actually got there? >> in looking at the records, it's clear that he got there sometime around 7:00. >> did at some point in time you have a conversation with shelly smith about, you know, how long you were over at alameda on the night of june the 7th? do you remember? >> you know, i don't distinctly remember having a conversation with her about how long i was over there, but i know that i told shelly smith that sled was going to come and talk to her and that i'd appreciate it if she would talk to them and that she just needed to tell them the truth. >> and did you take extra care not to talk to people that you

knew s.l.e.d. would be talking to? >> absolutely. >> and why is that? >> after this boat wreck that you've heard so much talk about in this courtroom, there were social media, newspaper, i mean, it went deeper than that. there were so many -- so much talk about how i, you know, fixed witnesses and structured the investigation, just things that were totally false, that were absolutely baseless, but it was said repeatedly, repeatedly, and it was reported repeatedly how i'd done this and this witness and influenced this police officer and all these things, so i wasn't taking any chances. >> i want to ask you about --

you can take that down, doug. thank you. ask you about the august 11th interview with david owen at the s.l.e.d. office in i think here? do you remember that? >> august 11th, absolutely. >> had you been requesting that meeting? >> i'd been requesting -- what i'd really been requesting is information, i'd been begging david owens to come meet with me and specifically i wanted, grandma, papa t, there were so many questions that i couldn't answer, and i'd been begging him to meet with me and to meet with

grandma and papa t. i'd been begging him for weeks and weeks. >> and did -- you went into the meeting on august 11th, did you think that's what it was for to give you an update? >> yes. >> and at the conclusion of the meeting, they let you know that you're their prime suspect. >> objection, your honor, what was said. facts not in evidence. >> mr. griffin. >> i'll rephrase it. at the -- by the conclusion of the meeting, did they make it known to you that you were suspect? >> oh, there's no question about that.

absolutely. now, he used a lot of -- i mean, you hear talk about how i'm in this circle and he can't get me out and this and that, but there's no doubt in my mind, there was no question in my mind what was going on. >> and the -- during that meeting did they show you the snapchat -- snapchat video of you trying to stand up the fruit tree? >> yes. >> and were you questioned about what clothing you were wearing? >> and i can't remember this. i can't remember if he showed me the whole video or he showed me a picture of it, but i was definitely showed that information. i was definitely shown those clothes in that meeting on august 11th. >> what clothes were you wearing? >> the same ones you see in -- >> and do you remember what kind of pants? >> it was khaki pants. >> and what kind of shirt?

>> it's a button down, short sleeve button down, i call it will a dress shirt, but a short sleeve button down dress shirt. >> like the shirt you've got there but short sleeves? >> just like this but short was. >> and what color. >> blue with some blue stripes. >> and were you questioned about when you changed out of those clothes? >> i was. >> and did you have a follow-up -- did you have a conversation after that meeting with s.l.e.d. with blanca about what you were wearing that day? >> absolutely. >> and what was the purpose of the conversation with blanca? >> well, they made an issue about that in that meeting, and i asked blanca about those clothes that i had on earlier that day. >> did you ask her specifically about the blue shirt?

>> i asked her specifically about all the clothes. >> okay. >> what i asked blanca about specifically was did she remember getting my clothes after she came back -- when she came back to moselle, did she remember getting my clothes and specifically what i asked her. >> i see. >> and why were you asking her those questions? >> because on august the 11th, they had made an issue about me wearing -- still wearing those clothes, not having changed clothes when i was in that snapchat video. so that's why i went to blanca. >> did they ever ask you on august the 11th whether -- did they ask you for those clothes? can you produce the clothes? did they ask you that? >> no, they didn't. >> have they ever asked you for those clothes? >> no. as far as my understanding goes, my clothes were never an issue

in this case until y'all figured out as my lawyers figured out that there was no blood spatter on me. >> sir. >> i said objection, your honor. >> reason for the objection. >> 402 and beyond speculation, your honor. >> mr. griffin. >> it's a matter of public record. it's a matter of public record. >> what is? >> the issues with the shirt and the blood test. >> it's a matter of public record. >> filed in this case, yes, sir. >> the objection's overruled. >> i'm well aware that my clothes never became an issue in this case until my lawyers proved that this blood spatter that they said i had on my shirt from my wife and my son was a

lie and that there was no blood on my shirt, and once they filed the documents and they proved that that was a lie, all of a sudden the clothes i was wearing back on that day became an issue. and that's in the weeks leading up to this trial. >> now, alex, after the -- maggie and paul were murdered on june 7th and 8th, where did you stay and where did you keep clothes? >> say that again, please. >> where were you staying overnight? let me ask you this, did you ever spend another night at moselle after june 7th? >> never spent another night at moselle. >> why not?

