15/02/2016 Newsnight


In-depth investigation and analysis with Kirsty Wark, including an exclusive interview with the mother of one of the Columbine killers and updates on Syria.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 15/02/2016. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Tonight an exclusive UK TV interview with the mother of the Columbine


killer who breaks her seventeen year silence.


I remember at that point thinking if Dylan is really doing this,


At that moment it was when I really prayed for him to die.


And what would she say to the families of the dead


I have this feeling of wanting to say over and over again,


And I know that such a thing is so completely inadequate.


But I don't know what else to say, except, I'm sorry.


Also tonight we reveal and see evidence that Labour is telling


members not to hold debates about leaving Europe,


I think they shouldn't be nervous of having the debate -


if they have a strong case let's hear it.


We have got our case and we want to put it.


And veteran gay rights campaigner Peter Tatchell on why people should


be allowed to say Transwomen aren't real women.


And transactivist Paris Lees on why they shouldn't.


What is it like to know that your own son planned


15 people died and 24 others were wounded


in the Columbine High School tragedy in 1999.


It was the first mass shooting of the 24-hour news era and pictures


were beamed live from helicopters circling the school,


and students trapped inside were interviewed live on air.


The two killers, 17-year-old Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris


who was eighteen, eventually killed themselves in the school library.


In the aftermath the parents of the killers were excoriated.


For seventeen years Dylan Klebold's mother kept her silence trying


to understand what drove her 17-year-old son to kill


Now she has written a book about it, A Mother's Reckoning,


donating her profits to mental health charities, because one


of the many things she didn't know about her son was


This is Sue Klebold's only British television interview.


You may find some of the scenes disturbing.


Columbine High School lies 50 miles south of Denver in the shadow


On the 20th of April 1999 its name became infamous around the world


when two students, Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris, calmly


drove their cars, packed with explosives, guns,


parking lot and set about destroying the school.


This wasn't a moment of madness, it was a cold-blooded massacre.


The suburban high school turned into a killing field.


I was screaming, and crying, I was telling them not to shoot me.


So he shot the girl, he shot her in the head


One by one they extracted the dead and injured from the school.


This teenager was rescued from an upstairs classroom.


I have been a SWAT officer since 1980 and this was clearly


the most devastating and dramatic scene that I have ever seen.


And began -- tell me how the day began. It was still dark. I heard


Dylan thundering down the stairs in his boots. I was startled because it


was too early for him to be up. I opened my bedroom door and I yelled,


Dylan? He was at the front door already. I couldn't see him but all


I heard him say was goodbye, then he slammed the door and left. I was


very concerned. I woke my husband and said something is bothering him.


Would you talk to him later? My husband said I will be home all day,


I will talk to him when he gets home. And then what happened? About


noon I was getting ready to go to a meeting. I worked for the college


system. I had left my desk and came back and the message light was


flashing on my telephone. I thought I better listen to it. I picked up


the phone and listened and it was my husband, this voice, and he sounded


horribly upset. His voice was cracking. He could hardly breathe.


And he said, listen to the television, something horrible is


happening at school. It was such a day of confusion. Police came to our


home. We were asked to leave our home. We had to sit outside. We sat


on the ground all day. At that stage you must have known that it was more


likely your son was involved in the shooting, rather than someone who


was shot. We heard through the window. The television was on. We


heard that 25 people were dead. At that point I remembered thinking, if


Dylan is really doing this, he must stop. And in that moment I prayed


for him to die. I thought something has got to stop this. Whatever it is


that is going on. It took me a very long time to believe, months, to


believe that my son was actually responsible for killing and hurting


people. Up until that time I believe I was living in an extreme state of


denial. He was there, but he didn't really kill anybody, or, he wasn't


what they were saying. That it was Eric? Yes, that it was Eric. Dylan


Klebold lived in this house for almost a decade. In 1997 Dylan


Klebold and Eric Harris were caught stealing. It hit the family hard.


