>> gretchen: sounds like he's going to give him bail because he's talking about the fact that it's circumstantial evidence. so the only person who know social security oscar himself. find out what happened. >> steve: we'll have complete coverage on it tomorrow on "fox & friends" weekend. have a great week. >> gretchen: happy friday. happening right whether the man known as "the blade runner" is free on bail while he awaits trial of his of the shooting death of his girlfriend. the eyes of the word are on the eyes of magistrate. >> i'm martha maccallum we've been listening to a readout from this magistrate, desmond nair.

much more detailed than we have for a bail hearing. sounds like the trial is already underway. let's listen in to some of this. >> the improbabilities as highlighted by the investigating officer but more underlined by the senior counsel representing the state, there are some aspects of the version of the accused that are quite pronounced. i have difficulty in appreciating why the accused did not ascertain the whereabouts of his girlfriend when he got out of bed. i have difficulty also coming to the terms with the fact that the accused did not seek to verify who exactly was in the toilet when he could have asked. i also have difficulty appreciating why the deceased would not have screamed back from the toilet. i have difficulty also understanding why the deceased and the accused would not of like mind in

those circumstances escape you there the bedroom door, then venture into the toilet? i have a problem also as to why the accused would further venture into danger knowing full well that the intruder was in the toilet, leaving himself open to be attacked even before he shot, because he heard a noise, left that area. went to fetch the fire arm, return and, to my mind what if intruder came out was waiting for him and upon sight of him shot him? i have difficulty in appreciating why the accused would not seek to ascertain who exactly was in the toilet. i have some difficulty with the defense version at this early stage for the part of, that i plays a the presiding officer in the bail application, that the accused chose to sleep on that side of the bed on that particular night and yet

indicating that the deceased had slept there the night before. for those reasons and many others i am not a trial court. there are improbabilities which need to be explored and possibly will only be ventilated if the accused gave evidence under oath. and for that reason i'm saying that the defense has failed to show this court that there's a weakness in the strength of the state case to the point that it can constitute a -- circumstance to their benefit. but equally, against the backdrop of the circumstantial evidence of the state case to some extent the evidence of the, the weak evidence on some areas of his testimony by

warrant officer hilton botha, and having regard to the above, i find that while it would have been necessary for the applicant to show the weakness of the state case as an exceptional circumstance, likewise the state not through its own doing, can not equally show that the state case is so strong, and watertight that the applicant must come to the conclusion that he needs to flee or evade this trial. with regard to the personal circumstances and the issue more especially, section 64-b, along with section 66 and that turns on the issue

whether the accused would choose to flee not because of the strength of the state case but because he's not tied in south africa. what are the emotional family community and ox pagesal ties of the -- occupational of the accused to the place he is tied. mr. pistorius is south african citizen. id. a professional athletic. resides at 6286 silver wood estates. he resided in the republic of south africa all his life and he frequently travels abroad to participate in international sporting events. he regards south africa as his permanent place of abode. he has not plans to relocate to anybody. he admits he has friends and family in south africa although he has friends abroad. heens immoveable property in south africa. what are the assets he has.

heens i am moveable property which consists of property. immoveable property he currently resides at silver wood estates. this property is valued at approximately five million encumbered by mortgage bond in the amount of 2 million. there are two further immoveable properties with weeping willow estates, pretoria east, which properties have a combined value of approximately 1.6 million. they are bonded to the value of one million. he has a vacant land in which has approximately 1.7 million which is not bonded. he holds mobile assets, housing furniture. jewelry which are valued in excess half a million. he has cash assets of one million at various banks within the country. he has what would be, what are the means and travel documents held by the accused which may enable him to leave the country. he has two south african

passports. the one is full. he needs the passport to compete overseas. compete overseas but is willing to surrender the passports to the investigating officer should be a condition of bail. he is not in possession of any other travel documents. and undertakes not to apply for such documentation pending the finalization of these proceedings. his professional occupation currently provides him with a income of approximately 5.7 million per annum. now we have debated the issue including the discussion on the argument and i as a court would have an inquisitoral power inquired from the investigating officer required it probable that a person of international stature would not only risk losing his career but seek

to be a fugitive in any part of the world. more especially as we discussed today being a person who has to use pros theet sis. and whales applicant now has argued but why in the same vein would the accused get involved in a fight at melrose arch or discharge a fire arm under the table. i think what we're seeking to establish the ends to which one would go to save himself and advocate nelson i don't think that false so much for consideration. the issue before me is whether this accused, being who he is and would be with the assets he has in the country, would possibly seek to duck and dive all over the world when, even by the state's own concession, he may at worst-case scenario face culpable homicide. i even pointed out in as

much as the minimum sentence legislation may be applicable there are provision for exceptional circumstances or substantial and compelling circumstance which would cause the trial judge to deviate if necessary. so it may not necessarily be the case that he is now committed to face 15 years imprisonment or life imprisonment. i can not find that the accused, i can not find it has within established, that the accused is a flight risk or that that ground has been established that seeks that is needed to be established. turning to the issue of whether the found in section 64-a along with section 65 has been established where there is likelihood that the accused if released on bail will endanger the safety of the public or any person or commit a schedule 1 offense, i have regard to what has been placed before me.

indeed so they are separate incidents and i -- [inaudible] and caused the investigating officer to explain the circumstances of the charge that was withdrawn against the accused by a complainant called sam. now the accused has shown tendencies of aggression i think it is quite clear but it is not in dispute he used foul language threatening to conduct himself in violent manner. it is not in dispute he threatened to break somebody's legs. it is not in dispute the accused caused his friend to try to manipulate a complainant into not taking the matter further. but i think one should differentiate between individuals who have outstanding cases against them, individuals against whom they are reported matters, individuals who have previous convictions and individuals who, i have

had, individuals with regard to whom the state has placed evidence under oath before me that has a propensity to commit violence. now in this particular instance officer hilton botha initially responded i have not objected to bail because the accused a flight risk. he will not stand trial. it is a serious charge. i've gone into the seriousness and the extent of the case and the weakness thereof. i do not think that warrant officer both that, spent as much much as he had if he wanted to show the accused has propensity to commit violence. if need to do that, there is ample room and ample time for you to do that by looking at the background of accused. one could be ingenius and even try to get any kind of medical report that can show that the accused is not of stable mind.

that was not done. i do not have the dates of the incidents. i have a verbal threats and another verbal threat. a discharge of a firearm passed under the table. is that enough so show that he has a propensity to commit violence? i appreciate that a person is did but i do not think that is enough. more especially when a investigating officer merely up to on these three incidents. that ground has not been established. and, in coming to my conclusion i have regard to the supreme court of appeal decision of state versus rudolph, 2010, 1 sa-262. weighing that particular matter the accused's past behavior included among others the fact that he had an -- against him relating to domestic violence and that he was out on bail on charges of rape and attempted murder. now that is the type of predisposition to violence

that would find the establishment of the ground that would vitiate against the accused getting bail. now, the honorable judge in the matter of state versus devi, 2012, 2 sac, 492, indicated that and i quote, an applicant in a bail application is given a broad scope to establish the requisite circumstances whether they relate to the nature of the crime, but circumstances of applicant to the accused or anything else that is particularly cogent. that he was seized with a matter which required the accused to show exceptional circumstances exist to justify his release. judge lacocd referred to the matter and others to which i

have referred and he also referred to rudolph, 20101 sac, 2-r, supreme court of appeal where it was found that personal circumstances to an kpaexal degree may lead to finding of release on bail is justified. he goes on in the judgment to say, in the contents, in the context of section 6011-a the extensionnalty of the circumstances must be such as to per swayed a court it would be in the interest of justice to order the release of the person of the accused. a certain measure of the flexibility in the judicial approach to the question is required and he referred to mohammed, 1992, 2 sa cr-5 07-c. he goes on to add. it would be foot tile to attempt to provide a list of possibilities that would constitute such exceptional circumstances. to incarcerate an innocent person to an offense he did not commit could also be viewed as exceptional. excuse me.

bill: we are listening to the magistrate who is about to decide whether or not oscar pistorius meets bail and goes home or goes back to jail. >> who after all must be regarded as innocent until proven guilty and the judge referred to journal. 1998, 2 sacr, 277, se, the real case he added argued before me on behalf of state, the respondents states a strong case against the apple lantz and could not stand trial if released on bail because of imprisonment. the to argue that the

appellants are flight risks. to ignore the factors of an applicant under section 1611, he goes on to add, in his view would have the effect of denying an applicant a reasonable opportunity to edues evidence to satisfy the court of the existence of exceptional circumstances, but most importantly it would be difficult, if not impossible to establish such extensional circumstances. -- exceptional circumstances.