>> i couldn't. didn't want to. >> okay. where were you staying -- we talked about the days and weeks, the week afterwards, but where were you staying when you got back from the lake, keowee and greenville. >> i stayed -- when i got back from greenville, so that would be -- so the first week until my dad's funeral, so that'd be the second -- after we -- i know buster and i, i stayed with grandma and papa t as much as i

could, you know. i stayed with -- i stayed with my brother randy a lot. i stayed with my brother john a lot. bus and i stayed at edisto a little bit. but at the beginning i stayed with -- i really stayed with either my brother randy and his wife kristy or i stayed with my brother john and his wife lizzie, and basically at that time buster was doing -- excuse me. buster was -- buster worked for wild wing at that time, and they had been so kind to him and gave him -- he was -- they let him be off just for a ridiculous amount of time, they were so good to him, so he stayed with me.

when he had to go back to work, he would stay at my brother john and lizzie's because it was close, so i would stay with randy and kristy in hampton when buster was there, i would almost always go to john and lizzie's when buster was there. i would go to john and lizzie's sometimes when buster wasn't there, but i was -- johnny parker, one of my partners had a guesthouse. his mother-in-law had lived in when she was sick that's really -- it's right at the foot of randy's drive. it's 100 yards, 70 yards from randy's house, and i was going to move into -- i was going to move into that house until we figured out where i could live.

so i have clothes there. i had clothes at randy's. i had clothes at john marvin's. i had clothes at chi ches sees like where we went to the river, and i had clothes there. i had clothes in somerville. and i had clothes at moselle. >> so your clothes -- yes, sir. >> last question? >> no, this -- >> so were your clothes spread out a lot of different places? >> yes. >> all right. >> thank you. >> we'll break for lunch, and return at -- in an hour and 15 minutes. please do not discuss the case.

>> we have been watching this walterboro south carolina courtroom live. that is alex murdaugh taking a rare high stakes risk testifying on his own behalf for more than two hours now in his double murder trial including admitting he lied repeatedly to investigators about where he was that night. but he denied killing his wife maggie and their younger son paul. he broke down when he was asked to talk about the moment he found them dead. >> i saw what y'all have seen pictures of. so bad. >> nbc's catie beck has been

closely covering this trial and joins me from outside the courthouse in walterboro. also with me kristin gibbens feden a former prosecutor and paul butler former federal prosecutor and msnbc legal analyst. catie, we mentioned how rare it is for a defendant in a murder trial to take the stand, how high the stakes are. give us the headlines for what we've seen so far on this extraordinary day at the trial. >> reporter: well, essentially alex murdaugh has rewritten his narrative, his alibi for june 7th on the stand, right away this morning as he took the stand, chris, he was asked directly did you kill maggie? did you kill paul? he was able to say emphatically he did not, and then he was asked immediately about that video at the kennels that places him at the scene just minutes before the murders. he says he lied to investigators about being there because he was paranoid at the time. he said he did not trust s.l.e.d. and also was taking a

large number of opioids and that made him very suspicious about being honest. he knew he was going to be zeroed in as a suspect and he made up this story and had to stick to it. so basically that rewrites the time line that he gave investigators multiple times, but he admits openly that he lied about that. i think what the defense has really tried to do this morning, of course the whole point of him wanting to take the stand is to give the jury a human look at this person, spending time with the family, staying in the hospital with a sick father and sleeping in the chair. he's sobbed and wept throughout this testimony. that is not unusual, the jury has seen him cry. but they are hearing a lot of detail. he is offering a lot of detail, and we suspect that could be a regrettable decision when cross examination comes around. there's many, many things that they are going to have to work

