that confirmation came from the federal receivership - the authority in charge of prison medical care in california. >> did the receiver not know it was illegal? >> the letter didn't ask whether or not procedures were illegal or not, just asked if they were taking place. >> the law clearly states no one is to be pressured into sterilization. >> our regulations are clear. a medically unnecessary procedure, such as a tubal ligation is not to be performed. when we were made aware, we took immediate steps to ensure that these procedures needed to stop. >> oh the patients they claim to have tuba ligation. it says it right there. >> wow. >> it says you're report i think from your c-section. >> mm mmm. >> january 29th? >> uh huh. >> let's keep that aside. >> to have a baby should be a wonderful, joyous experience, something that you just cherish all your life. to me, it was a nightmare. i was humiliated, i was treated so badly i just couldn't believe that i live in a society like animals. you know, i don't if it's my situation because i'm incarcerated, i don't know if it's the complexion of

they go into receivership. and someone comes in and hopefully saves the day. puts a bandage on it. and makes it good for the next couple of years and waits for us to repeat the cycle over and over again. so that is part of the reason why the mayor's office said, let's not do that. let's not just put a bandage on the problem and repeat the process. we have seen this before. the director prior to director smith, was not the first director we had that came and went in a short period of time. what can we do as a city to break this cycle? so we jumped on one of the solutions being presented by the secretary. so among the secretary's initiatives were the choice neighborhoods initiative as well as rad. these are two signature initiatives. and we figured out, if you can't beat them, join them. if the secretary has a new program to help public housing. let's figure out a way to take advantage of it and use it for the benefit of san francisco. both mrs. vascal and barbara said, it's the simple way of looking at how to make this work. we are taking money, housing authorities get funded turned

it went into receivership, then bought out at almost $2 million. how the company got to where it is today. >> i have been involved several years with the company. i was on the board and watched this great product suffer with a lack of marketing. go pro creates a market and we drift behind them. we were able to buy it back. so we are believers in the product. >> any chance you're going to be making the camera smaller? i know they feel a certain way. what about the actual size? >> that is a great question. we love the look and feel of this camera and we are looking at ways of making it smaller. >> what is the battery life currently? >> two and a half to three hours right now. we would like to extend that to five hours. >> what is your favorite sport? >> i am still doing heli-skiing. >> can we see that feature, that film of you going down? >> i lost that camera. i was coming back to report it and away they went. that is how i got involved in the company. >> gentlemen, thanks very much. james clark and danny lysenko. coming up next, i will speak to the

on, the united states government effectively owned general motors, the largest bond408der, in receivershipy was there no communication between gm and nhtsa? a government agency is trying to oversee the recall, but the government effectively -- it doesn't seem like there was any due diligence done? were they just separate? >> they're separate. what government bankruptcy and the bailout of general motors, that was cleaning up the balance sheet. let's be clear about this. they put people in charge will, and made moves, but the company was operating as it was. in other words, the government, yes, was an owner, but the government was not calling the shots day to day. this was a quickly done bankruptcy. this was about cleaning up the balance sheet. this was not about, hey, if i'm going to buy a company, let me do full due diligence. they couldn't. >> at some point, mandy, i don't know if you agree with this, at some point somebody from the government would you say, is there anything you need to know about, or hey, guys, just to put this on the radar, we're having an ignition switch, i understand

then as its balance sheet collapse the beleaguered bank placed the company into administrative receivership with pricewaterhouse coopers but then encouraged the accountancy giant to sell the profitable assets back to the same directors including mr southwell for what one expert now describes as quote a knock down prize at the independent on sunday which said this investigation said that this decision was bizarre as a company seemingly under the control of its directors with mr southwell as a not exactly had caused a loss to boss of about one hundred million pounds with a bank writing off sixty million pounds worth of debt on a single day and march two thousand and eight well this mirrors what we sold r.b.s. from r.b.s. sensors in their division restructuring group the global restructuring group the lobel restructuring group which is enabled by one of these big four a big five accountancy firms they're the really the linchpin in the photo being diet for the fruit for their fruit stores right so here it is price waterhouse cooper i think with r.b.s. it was one of the others or the big four an