martha: we believe we're moments away right now from hearing the decision on whether or not oscar pistorius will receive bail. this is being laid out in great detail. let's listen back in. >> if appellant's favor deciding he discharged onus of proving exceptional circumstances with the evidence of the investigator officer that appellant one was not regard the as flight risk. was not likely to interfere with state witnesses or defer the investigation of the case and to further concession there was no reason to regard the release of appellant one on bail as likely to constitute a threat to the public. so what the investigating officer in that particular

matter did was merely confirm that the ground that need to be established before bail may be refused in the interests of justice existed. and i turn to look at the facts of this particular matter, a as, mr. pistorius, being able to through his own evidence and that of his witnesses affidavit statements, and that of the evidence of the state that the grounds that need to be established in the interests of justice before he is released from bail have indeed been established. i want to just turn quickly before i deal with that on the score of public establishment of evidence to establish the grounds in section 64-a, to e. if this case, this particular matter evoked

public outrage in any way, my view is that the state in opposing bail or to have placed before me exactly where this outrage lay. i have some difficulty also with the fact that even though they may have been individuals in the court and outside the court who took umbrage at the violent nature of the deceased's death, before i can find it established as a ground that there will be a shock and outrain in this particular matter if i release the accused on bail, i can not certainly do so on my own and in isolation. i would need to be, i would need to have evidence before me in that regard. and if that is the ground on

which, or the ground that the state wishes to show has been established, which prevent the accused release on bail, then there are factors that will convince me to do that. whether the shock or outrage of the community might lead to public disorder if the accused is released is one of them. whether the central peace and security among members of the public will be undermined or jeopardized by the release of the accused. now, i must highlight that while bail is inquisitoral and while bail, the standard in bail is not that in terms of bee lot applicability of the law of evidence, that notwithstanding i can not flagrantly disregard the fact that there needs to be a proper basis laid before the establishment of grounds in the criminal procedure act.

i do also wish to indicate that it is indeed an area of concern that where the state is in possession of information, albeit in a magazine, that the accused, for instance, has property in italy, that the state machinery sound and solid as it is, did not contact, for instance, interpole or any other international police agency to help determine whether the accused indeed has property listed in his name in italy and whether or not he is allowed to use same and had that been done then the accused, as a matter of cause not mentioned it in his affidavit and that would have certainly count against him. having regard to the fact that the accused is not a flight risk, neither because he, not is not a flight

risk. and that he accused does not show a propensity to commit violence, the accused, there is no evidence before me will interfere with state witnesses, and there isn't proper evidence before me relating to the public perception of the matter, and having regard to the totality of the evidence before me against the factors that need to be established before the accused may be denied bile, i find that the very non-establishment of those factors set out in section 64-a to b, together with the fact that the accused offered in this instance a version under oath at very early stage and i do not attach any weight to the investigating officer's confessions with regard to the defense version but the fact remains, ordinarily one gets flimsy affidavits merely saying i deny the

allegations. i will not flee. but in those instance the accuse has reached out to try to meet the state case. of course against the background of those improbabilities that i have seen and mentioned. that fact, that reaching out in the affidavit in the way that he did, placing it before the court, together with the fact -- [inaudible] it is a formal inquiry in terms of section 60 subsection b of criminal procedure act. >> [inaudible]. we have a document that is -- >> okay. give me five minutes, please. thank you. court will adjourn. bill: so clearly we can not see inside the courtroom. we only have the microphone

at the magistrate who is gone for about an hour, 23, 24 minutes. you can clearly see he is not phoning in this decision. he is taking his time. he is going through a lot of south african law as we try to await whether or not pistorius goes home to await trial or whether or not he goes back to his jail cell there in south africa. martha: fascinating to listen to. sounds more like the entire trial is being laid out. we heard the pros and cons whether or not pistorius would be considered a flight risk. we heard the judge talk about whether or not he would duck and dive around the world. he laid out pistorius's assets which are considerable. he has a home in south africa. he has a home, according to this in italy as well. he has numerous cars. 1.65 million in annual salary. i believe that would probably be in and i would imagine. we can translate that to u.s. dollars -- rand. he has a lot of means at his

disposal. greg palkot, our reporter on this story is five feet away from oscar pistorius right now. he also has been leting us know what the feeling is like inside the courtroom. in fact when that list of assets was read greg palkot reported that pistorius broke down in tears, his head in his hands as he really feels the entire weight of what might be coming his way as a result of all this. bill: martha, this is just crossing. this is the associated press out of pretoria, south africa. it is a one-line headline. magistrate says, oscar pistorius to be granted bail. that's what's coming now in from the associated press. greg palkot is inside the courtroom. his reactions coming up in moment. he described how he is reacting now. megyn kelly is with me. megyn, good morning to you. i don't know how much time you have spent studying up on south african law but my hunch you're about to get a lot more familiar with this. if the magistrate says he gets bail and if that

headline holds, pistorius goes home today, right? our apologies. okay. we'll get megyn back here in a moment. just going to the wire services here now, listen, it would be a wonderful thing if we had the video feed because we could actually see what's happen inside the courtroom. the magistrate said before this bail hearing began though the video would not be allowed. that's the reason why we just bring you the microphone. megyn is back now. megyn, i just want to read this headline now if you missed this the associated press says the magistrate will grant bail to oscar pistorius. if that is the case he goes home today? >> i'm not surprised. it. two days ago, three days ago i would have been surprised. but this case is falling apart thanks to what appears to be some very shoddy detective work by a man who we now know and you guys reported yesterday, is facing seven counts of attempted murder himself. that's the guy who they have as the lead detective.

at least they did 24 hours ago. now he has been replaced. you tell me how compromised this investigation is now that they have someone himself an attempted murder defendant as the lead investigator. someone who left behind a bullet casing in the toilet which is, at the crime scene. someone who let ammunition go walking from the crime scene with supporters of the defendant. somebody who testified under oath that there is nothing at the crime scene that is inconsistent with oscar pistorius's version of events, which is not true. just sitting here as a armchair lawyer, half a world away i can think of five or six things that are totally inconsistent with his story. somebody who contaminated crime scene himself by not wearing protective booties et cetera, you are supposed to wear as an officer. all this came out on cross-examination at the bail hearing. what seemed to be at first an airtight case is quickly unraveling. were i the magistrate i would have serious doubts now too about the prosecution's ability to make premeditated murder.

that is very high standard. i don't know whether they can make anymore. i don't know whether they can make any murder case already now in a country where they have a 10% conviction rate in murder cases, bill. martha: megyn, it is martha. and i heard you say that last night, a 10% conviction rate in murder cases in south africa is a pretty stunning number. we can also add to the mix here that pistorius's family, according to the wire reports cheered in court after the athlete won his release on bail. we have a live shot up right now that shows what is going on outside there. you know, it's striking to me, megyn, when you watch this and you listen to what's going on in that courtroom, you know, the parallels you feel to the o.j. case because this man is so famous, so beloved, so well-known in his nation, accused of killing this beautiful, blond girlfriend, and it is clearly, you know, gripping that country in a way that, you know, you just, you wonder how, what impact that has on how this all

plays out in the end? >> well, that's a good point and the other problem that they have, the prosecution has, in that country, apart from his notoriety is, that there is an epidemic there of violence by men against their female partners, an epidemic. the defense is going to get up there and argue about how the murder rate is high and the crime rate is high and oscar pistorius knew this. this is why he was so scared when he heard a noise in the middle of the night, he jumped to the conclusion it was an intruder rather than the woman he was shing with the -- sleeping with in the restroom. south africa has horrendous, horrendous rate of violence against women and male partner against female partner and they overlook it. there are initial reports he had at least a couple of domestic incidents at his house. they don't say whether it

involved reeva and other details. she was abused woman in the past and advocate for abused womb. that is pattern women that abused tend to repeat. that is circumstantial and not necessarily admissible. you tell me, is it imapplauseable a man so tearfied an intruder would sleep with sliding glass doors open and upon first hearing a noise wouldn't look in the bed next to him to see if the woman supposed to be sharing the bed was there or in the bathroom that he was going to shoot up. isn't possible that she would not have screamed someone is in here. would she lock lock the door to use the restroom in the middle night. why was she wearing street clothes. why in the middle of the night dud she have on shorts and a vest instead after nightgown? bill: these are great questions and they will be answered sometime during the trial. greg palkot is getting lined