with and possibly impeach his testimony yet again. the one thing i will say the defense had a pretty good line of questioning on was pointing out inconsistent statements he made on the 911 phone call. that was at a time when those inconsistent statements didn't really matter. he was under duress. he was, again, on opioids, and he, you know, puts the wrong bullet in the gun, which you know, he knows better than to do that. he says the house is 100 yards away when it's 1,100 feet away. so he makes some mistakes there, and i think the defense point is he made inconsistent statements because he was under duress and even when it doesn't matter to his case per se, he was making those kind of statements. so we'll see, i have a feeling that this testimony is going to go on a while. i mean, the defense we took just a lunch break now, they're going to come back. they haven't even gotten to the financial crimes or the roadside

shooting or any of that yet. and then there is sure to be a robust and lengthy cross examination given all of the ground they've covered just in the past two hours. lots and lots of detail from alex murdaugh. >> almost an hour point by point. where were you this day. let's talk a little bit about the emotion. obviously one of the goals if you're going to take this risk and the defendant's going to take the stand, you want to humanize them. you want the jury to see the emotion from him. a couple of notes from our folks inside the courtroom. the jury has remained deeply attentive to his r words. many members of the murdaugh family could be seen crying as he spoke and got choked up on the stand. as you look at this part of it, has he helped himself? >> absolutely. you know, i think there is a lot of harm that will come out of this testimony, particularly on

cross, but this is exactly what the jury needed to see so that they can basically come away from any narrative that this is a malicious man capable of committing these very, very heinous murders. these murders are heinous. these are not murders that we typically see when there's a crime of passion. his wife and his son were murdered by being shot in some cases multiple times in the head. so it absolutely humanizes him as catie was talking about. but again, it also detracts from the malice narrative the prosecution is trying to put forward, which is that he did this because he wanted to cover up his misdeeds. he wanted to cover up his financial crimes. this type of motion really doesn't jive with an individual who is capable of committing these heinous murders. >> could he, though, paul -- could his lawyers have gotten

this part of it out without asking about all the details, without that day by day narrative that catie was talking about? what do you make of this so far? pay off or misfire? risk reward ratio for the defense at this point? >> it's kind of too early to tell, but there are only two reasons a defense attorney puts a defendant on the stand. one is that he's the only person that can offer testimony that's necessary for him to be acquitted. and the other is that the client wishes to take the stand even against the advice of counsel. and we heard -- when alex murdaugh was introduced, his lawyer said he wishes to take the stand. the problem for defense attorneys is that defendants can be impeached with prior inconsistent statements, like the fact that murdaugh lied to the police when he said he wasn't at the dog kennels that night. the key evidence presented in

the prosecution case was e cell phone video made by paul about five minutes before when the prosecutors say the murder happened, and on that video you can hear alex murdaugh's voice in the background. so if that video is legitimate, he had to change his story, which is what he did today admitting for the fist time in 20 months that he was at the scene of the crime at the time of the crime. >> but his explanation for why he lied, do you think the jury bought it? >> well, again, on the one hand, he says he can't remember some things because he was understandably distraught. on the other hand he had the presence of mind to realize he would be a suspect in these killings and that's why he lied about where he was at the time of the murder. i think the jury will certainly take that contradiction in its view when it deliberates this case. >> you can make an argument in any case like this, kristen, that the single thing that a jury wants to hear is they want

to hear a defendant say i didn't do it and judge for themselves whether it's believable or not. but on the other facts of the case, is there one big question you think he has to answer for the jury? >> yeah, i think he has to answer who on earth would do this. and quite frankly, chris, he has kind of gotten that out through the testimony where he says that his son was being threatened, and when he was explaining the 911 call as to why he was saying they did it, i should have kind of followed through and given a lot more credence, i think he did that. and by doing that, he kind of points the finger. and by pointing the finger at someone else, he is able to establish the reasonable doubt. now, will it be something that the jury will accept, that's something that's too soon to tell. but he at least was able to point the finger at someone else. >> this could go on for a while