up in south africa right now. megyn, go back to the first point here. this is what defense attorneys do. they don't go into defend their client. they turn their case against the police and they put the police on trial. that is pretty much what we saw over the past 24 hours. >> that is absolutely right. that is their job and that is what they should do, there, south africa, like here the deck is normally stacked against the defendant. just merely by the fact that he has been charged, the trier fact, whether it is a judge like it will be here or a jury like in america, usually, tends to believe they did something. there is a reason they show up in a courtroom. the deck is stacked against them. system should work against the defendant's advantage and police should dot all the ts andis. what a mess this investigator boeth that did, he may have cost them a murder conviction. i don't know right now. bill: we don't know if he

was specifically assigned to the case. if he assumed control of it, or perhaps he was just in a rotation of various detectives that are on that police staff. >> i don't know how he got appointed but what i do know according to the reports is his attempted murder charges, by the way there are seven of them. he allegedly tried to shoot up a bus full of civilians because he was chasing a bad guy. he believed was on the bus. that was brought on february 4th. reeva was killed on february 14th. when they assigned the detective to the case they knew, they knew this guy had seven counts of attempted murder potentially against him and no one batted an eyelash!. bill: that could be the case but that, that still does not prove guilt or innocence for pistorius. >> absolutely not. absolutely not. listen, i opine as a person who practiced law for nine years, that without the shoddy detective work, this is a strong case against oscar pistorius because his story makes no sense, no

sense whatsoever. and we'll see what the other evidence is. there were initial reports that an earwitness heard them arguing although, she appears to have been very far away. there were initial reports she had been texting with another man shortly before she was killed. that is not confirmed. so we'll see as time goes on what the evidence is of an argument or what may have ticked him off if anything. but his story as he has told it is not plausible. nonetheless, not plausible doesn't equate with guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. martha: the magistrate said as much. he said this story has a lot of holes in it and he said that could constitute a reason why, why pistorius would want to flee, when the magistrate was laying down his argument for what would have persuaded him in that direction. megyn, thank you so much. we'll see you later. i know you will be all over this on "america live". we'll tune in. thank you very much. let's go to greg palkot who was less than five feet away from oscar pistorius when this all played out in the

courtroom. greg, what can you tell us from in there? >> reporter: martha, bill, amazing stuff. again i was just a couple feet away from oscar pistorius when the word came down that in fact he was free on bail. he started to cry uncontrollably. behind him his family, yelped out a shout of cheer. they clearly saw this, at least a small victory. the accused was then led off and then the family continued to cheer and to hug each other. i left them as they were in an embrace, a circle embrace. i spoke to a few of the family and friends and they said they were happy. they were gratified. but this was a long haul. i'm sure you've been explaining to our viewers, we were in that hot, sweaty courtroom, and the judge, known to be methodical, certainly took his time, going through piece by piece through the evidence, through his arguments, through the case and finally coming to the conclusion

that in fact bail should be granted to pistorius. that he did not represent a flight risk as called it. he did not represent a risk to other individuals. and it would not impede the case. but in fact it took a long time to get to that point. the judge made a lot of other points as well. the key issue about whether or not this shooting, this death, of steenkamp, of reeva steenkamp, the former girlfriend of pistorius, that was still left open. in fact the judge saying that while he was less inclined to think that it was premeditated murder, in fact it was not his position to decide whether it was. he would keep it in what is called category 6 here in south after can law and it would be the job of a trial judge to decide whether in fact it was premeditated murder but he would proceed along those lines. he did pick apart the case of detective bottom that,

that lead detective in the case. time and time again he said the evidence gathering was sloppy. he came around, if not detective, that is the state case, the case is still out there and, then point by point by point, he said he had troubles with the various aspects of the story being put out by the defense for pistorius, the actions on the night of early morning hours of valentine's day which left the slain girl in, slain woman in that bathroom i was close to pistorius, a couple feet away. i kept glancing at him. he lost composure, again and again and again. his head was downcast and literally in his hands when the judge went through the events of that tragic night. when he recounted eyewitnesses and friends of pistorius talking about the

relationship with steenkamp. he was crying. he was clearly worked up. there was an adjournment in the case, in the hearing for the judge to leave for a moment and that helped to compose, to some degree the accused. he came back out and heard this decision on the bail. that by the way, the mechanics of that is this. that should be happening in the next couple of hours. it will be processed here. and we're awaiting for the details exactly when he will be set free but, from a short-range standpoint, family and friends telling me that they are gratified by the decision on bail, on the longer range standpoint, that is the state of the case against pistorius, still a lot of questions, a lot of doubts raised by this methodical judge in this lengthy conclusion to this bail hearing. martha, bill? martha: it is so striking. as you say that judge laid out in very clear terms why he thought that the

defense's story does not hold up. why it was implausible, improbable that the way the defense is describing what happened that night could be true. and then he went together and pieced together the problems with the detective both that's investigations and it felt that because they could not establish a violent past for pistorius, a history of this kind of behavior, and because they can not prove that what happened that night is as might appear, that prompted this judge to say, that gives me no reason not to allow you to be out on bail. greg, what about the question of what happens now? what kind of restrictions will be on oscar pistorius as he waits for his trial? do they have a speedy trial system in south africa? or is this something that will drag on indefinitely before we see him back in court? >> reporter: martha, from legal experts i have been speaking to, this will drag on. they don't see an actual trial in this matter, although it seems like there has been a trial for the

last couple days, at least for many, many months, not maybe until the end of this year. and that was probably one of the big arguments for allowing pistorius to be granted bail. the prisons in south africa are rough. conditions in these cells are tough. crime is high here. and i think that weighed on the judge's mind heavily, that pistorius in one of these south african prisons for six, seven, eight months, waiting for the trial to start, that could raise more problems. yes he will be under tight supervision, title restrictions. we know where he will be. he will be at a family home. there will be tabs on his movements. going into this hearing, martha, i was basically told it looked like the judge would grant the bail. once again for our viewers, i think the judge underscored this too, this does not in any way really make a decision, make a judgment on the case. that in fact again the judge time and time again thought

that there were all sorts of problems with the version of events that pistorius's lawyers laid out. again, six, seven, eight, nine times, the judge said he had problems with that. but at the same time, yes, he was pretty fair and pretty balanced on this matter. at the same time he took apart time and time again the initial work by the state. i think basically now he is saying, martha, that south africa has to get down to business and really put some top investigators on this and create a case. what i've been told by legal experts the forensic evidence is not in. the autopsy evidence, the ba list i can it is, all of this is still to come. all of this potentially, potentially damaging. martha. martha: yeah, so many details. you think about the angle of the bullets and the way they went into that door and whether or not that determines if he had his prosthetic legs on at the time or not, and whether that goes to the issue of premeditation perhaps and what was going on. we heard, megyn talking about how she was dressed in street clothes when she was

in there. which doesn't back up the story of a couple asleep in bed and hearing somebody, something go bump in the night in another room and causing them to fear. one more question, that i have for you, greg, is just in terms of the trial when it does happen, it will be to a trial judge but just so everyone understands here at home, there won't be a jury in this case to convince. >> reporter: that's a fascinating point you're raising, martha. you're absolutely right. there is no tradition, no system of jury trial in this country. it is one judge, one judge alone, perhaps with some assistance, but he's the one deciding things. and so it will be all up to one person and that person has one inclination or another inclination, who knows, that could weigh in on a trial as well. but you're right, it is not a jury trial. it is the state presenting a case, defense presenting a case. i have to tell you from sitting in that courtroom for a couple of days that defense team is top-notch.

and as they can pick any holes in the state's case, they will look to that, but, an interesting point, martha, which was raised to me, that the fact that the lead detective was bounced from the case, the fact that the detective botha was disparaged by the defense team, that might come back to haunt the defense team, i am told, by one insider. they might have now south africa's law enforcement agencies completely focused on this. the chance that they will make as many mistakes as we saw in the past couple days perhaps lessen, martha. martha: got a couple things crossing here. one is that he has been ordered to avoid his home. it avoid the witnesses in this case. to surrender his passports. the conversion on the bail comes out to about $28,000, which seems rather low considering what he has been accused of here and the means that he has. so, is this is an extraordinary morning in this whole case.

greg, thank you very much. i know we're going to want to come back to you. stand by. thanks, greg. bill: sure will. ordered to avoid his home, and witnesses. surrender his passport. mentioned $28,000 bail. ordered to report to a local police station twice a week. issue for one judge, it was frankly hard to hear what point overhearing past hour and 25 minutes, yes, bail was granted. it was not that clear. the headlines moved across the wire services around the world. earlier the magistrate said this. the issue before me is this individual going to seek and duck and dive all over the world? our own judge andrew napolitano with me now. judge, good morning to you. your reaction, surprised or not? >> good morning to, you bill and martha. no, i'm not surprised. even though as greg palkot just pointed out it seems like we've been watching a trial, a murder trial for the past three or four days, and in fact this is not a trial. it is just, it has not been

a trial. it is just a determination whether or not the defendant is entitled to bail and if so under what conditions. so the state is likely to come up with a lot more evidence and present it out of the mouths of a lot more credible witnesses. and the defense will come up with a version of events consistent with the evidence as they see it. but in strictly construing the following question, is oscar pistorius a flight risk, the answer clearly is no. are there terms that would assure his return to the courtroom when we require his presence? the answer is clearly yes. so i don't think this is a surprise. i will tell you this, we don't have bail hearings in this country that go on for three or four days. even though i'm not happy there is no jury system, they haven't had a jury system in pretoria since the era between world war i and world war ii, nevertheless this was an extremely thorough proceeding, presided over by a very fair

and very diligent judge. bill: so when this case goes to trial, judge, and there appears to be no argument on that at the moment, is that before one judge? is that a panel of judges? how will that work? >> i believe that it is just before one judge. i know for sure there is no jury system. this is the only major country in the western world that does not permit juries for criminal cases. so there may be other judges who can whisper into his ear and provide him with guidance and do research for him but the ultimate decision will be made by one person. that changes the way the evidence will be presented. bill: how so? >> the idea that because the constable has erred, the prisoner should go free, resonates a lot better with a jury, a la o.j., than it does with a professional

jurist who understands that police are imperfect like the rest of us. bill: you wonder how that plays out then? and clearly different from our own system. >> yes. look, the state has some serious problems. the problems are that detective botha was the only person to have examined evidence initially. so they can not escape from him. he is going to have to testify one way or another. bill: does that hurt pistorius? does that help him? >> i think it helps pistorius because it forces the government, bill, to put somebody on the witness stand who himself a potential criminal, charged with a very, very serious crime. bill: if he were not involved in this initially, does that impact the judge's decision today? >> on bail? >> no, no. bill: so all the judge said this guy is too well-known. anywhere he goes or travels in the world people will recognize him and his ability to hide is greatly impaired? >> precisely. in american court the bail hearing would have concentrated just on that

and would have taken about an hour. i'm not critical of the system. on the contrary i am very impressed. bill: he was very thorough. >> extremely thorough. more than we would have been. i did this we would hold ten or 15 bail hearings in a day. that obviously gives you far less than an hour. this extraordinary what he went through. think about this. his critique of the defense and critique of the government gives them each a guideline where their cases are weak and what they need to do so shore them up in time for trial. bill: wow! so you think about the evidence that we've heard about already. it is my imwe're just scratching the surface on this if the forensics are not all in. if the autopsy is not fully completed and filed, we have yet to even get a glimpse of what that evidence could be. >> i think you're right, bill and again, in fairness to the state, it would be impossible just because of the time it takes to do these things, for the

forensics to be in. certain tests of bodily tissues require the passable of many days before you can be assured of the likeliness of the accuracy of the test. if the forensics back up the basic storyline that the government told, there is clearly enough evidence here to the convict him of some degree of murder. now the government may back up first-degree murder and make this second degree murder, which is the same as first without planning and plotting. bill: so the premeditation would be removed at that point? >> yes. they might have some difficulty proving that but i think the concept there was an intruder in his bathroom using the facilities and sitting on the toilet at the time, that a reasonable person would have thought that is not something the defense is going to present. bill: how ironic that the premeditation hinges i do believe, whether or not he applied his prosthetic legs in the mitt middle of the night. >> yes. bill: his life long handicap

could determine whether or not he is tried on premeditated murder or eventually found guilty or innocent of that. >> yes. it is ironic and fascinating that that's the case. remember the government still must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. so pistorius is not obliged to come forward with a defense. he can remain silent or he can just do his best through his lawyers to poke holes in the government's case, just like in the o.j. case, just like in any standard criminal proceeding in the u.s. the government still has the burden of proving proving the case beyond a reasonable doubt. in my opinion they have enough evidence here with which to do it but they have been told where their weaknesses are. now they have as greg palkot just told us about a year to prepare. martha: hey, judge, it is martha. just getting back to what we do know. as bill and you were saying there is so much we don't know in terms of forensics but i don't think, the bay i cans of this case the woman

was dressed in street clothing. locked herself in the toilet, small room of a bathroom, and she was shot through the door and everyone accepts the fact that he was the one who did the shooting but he claims he thought it was an intruder. we just listened to this judge sort of lay out why the story is so implausible. i think once again a lot of people listen to this whole story and say, you know, boy, the facts certainly seem to be stacking up against oscar pistorius. you know, but i think there is a hesitation because you've seen these things happen before. we've been through the o.j. experience. what's your take on how all of this goes and how does it impact that it's one judge? when you talk about guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, you're not trying to sway two people on that jury. >> my, that is a great question, martha. my take is that he is in a lot of hot water and the case against him is a strong one and the types of things that sway juries to vote not

guilty are not likely to be present in this case. a professional jurist is less likely to discredit the state's case because one of its witnesses has lied or has a criminal past on his own, than a jury would. stated differently, if o.j. had been tried before a single professional jurist, a judge, a full-time judge, rather than a jury of his pierce, inconceivable in america, if it had happened i think he would have been convicted. i think the case against pistorius is a very strong one and the types of evidence and interplay and dynamics in the courtroom that often results in a person who actually committed a crime being found not guilty are less likely to occur in this arena where the sole determiner of the facts is a professional judge himself. bill: many people argue over time whether that is the best system or the jury

system is the way to go, the way we have in our country. >> that is value judgment. i come down on the side of the jury system and as do most people listening to us. bill: well aware. reuters says the case has been postponed to the fourth of june. that is 3 1/2 months from now. also the judge just raised the bail amount to a million rand. it was 250,000. that is four times the previous value. 128,000 --, $110,000. >> by our standards --. bill: which is small for the amount of net worth that pistorius has. martha: absolutely. bill: remarkably low. >> the bail is supposed to reflect what would likely cause the person to have second thoughts before they flee. so bail for a wealthy person charged with murder is normally a lot greater than bail for an unwell think person. to me, $100,000, first-degree murder with a very serious case against the defendant is very, very low. i think he is taking into account the fact that he is

an internationally known figure with a serious handicap, both of which would make it nearly impossible for him to flee and to stay outside the country. martha: judge, thank you. >> pleasure, guys. anytime. martha: we'll talk to you later. let's go back and listen to the magistrate here when he made the decision to grant oscar pistorius bail. >> accused has in this instance offered a version under oath at a very early stage and i do not attach any weight to the investigator's, investigating officer's concessions with regard to the defense version but the fact remains ordinarily one gets flimsy affidavits merely saying i denye the allegations. i will not flee but in this instance, the accused has reached out to try to meet the state case. of course against the background of those improbabilities that i have seen and mentioned.

that fact, that reaching out in the affidavit in the way that at the did placing it before the court, together with the fact that none of the factors that need to be established have an about established, i come to the conclusion that the accused has made a case to be released on bail. martha: you can hear the cheers in that room. we know that oscar pistorius broke down in cheers according to our reporter greg palkot. he was just a few feet away from him at that tense moment in these proceedings as it continues to play out. and as bill pointed out, june 4th when we expect this to pick up again in court. also a strange move, to increase the bail. he announced it once. within moments increased by four times, somewhere in the neighborhood of 110 u.s.