as catie points out, as a former prosecutor and you're looking at this so far, what do you see the prosecution talking about, thinking about in terms of cross examination? >> so kristen, the prosecution has some problems. first, no eyewitness to the killing. second, no murder weapons. the police haven't found any guns that could be tied to the crime, and the third is a weak motive. they're saying that mr. murdaugh did this in order to deflect from his own legal troubles. i do think he's doing a good job of demonstrating to the jury that he loved his son and he cared very much about his wife. so i think the prosecution and cross examination will just try to undermine his credibility. this is a reasonable doubt case. the defense will say they don't have to prove who killed these two victims. all they have to do is persuade the jury that there's reasonable

doubt about whether mr. murdaugh committed the crime. >> kristen, ultimately, and there's some indication just in the way he was introduced that he wanted to take the stand, but is it -- it's always, isn't it, ultimately the decision of the defendant whether or not they decide to testify. so even if -- because one of the things i read in the local paper today was that his lawyers were meeting with him at the jail late into the tonight. we don't know what that was. that could have been prep. it also could have been them and probably was explaining to him what the risks were here. but ultimately, they're going to do what he tells them to do, right? >> yeah, he has a constitutional right to participate in his defense. and if he says he wants to testify, it is up to the court as well as his defense attorneys who are mere representatives. it is up to them to make sure that he is making this choice voluntarily and intelligently and knowingly. and that's what they did by doing the question and answer in

advance of the jury coming in. they made sure he knew what risks and rewards there was, that balance. that he knew all of those things, and yet he still wanted to testify. but you know, based on the way that his attorneys seem to suggest and when the court said, hey, do you want some time to speak with your attorneys before it's your time to take the stand and his attorneys saying he doesn't want to talk to me, it makes it very clear to me that he made this decision from the start. so i think that they had been prepping all along for his testimony, and you can see it is coming out very methodically. now, the cross examination will be a very different thing. as of right now the direct is coming out as beautiful as it could. >> do you think it helps him or hurts him that he's a lawyer? >> i think it absolutely helps him. and the fact that he's a former prosecutor, it absolutely helps him. he knows and can anticipate what types of questions the

prosecutor is going to ask. but you know, at the same time, as a former prosecutor, i can tell you if i'm accused of these heinous crimes, i probably wouldn't take the stand because i also as a former prosecutor know what a good prosecutor is capable of, and i know the risk and exposure of the unconvicted yet charged crimes will have on my ability to be free. >> paul, do you agree with that? do you think he knows what's coming? >> well, i think he knows what's coming, but i do think the jury might have some concerns about whether this is performance. this is an experienced attorney, extremely well-connected in this county, and very wealthy. he doesn't sound look any of that. he's trying to come across as very folksy, he's talking in a specific way that's designed to appeal to the jury. whether they will be persuaded by that is a whole different question. >> yeah, i mean, catie beck as you've been watching this all

along and i was struck as paul just said about sort of the folksy way in which he talked about members of his family, grandma and papa t and pau-pau referring to the son who died and bus, his other son who actually testified and trying to paint this picture, right, of a very loving family. he went to the home of his now deceased wife's parents and so on. talk a little bit about, if you will, what we know about this family and how they have done since then. >> reporter: well, we have heard lots from testimony in this trial. we've heard five weeks of testimony and friends and family, you haven't heard one person describe any conflict, any disagreement, any aggressive behavior, any phone calls to the police before this for potential domestic violence calls or anything else. you have seen a picture through the witness testimony of both prosecution and defense of a pretty wholesome family.

they did attend sporting events together, they did go to the beach together, they did call and text each other. that's all very clear. i think they are reinforcing that at this point, and trying as much as they can to paint that picture. but i think there were two critical questions that each side really needed to answer. i to think the defense needed to answer for that video. to leave that an unanswered question for the jury, him saying to investigators multiple times i was never there and clearly all of these witnesses identifying him as there, to leave that as an unanswered question is really probably going to be tough for the jury going into the jury room. the prosecution's challenge now in terms of answering a question is how was alex murdaugh's life made better by these murders. that hasn't been fully explained. as we've discussed this theory that he was trying to get sympathy and that these financial crimes were causing this incredible pressure, yeah, that's believable to a rational person, but how has his life