dollars. not a very high number considering what we're talking about here. bill: not like he came out and doubled it. he upped four times. dr. lewellen kurlise he is with legal counsel in pretoria, south africa. can you explain to us in very simple terms why the judge felt bail was okay for pistorius? >> well, all in all, it was down to the base being principle of bail in our country and at that is to determine whether the accused will ultimately stand trial. when the matter is postponed for trial purposes ultimately. all in all the magistrate came to the conclusion he is not a flight risk. that he will ultimately stand trial. that is basically why the magistrate at the end of the day decided to grant bail. bill: i see. >> all in all it was

well-argued and well-balanced, reasonable good judgment which is not necessarily susceptible to appeal at this stage. bill: what is pistorius to do now between now and the fourth of june? what happens on the legal side or maybe for his defense team or more importantly for the state to prove its case over the next 3 1/2 months? >> yeah. what will happen is oscar will probably take off a day or two and spend some time with his family just to recuperate and have a decent bath and so forth and so on. and then, then the proceedings and the trial preparation will start. obviously is a lot of work to be done by both sides. the prosecution will look and scrutinize the defense placed by oscar before court by means of his affidavit. they will seek evidence to contradict that ultimately. from the defense side, in terms of our prosecution, they will be entitled to discovery of all evidence

forthcoming by the state. they will request further particulars through those charges and they will definitely start preparation and preparing the witnesses for the trial that will likely to be following in about six to eight months from now. bill: that will be summertime here in the u.s. now based on what you have heard about the evidence, and based on what has yet to be made public, what is the state's strongest case to prove murder, or perhaps premeditated murder against him? >> yeah. you must remember in our country we don't necessarily have a separate offense called premeditated murder. we have murder but we don't have, or we've got culpable homicide. which is more or less manslaughter in the u.k. and elsewhere in the world. on the assumption that the state can prove intent, they can have a conviction on murder. if not, and on the assumption they can prove the slight of the, minutest,

we call it the 1% rule on negligence they can secure a conviction on culpable homicide. ultimately on both sides there are loopholes. obviously that was made certain in no uncertain terms by the magistrate during his judgment you but make no mistake it is not as if this is the end of the road. oscar also has some work to do in order to make sure that these defense ultimately the scrutiny by the prosecution during cross-examination at trial. bill: very direct question here. if he you can prove i applied his profit at the time tick legs before the shots were fired, or if the defense can prove otherwise, why and how is that significant? is that truly the lynchpin of this case? >> you must understand at this stage there are there are many issues in dispute. more or less there are four elements of the crime the

state must prove. obviously there was an action which is admitted by the defense. that there was unlawfulness and that one is obviously not admitted at this stage. what we call mens rea, which has to do with the guilt of the accused which is also in dispute. all the other issues are already admitted by the defense. so ultimately we will have to look at the parameters set by a defense like self-defense, and obviously taking into consideration the prestigious and what happens surrounding the shooting itself, that might have an implication on the credibility of the witness and ultimately on oscar's own credibility. remember the matter will in my time stand forth with his own evidence during the trial. because he will surely have to come to testify underoath to substantiate his private defense which he raised. bill: doctor, thank you, really appreciate your inside there from pretoria, south africa. what an hour it's been. we expected the ruling at 8:00 a.m. eastern time.

which is two hours ago. we got it 35 minutes ago. that whole country, they are locked into this case because there are very few people more famous than he is. martha: what he just said, he will have to testify on his own behalf. it will be his word against this magistrate's word which will be very interesting. a south african chief magistrate has ruled that oscar pistorius will be granted bail. whoops and hollers from his side of the courtroom just moments ago. the olympic star that the world came to know as "the blade runner", his story captivated his own country and the world during the olympics. he now prepares for a murder trial, in the shooting death of his girlfriend, reeva steenkamp. brand new hour starting right now of america as newsroom. i'm martha maccallum. bill: i'm bill hemmer. good morning again. in a moment we'll take you back inside that courtroom but we want you to hear what the man straight had ruled. with regard it bail, this

came down about 40 minutes ago. there is no video camera inside the courtroom today. the judge ruled that is out as of today. but the audio and the microphone is clear. listen. >> there are probabilities which need to be explored and possibly will only be ventilated if the accused gave evidence under oath. and for that reason i'm saying that the defense has failed to show this court that there's a weakness in the strength of the state case to the point that it can constitute a circumstance to their benefit. but equally, against the backdrop of the cirucumstanceal evidence of the state case to some extent the evidence of the, the weak evidence on some areas of his testimony by warrant officer hilton botha,

and having regard to the above, i find that while it would have been necessary for the applicant and weakness of state state case, likewise the state, not through its own doing, can not equally show that the state case is so, so strong, that the applicant must come to the conclusion that he needs to flee or evade his trial. bill: so that was the judge as we all sat here. truly gripping for about an hour and 25 minutes before he finally rendered his decision on bail. there are details that continue to trickle in. he met bail. it was raised to $112,000 u.s. the trial will resume on the fourth of june at the moment. he surrenders his passport.

he surrendered all his firearms. he is not allowed to go back to the his home where the death of steenkamp took place. he is not allowed to drink any alcohol. that order coming down from the judge just a moment ago. there will be likely a few more coming out of pretoria later this hour. martha: we want to go to greg palkot who was a few feet away from oscar pistorius from these proceedings. very dramatic from pretoria, south africa, we heard a little bit of sound from one of the defense representatives, greg. clearly they are counting very heavily on the missteps of the original detective in this case. >> reporter: absolutely, martha. yeah, the judge noted those missteps. there were many of them. many describe the state case as bunk he will abouted. but at the same time, the judge did not seem to like too much various aspects of the defense case. i have problems with this. i have problems with this.

i have problems with this. at least six or seven or eight different points. in fact the judge came down hard on both sides. a global celebrity for his olympics now on the dock. he had his head down wa*s throughout the entire proceedings, and he cried, and he cried, and he cried. first when the details of that night were told by the judge, and then when the judge read out evidence from witnesses, and from friends describing misery lacing ship with reeva steenkamp. then he tried again when the judge came harder and harder down on the case, and on the presentation. but at the end of the day it was

emotional, an up just not for him but for the family. his family behind him, his father, brother, sker showing support immediately when the word came out that bail would be granted screamed, there were shouts from the family, khaoefrpltcheered. the father held over and held the shoulder o of oscar pistorius. i had a chance to speak to a few of them very briefly. they didn't want to talk to the media too much. but they did say they were gratified, they were pleased by this decision. again, as you folks have been mentioning, this bail comes with a lot of strings attached, a lot of restrictions on this: the

judge said the bungling of the case is not the the state case. it still has to be proved and go to trial, which now as you noted is officially set june 6th. i'm told by legal insiders that could be put off months or months if the defense team or prosecutors decide to extend it. martha: it's breaking up a little bit. i think we've got you, greg. set the scene for us in there. the pictures we've seen from inside the courtroom are of oscar pistorius standing in front of a bank of cameras. was he seated during then tire thing, was he sitting with his lawyers as we see in u.s. courts? any family members or representatives of reeva steenkamp in that courtroom today? >> reporter: first to oscar pistorius. how it works is actually it was quite crowded with media. there were banks of cameras that you were showing. they are allowed to get oscar pistorius east comes into the

court and then the media, the cameras anyway are hustled out of the courtroom. and then he sits. again, as i say he sat throughout the proceedings with his eyes down cast, with his head almost down to his knees and he's all along. it's a long dock, a long bench and he is isolated and feeling very isolated throughout the proceedings. as for reeva steenkamp not to my knowledge, martha were there representatives of the woman. i can't say that for an absolute fact. we have been talking to friends of hers an and a couple of days they've come out to offer support on the sidelines. we are seeing here the intense coverage of the details of this trial -- not trial, bail hearing. reeva steenkamp is the missing piece, the forgotten person in these proceedings, and i think some family members would like to underscore the fact there was

a tragedy here, there was a victim, and that should be under scored. but, again, reeva steenkamp for the moment at least in the background, the focus is on oscar pistorius, what he does now and where the case goes from here, martha. martha: that is fascinating. you look at this beautiful woman and you imagine sort of all of the feelings that her supporters are going through right now, and it does remind me of the oj situation where you just had this out pouring of interest in this athlete. would you equate that in terms so people can understand how big is in south africa, how significant he is to their sense of national pride, which they have worked so hard to build up. >> reporter: if i'm interrupting excuse me, i just lost my contact with you. if i heard you right you're asking for parallels between this case and the oj simpson trial and we have in fact heard that time and time again. here is oscar pistorius, an athlete, national icon, idolized

by many and then the beautiful reeva steenkamp, the slain victim. there is a lot more parallels here, the missed steps, the missed request's by the state in their investigation by the state. and a very aggressive defense team, i want to stress that very aggressive. they occupy a central desk there, five, six members were there at any point of the day, seeming to out number the cos prosecution. he's got a lot on his side going forward. as we heard from the judge there are a lot of problems with the story that they are putting out, and that certainly should get played out in the evidence that its unveiled over the next several months leading up to the trial. and i'm sorry, martha, i'm not hearing you. i'm going to have to drop off for a moment here. martha: thank you so much, greg, we'll speak with you soon. bill: terrific work down there. greg palkot on the scene inside the courtroom and now with us.

there are apparently ear witnesses to this. we say ear witnesses because they heard some sort of shouting. it's quite possible they heard gunshots as well. but we have not been told at what point in the night the ear witnesses say that they heard some sort of commotion inside that mansion. martha: there are also reports that they were a thousand meters away, and big questions as to whether or not they would have been able to hear or confirm anything in that house. bill: even that distance changed a. loft stuff, frankly we do not know. what we do know is it's captured the attention of the world, and now we know oscar pistorius will spend the time at home at least over the next several months before his trial gains begins. martha you mentioned therl yea this earlier, this is really a case of two people in a room by themes, and now the state has to prove that it was his intention when he fired through that bathroom door, that he knew she was on the other side, and he knew that possibly the decision he made to fire that gun could take her life. martha: it is stunning, because he is the only person who knows

what happened that night, and now the detectives, the newly assigned detectives will have to try to piece together his movements in that room. so much of it as the magistrate said sounds implausible. go around the side of the bed, get a gun that was on the side she was sleeping on, go back around the bed, through the bathroom with that gun having never noticed that she wasn't actually asleep in the bed at the time. just so many holes and questions in this story. why would you go into the bathroom and lock the bathroom door in the middle of the night at your boyfriend's home? that also seems to make no sense on the face of it. as we've pointed out a lot of these facts and these scenarios have been changing, in terms of what we're getting in. a lot more to come. bill: back in june on that. in the meantime there is other news today and a lot of it. americans hit hard by recent tax hikes, president obama saying the wealthy should pay more. we'll break down the numbers that they do pay and ask if the

president has a fair argument. martha: a week now to go before the automatic budget cuts kick in. next, both sides of the argument, for and against more government spending in a very increasingly tough economy. of odor causing bacteria and helps dissolve stains. that's why i recommend polident. [ male announcer ] cleaner, fresher, brighter every day.

[ male announcer ] want to make a great car interior? stop looking at car interiors. get inspired by other stuff. yep. yep. ok. sure. why not? woah. touchscreens. put that in your dash.

now, luxury stuff. make your seats like that. that thing has wifi, why doesn't your car? you can't do that. ignore that guy. give it wifi. yes! make it fit 5 people. no, 5 actual sized people. give them leg room, good. destroy boring car interiors forever. and that's how you do it. easy. ♪ bill: we are just about a week away from massive automatic spending cuts. some describe them as massive but the gloves are r-r off. presiden already off. president obama says the only thing republicans, keeping them torgt the desire to shield the rich from more tax hikes and corporations as well. steven hayes, senior writer, and fox news contributor. here is president obama with al sharpton yesterday. listen. >> my sense is that their basic view is that nothing is

important enough to raise taxes on wealthy individuals or corporations, and they would prefer to see these al-qaida of cuts that could slow down our recovery over close handgun tax loopholes. an closing tax loopholes. bill: that is a four and a half year argument we have leered from the president. is he winning on that point, steven? >> i would say it's actually a less sophisticated version of the argument that he's been making for quite some time and he's man making throughout the 2012 election. to suggest that the republicans only suggest about protect being the rich and loopholes. he may be over playing his hand here. most americans understand that a, the government is spending too much and b, republicans believe in things other than just protecting corporate jet

loopholes. bill: to the other side then, rush limbaugh was on fire yesterday. he was not holding back about the threats he's heard in the past and how they did not play out. this is part of what limbaugh's case is and i'll ask you about that. >> what's happening here, folks, is we are being paid for fools, being suck erred, suck erred into supporting the never ending expansion of government, wholesale destruction of the private economy. and everybody who joins in this debate under the premise that obama puts forth, as well as debating the politics of this nonsense, is being used to cover up what is actually going on. and what is going on is no great spreur, it' conspiracy, it's no mystery, we are spending much more money than we have. bill: that is the argument republicans have. to that point with limbaugh now

others are saying, let's go ahead and let it take effect and see what happens. >> there is no question that i think rush is right about the expansion of government. the president ran on that. and this is what he's trying to do. i don't think that is any secret. and he's also right in that this amount of money in the overall context of what we are spending on federal government, $3.6 trillion isn't that big. i guess the one place i would differ is in these defense cuts i. think the defense cuts can have a negative impact in part because they come on top of $16 billion in defense cuts that came earlier in the obama administration, an additional first round of cuts at $41 billion, now you're talking about another potentially $49 billion on top of that from a defense budget overall that is $600 billion or was supposed to be this year. i think they could have some effects. if you look around at the world i think what we've seen is pockets of instability that we saw in 2008 now turning into regions of instability here in

2013. so that concerns me. bill: there is a third player in all this. i'm talking about the politics of this and how people perceive it. the house speaker john boehner has made it his mission to remind people that this was president obama's idea to begin with. is he winning on that point or not? >> i think he's made that point. the question is whether people care now. i don't think people are paying particular attention to this right now, and this back and forth, and who is to blame. i also think it's a little convenient for republicans, both in the house and the senate to just blame this on president obama and say that he's the one who wanted this. republican -ts signes signed onto it too. that was one of the reasons there was skepticism going back to 2011. this is something the republicans and president obama wanted and pushed. i think both sides are playing a little fast and loose with those facts about the origins of this. bill: eight days to go. it will be a fascinating week. apparently there an overture yesterday that the president reached out to john boehner and

mitch mcconnell. don't know if anything came from that. we'll be watching for more headlines. steven hayes in d.a. 19 past, martha. martha: we have some really spectacular pictures taken of the sky. look at those. they may look like special effects from a hollywood treur thriller, nature is always cooler than what hollywood can cook up. bill: rand paul high school a naval idea putting his money where his mouth is, doing his heart to cut our ballooning budget deficit while starting in his own senate office. wait until you here in a moment what he is doing. eat good fats. avoid bad. don't go over 2000... 1200 calories a day. carbs are bad. carbs are good. the story keeps changing. so i'm not listening... to anyone but myself. i know better nutrition when i seet: great grains. great grains cereal stts whole and stays whole. see the seam? more processed flakes look nothing like natural grains.

you can't argue th nutrition you can see. great grains. search great grains and see for yourself. to help support a healthy tabolism try new great grains protein blend in cinnamon hazelnut orhone.

morning. oscar pistorius has been granted

bail. it happened about an hour ago. he is now headed home. in a moment we expect the family to issue their first statement, give their first reaction. when that happens we'll deliver that to you. this is a national iconic sports hero in south africa, born without fibulas in both his legs beneath his knees. his parents made the decision at the age of 11 months to amputate both e. was fitted for prosthetics for the past 20-plus years of his life and became a track star and a huge attraction for international sports when he competed again others, normal track athletes in the london game in the past summer 2012. we are awaiting that, that was the family you saw inside the courtroom. when they release their statement we'll have it for you here on "america's newsroom." martha: sources are now telling fox news that the obama administration has agreed to release controversial emails on the benghazi terror attack.

this is an important development in this story and it comes after a group of republican senators threaten to delay john brennan's nomination as cia chief if they did not receive the answers they were looking for from the white house about who changed the talking points in the days after that deadly assault, a big issue for john brennan. let's bring in chris wallace, the anchor of "fox news sunday." good morning, chris, good to have you with us. >> reporter: good to be there. martha: what is your take on that? >> reporter: look, the republicans used the hagel nomination as leverage and they basically said we're going to hold this up until we get this information. the white house did not want to release it, they had refused to release it, they said that these emails within the administration were part of the deliberative process, but they knew that the hagel nomination might not get through without it and so they are going to release the information to try to satisfy the senators. now of course the interesting question is what is in the emails, why is it that this was

from early on in the week after 9/11 when it was seen first as a terror attack and then suddenly it wasn't a terror attack and al-qaida was part of it, then suddenly al-qaida was not part of it, by the time susan rice came on "fox news sunday" that sunday, five days later, it was a spontaneous demonstration in reaction to the ante islam video that spun out of control. and the question is how do we get from this pint to that point? martha: that is really back to the seed of whatever wants a good grip on here. petraeus as head of the cia at the time said they knew it was a terrorist attack, they felt that within the first 24 hours. we reported that as well that they had decided within the first 24 hours that was indeed what it was. by the time it translated to sunday on your show we had a very different take on it, it was all about a video, and a protest that erupted in the street and got out of hand. do you think that we are going to get to the answer here when we look at these emails? >> reporter: i'm not sure.