improved after the fact? he was still charged with all of those financial crimes. he knew the cat was out of the bag. he wasn't going to be free of all of this by committing these crimes. i feel like in terms of motive, it is a steep hill right now. they do have to answer that question, how was his life made better. and if they had this wholesome life before, he certainly lost that now. so i think putting him up there as it's been pointed out this morning, there might have been some tension between the attorneys and murdaugh on whether or not that was a good idea. the decision ult ultimately came down to him. he seemed calm, confident, ready to go. he did seem like this decision was one he carefully considered and was ready to make. >> and does the jury believe that what he is showing on the stand, the motion is real. so many more questions. we're about an hour away from going back, hour and 15 minute lunch break, catie beck, kristen

gibbons feden, and breaking news on another key story, the ohio toxic train derailment, we've got a live update from the national transportation safety board on its new preliminary report and whether any of this can bring peace to the people who live nearby. they have been speaking emotionally about how their lives have been turned upside down. you're watching "chris jansing reports" only on msnbc. reports"c giorgio, look. the peanut butter box is here. ralph, that's the chewy pharmacy box with our flea and tick meds. it's not peanut butter. i know, i know. but every time the box comes, we get the peanut butter. yes, because mom takes the meds out of the box and puts them in the peanut butter. sounds like we're getting peanut butter. yes, but that is the chewy pharmacy box. ♪ the peanut butter box is here. ♪ ♪ the peanut butter box is here ♪ alright, i'm out. pet prescriptions delivered to your door. chewy. subway keeps upping their game with the subway series. an all-star menu of delicious subs.

like #8 the great garlic - rotisserie style chicken, bacon and garlic aioli. i've tasted greatness. great garlic though - tastes way better. can't argue with that analysis. try subway's tastiest menu upgrade yet. [♪♪] can't argue with that analysis. if you have diabetes, it's important to have confidence in the nutritional drink you choose. try boost glucose control®. it's clinically shown to help manage blood sugar levels and contains high quality protein to help manage hunger and support muscle health. try boost® today. woo! hey you. i am loving this silversneakers® boxing class. thank you aetna. yeah? well, i'm loving that zero dollar monthly plan premium. thank you, aetna. ah-ha. smartest move we ever made. well, it sure is. and by the way did you finally make that appointment with your dentist? i sure did. gotta keep this million dollar smile. if you're turning 65, call 1-888-65-aetna to learn about the benefits you may want. and let's make healthier happen together.

come here! you know why people are always looking at their phones? they're banking, with bank of america. see cousin jimmy over there? his girlfriend just caught the bouquet so... he might need a little more help saving. for that engagement ring... the groom's parents. you think they're looking at photos of their handsome boy? they're not! she just saw how much they spent on ballroom dance classes... won't be needing those anymore. digital tools so impressive, you just can't stop banking.

everything's changing so quickly. digital tools so impressive, before the xfinity 10g network, we didn't have internet that let us play all at once. every device? in every room? why are you up here? when i was your age, we couldn't stream a movie when the power went out. you're only a year older than me. you have no idea how good you've got it. huh? what a time to be alive. introducing the next generation 10g network. only from xfinity. the future starts now.

right now we are hearing directly from officials from the national transportation safety board. there you see it in d.c. just hours after their preliminary report pointed to overheated wheel bearings as the reason for the norfolk southern railway crash in east palestine. here was the ntsb chair just moments ago. >> i can tell you this much, this was 100% preventable.

we call things accidents. there is no accident. know that the ntsb has one goal, and that is safety and ensuring that this never happens again. >> but it is clear that people in east palestine really want to know details about why this happened because it's been nearly three weeks since their lives were turned upside down, and emotions were running high after locals got to directly confront the railway's ceo. >> the people of east palestine are just being treated like dummies. we're not dummies. we're smart people. i don't feel safe in this town now. you took it away from me. you took it away from us. i'm 65 years old, a diabetic, afib heart disease, everything. now did you shorten my life now? i want to retire and enjoy it. how are we going to enjoy it? you burned me. we were going to sell our house.