that's the question, is there a smoking gun? and the real question of course is the allegation of political manipulation. was this taken out, the talk about it being a terror attack because the president was right in the middle of a campaign against mitt romney, and one of his talking points was the fact that under his watch that the u.s. government had decimated al-qaida, and had them on the run, and obviously if al-qaida was in some way, shape or form behind an attack that killed four americans, including the first american ambassador to be killed since 1979, then obviously that would go against that. are we going to see any evidence that there was some political manipulation here? is it similar me going to be kind of bureaucrat particular talk, gee we don't want to mention al-qaida, as some administration people have said, because we don't want to tip them off that we have had some intercepts of conversations. we don't want them to know that we penetrated them, that's what we're going to have to wait and see. having said also this, there is

a lot of other stuff that this isn't going to tell us. for insurance fans it's not going to tell us what the president's actions were on the night. we still don't know what went on in those seven hours when he wasn't calling the pentagon, when he wasn't following up with the secretary of defense, and the secretary of state, when he wasn't calling the top officials in libya to demand cooperation to try to protect our people there. there is a lot of information there that we still don't know and that isn't going to come out in this release of these documents. martha: the decision to release them, you know, what does it say about whether or not they are confident that they can release them and that john brennan will be confirmed? what is the feeling in washington about how likely a brennan confirmation is at this point? >> reporter: at this point there is growing likelihood. a key republican senator, richard shelby of alabama announced yesterday that he's going to vote for it. of course the question isn't the 51 points the democrats have enough votes. the key is to end the

filibuster. they had 59 votes. it does appear with shelby and some others who satisfactory said all we wanted is to get more information, it does appear that they will be able to break the filibuster if the republican -ts don't jus republicans don't just shut it down on their own and with a simple majority vote that they'll be able to confirm hagel. it does look like he'll be able to get through. martha: everybody will want to see what is in the emails nonetheless and it should be very interesting. chris, thank you very much. >> reporter: let me just say one other thing. you've got to figure, we'll have to wait and see, you've got to figure if there was some terribly damaging smoking gun they won't release the documents. martha: that would be logical. we'll see. chris, thank you very much. we'll be watching you on sunday where chris' guests will be senators claire ma cast kel and tom coburn and they will be talking about the massive cuts that are ticking away getting every closer.

bill: we have to wait and see what happens. martha: we'll see. bill: march 1st. we are watching these developments now from a south african courtroom. olympic star oscar pistorius is granted bail. he will go home momentarily, not to the same home where he was living. reeva steenkamp's roommate says justice will be served, that comment a moment ago. his family expected to make its first statement. we will have that for you and talk to a reporter who has been inside of that courtroom since day one. >> there was also a bullet hole through the white pants. he added that .38 rounds of ammunition were found and that the applicant has no license for a .38 special revolver.

at a dry cleaner, we replaced people with a machine. what? customers didn't like it. so why do banks do it? hello? hello?! if your bank doesn't let you talk to a real person 24/7, you need an ally. hello? ally bank. your money needs an ally. ♪

(train horn) vo: wherever our trains go, the economy comes to life. norfolk southern. one line, infinite possibilities.

martha: we've got to get caught up on what is going on with the weather. it is pretty serious stuff for at least 20 states right now. freezing rain and hail, driving is very dangerous out there. it has crippled the morning commute. two deadly car accidents have already been blamed on this weather system and that leaves folks looking out their doors thinking twice about whether or not they should leave the house at all. >> took a little peak out of my window at about 2:00 this morning. i knew we were in it and i was ready. >> this morning was a little rough. the drifts were not too thick, maybe 8 inches off the ground

and nobody has gone outside yet to shovel, so a little tricky but just wear your boots. martha: team fox coverage for you. janice dean is live in the fox news extreme weather center where it's nice and toasty warm. we go first to mike tobin who is out there in ohm a ma omaha, nebraska where it's not. how is it look. >> reporter: because the schools are closed and the business shut down we see life trickling back to normal as the people are digging out here martha, you see a little bit of traffic behind me. the interstates so warm and clear that they are actually well. you can see an example of that when the sun comes out, melts the snow the roads get wet. here is the ricketts, as yo risk. you can see where the bridges stay frozen, the ramps stay frozen. you can have drivers pick up a lot of speed on the wet, clear road, hit the icy patch and get into trouble. at the end of the day the road crews pulled out all of the stops because no one was

surprised by this storm. they maximized their staff, the storm wasn't as bad as predicted, at least not here in nebraska. they stayed on top of it. as the storm moves east you see the scenes repeated, the driving snow, airports with the flights canceled and that's what you have to look forward to out east. martha: all right, we are getting ready. thank you very much, mike, mike tobin. let's go over to january is where there is more weather th janice dean where there is more weather to talk about down south. concerns down south, right jd? >> reporter: yes the storm is moving eastward. we have another storm system that will move across the country this weekend and perhaps hit kansas and nebraska again early next week. look at these storm totals. 18 inches in nashville, kansas. so, yes, in some cases the forecasters were right on with their predictions. let's take a look eight. we have the upper midwest getting snow right now, winter weather advisories for you across the ohio river valley. also want to point out winter weather advisories for new

england. another storm system will creep up the coast this weekend. heavy rain as the cold front continues to press eastward, 2 to 3 inches out of this. they need the rain but unfortunately it will cause flooding concerns. looking at our latest round of models that's go into frida saturday and sunday we have a coastal event that could bring a foot of snow north and west of boston. we need to watch this obviously because these areas got smacked with 2 to 3 feet of snow two weeks ago. winter is not over yet. martha: they are happy in srer ran vermont about that snow. >> reporter: that is true. martha: we'll keep an eye on it. bill: we are watching the "blade runner" reaction, his family speaking out after the bombshell headline hit about an hour ago. oscar pistorius is going home, the judge has granted him bail. here is his uncle inside that courtroom. have lace even here. >> yes, we are relieved, the fact that oscar got bail today.

but at the same time we are in mourning for the death of reeva, with her family. and we are also grateful for the judge, or the magistrate to come to the conclusion and for our legal team that has delivered extremely professional and legal statements that led to the decision to give him bail today. as a family we know oscar's version of what happened at that tragic night, and we know that that is the truth, and that will

prevail in the coming court cases. again, thank you very much for your time and all your patience. we as a family really appreciate that. bill: what is interesting, the last thing he said there about justice will prevail. the room nature nor reeva steenkamp now dead said something similar to reporters moments ago saying that i'm sad but justice will pre vial. we have a digital news reporter in south africa, she has been inside the courtroom since the very beginning. how did he react, first of all, when he was granted bail? and is he out of jail? is he headed home now, or do you know his whereabouts? >> i can't actually remember how he reacted exactly, i know from the court we heard one of the south african celebrities screamed and punched and screamed yes. then we saw him being whisked away very quickly back into the holding cell and the family

together, hugging, crying, praying a lot, a lot of praying again. when he came back again he looked a lot calmer. we didn't see him smile or very happy, you see him a lot calmer, not crying as much as he did while the magistrate was giving out his judgment. he kept a lot inside, held it. took heavy. bret: . we saw him feeling very sad during this time. but once his bail was granted he was a lot calmer. i don't exactly know but i can tell you that the helicopters have gone. we do know that he said he will leave half an hour after he was granted bail, he'd leave there the magistrate's court which is the pretoria magistrate's court behind me. they said a back entrance if i remember right for oscar pistorius. i do think he's left. i don't know where exactly he's gone too yet. bill: for reeva steenkamp who was representing her in court today, and how did they react?