our value went -- >> you can hear the pain there, and residents just want their lives back. they do not want to be used as political pawns. it's against that backdrop that transportation secretary pete buttigieg arrived at the crash site this morning, but can the report, secretary buttigieg, the ntsb do anything to assuage the fears of people in or near east palestine. i want to bring in nbc's jesse kirsch who's been talking to residents today. also with us former national transportation safety board chair jim hall. let me start with what i thought was a pretty strong statement from your successor, current head of the ntsb. i can tell you this much, this was 100% preventable. there is no accident. what do you make of that statement, and from what you've seen in the preliminary report, was this preventable? >> that's perfectly an accurate statement based on the information that she received from the investigators of the

factual report. the fact of the matter is that the ntsb can make recommendations, but the system of safety depends on the railroads who own the tracks. i think that's an important distinction a lot of americans don't understand. you know, your roads are owned and operated by state, federal, local government. the skies are by the faa, but the railroads own the tracks, it's their responsibility, and what we have seen in the last decade is corporate greed and government indifference to regulatory measures to keep americans safe because there are thousands of tons of this hazardous material. they ship through each and every city in this country almost on a daily basis. >> let me ask you a question, it's a little bit maybe basic, but not being an expert on

railroads i'm going to ask it. the derailment they set in this report can be traced of the overheated wheel bearing. 253 degrees hotter than air temperature. anything from 170 to 200 degrees requires a stop. is that something that they know every moment what the heat of the wheel bearing is, who would make that call to say we have to stop, it's too hot? >> well, that's all part of the investigation, and i don't want to get into that from the standpoint that that is being conducted by the ntsb. i'm very confident in the investigators there, and those questions will be answered. but the fact of the matter is the people at east palestine have to live with the decisions that have been made that may impact their geography for decades. >> which brings me to jesse because watching the town hall last night, these people -- you

understand, they are traumatized by what happened. they're concerned for their health. they're concerned for their finances, and this is their town. this is the place they love. this is where many of them have raised their families. i wonder if you've had a chance, if there's any early reaction to the report, to the ntsb press conference or the visit from secretary buttigieg? >> reporter: yeah, so chris, we had yesterday asked a resident about the impending visit of the secretary, and he said at this point, you know, just broadly speaking just got to let officials do their jobs at this point, but obviously as you mentioned, there are concerns about people's health. there are concerns about their property values. that's something that the krae ceo of norfolk southern was pressed upon last night by residents who spoke at a town hall on cnn. they were pushing for the company to essentially pledge for higher property values than they think their property is worth at this point because of the stigma associated with this community in the aftermath of

this derailment. i want to flag something that just came up at the ntsb press conference. our tom costello asked for clarification because we were talking about those three temperature readings we got around a roughly 30 mile stretch leading up to the derailment in which the trains, onetrain's, a suspect wheel bearing, according to the ntsb jumped in temperature by more than 200 degrees. the ntsb press conference, tom costello just asked about this, and got clarification that the crew knew that the temperature was heating up on that wheel bearing because we know from the report that an audible alarm went off when it hit this critical threshold when it was at that more than 200 degree jump but there had been two prior sensors that were getting readings that would have shown the temperature climbing along that 30-mile stretch. we know the crew was aware of that as it was unfolding according to this ntsb press conference moments ago. however, the ntsb chairman did

clarify that how to deal with the temperature readings and jumps they were following procedure according to the ntsb. there's the question of if those thresholds, if the time to pump the brakes needed to come sooner and if there needs to be reform around those kinds of systems, and that's something we have questions on, and we have reached out to the railroad for an interview on this, and we have been told they're looking into this and will keep us posted on any updates. more questions, frankly, obviously getting some answers at this point, chris, and that leads to more questions about what might need to change in the future. >> let me ask you then finally about that because, jim, i really am taken by the fact that you said this is about corporate greed and indifference and we also heard from the head of the ntsb that, you know, they're going to make changes. what do you see? let's get away from, you know, the specifics of overheated bearings, but what needs to change to address that big

picture problem that you see? >> well, the railroads, particularly norfolk southern need to address the corporate culture that has really gone off the rails as well in the last ten years. you know, these trains are operated by human beings, they're based on training, but at the end of the day, the amount of resources that go into safety that are executive board room decisions and when an event like this happens, you need to examine this company from top to bottom. the american public also needs to know that the ntsb doesn't have the full independence that it has in aviation accident investigations in rail. the so called black boxes are many times taken and read out by the railroads before the ntsb had them. i'm not saying it happened in this case, but i'm just saying

the rules and the railroad investigation and the amount of money that ntsb is staffed with, the staff at the department of transportation,