>> i do know that one of the friends of reeva's or classmates was present. think in between all the great amount of oscar's support i didn't get to see any reaction from them. i tonight know exactly how they reacted. they didn't quite want to speak to the media as well. hopefully we can get something later on from the family telling us how they feel about the bail being granted. bill: you've been in court every day. were you surprised that the judge ruled this way? or our expecting this? >> could you repeat that i didn't quite hear you. bill: fully understood. were you surprised the judge ruled this way or did you expect that based on what you've heard in court throughout the past week? >> i think we expected it to a certain extent, because the state did not prove that he was a flight risk which was one of the main reasons for opposing bail. they also couldn't prove that there will be public outrage if

oscar was granted bail. i was very surprised, and i think that there is a very big misconception going around, h-pl getting bail is he's guilty or innocent. i don't think that is the case. giving him bail is just decides where he'll be before and during the trial. bill: thanks for being patient with us. working on that signal. we appreciate your time. a reporter working that story in pretoria since day one inside the courtroom earlier today. which had some drama. martha: indeed it did. back here there continues to be some economic drama in the country. new signs that the expired payroll tax cuts have had a serious impact on average americans. but does that mean that the wealthy should pay more in taxes, as the president has suggested? we'll talk about that. bill: jaw-dropping images from our sky. check out this dazzling display. more pictures, and where it's

happening next. [ male announcer ] any technology not moving forward is moving backward. [ engine turns over, tires squeal ] and you'll find advanced safety technology like an available heads-up display on the 2013 lexus gs. there's no going back. progress-oh! [ female announcer ] with 40 delicious progresso soups at 100 calories or less, there are plenty of reasons people are saying "progress-oh!" share your progress-oh! story on facebook.

bill: now for the northern lights. these pictures show aurora activity over a national park in sweden. the strong greenish tint is said to indicate objection skrepb in the loweoxygen in the lower atmosphere. i did not know that. did you. martha: of course i did. bill: the pictures were shot over 13 different nights. martha: i have seen the northern lights and they are beautiful. bill: there is a great band called the northern lights. martha: something like that, thank you, bill. there are new signs that the expired payroll tax cut is having a serious impact on average americans, because everybody noticed after january 1 that a little bit of money was missing from their paycheck. all right. so this as president obama continues to push as we heard again yesterday, for the wealthy to pay more out of their taxes. let's look at exactly how much the so-called rich already pay into the federal income tax kitty.

the top one percent which you hear a lot about, that means those earning more than 369,000 tkhr-rd$369,000 a year they pay nearly 38% of the total tax load in the whole country. with that as a backdrop and knowing that everybody is paying more under this scenario. we have the former director of the cbo and president of action forum is with me now. doug, good to have you here. >> thank you. martha: a story by the "wall street journal" which very interestingly laid out what everybody started to sense after the first of the year. across the board people were saying, wait a minute, i didn't think my taxes were going up, i thought it was rich people's taxes that are going up. i have less in my paycheck. you're hearing burger king, walmart, all of these basic companies across the country are saying, look, business is bad and people are using less and less of their disposable income at our outlets. >> this was characterized as a tax increase on the very wealthy. the vast majority of americans saw their taxes go up. if you recall back in 2010 the

president selfmade the case that in a weak economy we shouldn't raise taxes on anyone. in 2010 we were growing more rapidly than we are now. there is a real risk associated with the sharp tax increases that we saw at the turn of the year. martha: you wonder how the president squares that, because he clearly said that back then. now he has taken the opposite approach, because taxes have gone up on everybody across the board who has income, okay. and we see what's happening. when you read some of the details here, you know, burger king says the whopper junior is down to 1.29. walmart is forced to put out smaller packages that people can buy for less money. you talk about a new normal, dog doug, is that what we're talking about, is that where we are? >> i think the new normal is an important component of this. this we saw top line gdp growth at 3, 3.5% you'd be able to get

rid of a tax holiday, you do want to fund social security. it doesn't make sense there a hiring point of view, our supposed to stimulate hiring, it just didn't. we could weather the shocks easily. the fact that we are growing more slowly is every little thing could tip us into zero or negative point. we need a better set of policies to grow more rapidly on a regular pays sis so that when bad things happen -rpbgs as they always do we can sustain them. martha: let's take a look at some of the numbers here and pull up this full screen, because basically if you make about $65,000 a year you are losing $1,300 more of your income, that is a lot of money, $1,300, that is the kind of thing that makes people, as evidenced in this article, not go to chipotle, but go to burger king, and that hurts every company along that chain. >> it's a real impact on consumer spending and that is two-thirds of the economy. you could survive that if the other parts of spending held up, but we are not exporting that

much and the administration has not season a big interest in a trade agenda. business investments not as strong as it need to be. we need a better business spending environment. we have weakness across the board which highlights these big impacts on the average household. martha: the president's solution seems to be that he wants to go back for more tax increases on the wealthy. what impact do you think that is going to have? >> this is not going to solve the problem. the fundamental problem is that we have an enormous amount of debt, which is a burden on growth. we need deep entitlement reforms to put us on a sustainable practice skwrebgt re, th sustainable trajectory. he has taken those off the table. erskine bowles and alan simpson said we need tax reforms an hasn't pushed that. the recipe he's got is not going to solve the problems that ails our economy. martha: even steny hoyer talking about entitlement reforms. maybe the groundswell comes from outside the white house. we'll see. thank you so much. always good to have you.

bill: there is at least one senator who is serious about the budget deficit, republican hand paul of kentucky, true to his word by doing his part. we'll tell you what he did. it will probably surprise a lot of folks everywhere, not just washington. flavor. [ anouncer ] ihop's new griddle melts... made fresh and hot! hand crafted just for you. it's like a sexy sandwich. [ anouncer ] compare new griddle melts yourself. just $4. it's like a sexy sandwich. it's an epic breakfast sandwich.

martha: kentucky senator rand paul putting ace money if is mouth hawk. he is returning 600,000 tkhrafrz his $3.5 million office budget to the u.s. trerb raoefplt he says it'treasury. he says it's not enough but it's the only budget he controls. he scrutinizes spending on travel, paper and ink cartridges, using their part to use the skap pell in the office to cut expenses. senator rand paul made a similar move last year when he returned

$500,000. that is a trend. bill: a manhunt now covering three states. gunshots and a fiery crash that left three people dead in the heart of the vegas strip. we watched this play out yesterday on our air. police are looking for a distinctive black range rover with large black rims, tinted windows, they said fled the scene. rod wheeler, fox news contributor, former new york homicide detective. good morning to you. a couple of things key to finding the range rover there was an altercation of some kind at a hotel. is that where you start? if that's the case there were eyewitnesses at some point to that, right? >> that's right there will be a number of eyewitnesses. it started in the valley area according to the reports, bill, this altercation did. the question that the police investigators are trying to figure out right now is what was the relationship between the kwreu individual that was driving the mat rat thee and the individuals in the black range rover. these are the folks who had the altercation. they will get video, camera footage from the hotel, video calm rajai footage from just

about every building in that area on the strip. i think there will be a lot of evidence that they will be able to get that will help them find out who these individuals are, bill. bill: the driver of the maserati is dead, but there was a passenger who survived. there is a great eyewitness for you there, right? >> exactly. they are talking to that person now. trust me when i tell you, what is really ironic, bill is where the shooting occurred is exactly one blockade way from where two pack satisfactor tupac sakur was killed. i just learned that the person killed in the maserati was a rapper. bill: age 27. >> he was doing pretty good but he was also known as a pimp on the strip. i think there will be a lot more information that we'll learn as the investigation progresses. bill: the cameras up and down the vegas strip could lead to extent clues. thank you.

martha: a massive winter storm battles across the great plains. more on that coming up. . ...

>> announcer: you never know when, but thieves can steal your identity and turn your life upside down. >> hi. >> hi. you know, i can save you 15% today if you open up a charge card account with us. >> you just read my mind. >> announcer: just one little piece of information and they can open bogus accounts, stealing your credit, your money and ruining your reputation. that's why you need lifelock to relentlessly protect what matters most... [beeping...] helping stop crooks before your identity is attacked. and now you can have the most comprehensive identity theft protection available today... lifelock ultimate. so for protection you just can't get anywhere else, get lifelock ultimate. >> i didn't know how serious identity theft was until i lost my credit and eventually i lost my home. >> announcer: credit monitoring is not enough, because it tells you after the fact, sometimes as much as 30 days later. with lifelock, as soon as our network spots a threat to your

identity, you'll get a proactive risk alert, protecting you before you become a victim. >> identity theft was a huge, huge problem for me and it's gone away because of lifelock. >> announcer: while no one can stop all identity theft, if criminals do steal your information, lifelock will help fix it, with our $1 million service guarantee. don't wait until you become the next victim. you have so much to protect and nothing to lose when you call lifelock now to get two full months of identity theft protection risk free. that's right, 60 days risk-free. use promo code: gethelp. if you're not completely satisfied, notify lifelock and you won't pay a cent. order now and also get this shredder to keep your documents out of the wrong hands-- a $29 dollar value, free. get protected now. call the number on your screen or go to lifelock.com to try lifelock protection risk free for a full 60 days. use promo code: gethelp. plus get this document shredder free-- but only if you act right now.