Dylan Became withdrawn and hostile but still took part of family


events, held down a part-time job, he went to the school prom three


days before the massacre. But what his parents didn't know was that


Dylan Klebold has been suicidal for two years. He poured all of his rage


and upset into diaries and journals that were only handed to the family


by the police almost two years after the killing. What they were also


unaware of was that Dylan had hidden a sawn off shotgun and ammunition in


his bedroom. Police later said the killers had prepared 99 home-made


explosive devices for use in the attack. It must have been a strange


thing to compute, to know that between them Dylan and Eric Harris


were going to blow up the whole school. That was one of the most


difficult moments of this entire process. I had to go through so many


phases of accessing this, and accepting, OK, they were there, OK,


they hurt people, it was purposeful, yes, it was planned, it wasn't


impulsive. Then at the police report to finally learned that their plan


has been to kill everybody in the school but their plan failed. When I


thought of that, and thought of the magnitude, I really did not think I


was going to live through it. You come in the book, sometimes


described him as withdrawn and monosyllabic, and that he took


failure heart. Whether certain signs that you missed? -- failure hard. In


his junior year several things happened. He got arrested, he got in


trouble at school, he has scratched a locker at school... I did not


recognise that those things meant there was a potential life and death


situation. I didn't recognise that these were possible signs of a


mental condition. According to FBI records there have


been 50 mass murders, or attempted mass murders, in schools in America


since Columbine. Sue Klebold made one stipulation before our


interview, that we would not show the CCTV pictures of the boys in the


school during the massacre. For fear of copycat attacks.


You were asked to go to the Sheriff's office six months after


the massacre to be showing videos. Tell me about that. It was a


collection of the two of them talking about what they were going


to do. Horribly violent and hateful... I remember when I saw


that I actually stood up. I thought I was going to be ill. It was such a


shock. The person I was seeing on that film wasn't anybody I could


recognise. It wasn't Dylan. At that point did you have to face up to the


fact that he was equally responsible for Columbine? That's it. That was


the moment. That was the day in which I learnt that he was not an


innocent bystander who happened to get involved. This wasn't an


impulsive act. He prepared for this for a long period of time. And that


he was equally involved in killing people, and saying horrible things


to people before they died. In the aftermath of the massacre you had


support from friends and co-workers, but you also had a substantial


firestorm coming at you. What sort of things happened? I remember being


in a grocery store and paying with a cheque. The checker recognised my


name and asked me if I knew him. I said yes, he was my son, and then


she started saying in a very loud voice, you know, this was the work


of Satan, and just shouting at me. I am trying to bag my groceries and go


out. I would turn on the radio and hear myself being discussed, and


called disgusting. These were just things that happened. It created a


feeling, always, of being watched, being judged. This instant decision


from people who didn't know. People want to believe that it is something


as simple as bad parenting. Because it is a comforting fort. Because


nobody wants to believe that anything like this can happen to us.


-- comforting thought. I think it made people feel safer to believe


that we were all of the things they wished we were, or perceived us to


be, or imprinted on us, because then they could feel, well, this will not


happen to me because I am not like that. You also wrote to the victims'


families. I did, yes. A father wrote back to us about a year later, for


which I was extremely grateful. He wanted to meet with us. It was


profoundly comforting to me. It meant so much to me. I received a


letter from the sister of one of the girls who had been shot. And then


one of the mothers of the girls who had been killed also reached out and


wanted to meet with me. Those things meant so much to me. I couldn't... I


couldn't even begin to explain how it felt so wonderful to have them be


gracious enough, and brave enough to do that.


Sue Klebold now believes her son's suicidal ideas were a significant


factor in the Columbine massacre. Since 1999 she has become


increasingly involved in the issue of the suicide prevention.


You say in the book, I shall listen more and lecture less. In all the


years since I lost Dylan, I wish I had just said, you feel that way,


tell me about it some more, tell me about how you feel. I think I had a


tendency more to lecture, tell him what to do, to do what parents do. I


just wished I had talked much less. I read somewhere that you had worn a


piece of his clothing. You held onto things. I did wear his clothes for a


long time. My husband and I both did. It was just a feeling of


wanting him a little bit close. -- closer.


The tragedy, which was at the time the worst school shooting in


American history, cast a long shadow. Families were shattered.


Sons and daughters dead. One teacher murdered as he tried to protect


students. And those who were shocked that they and survived some of them


living with the most horrific wounds.


Have you been to the memorial? I have. What happened when he went


there? I have been quite a few times. What I do is I sit there and


in my head I talk to the kids, and the teacher who was there, without


the rest of the world, without parents, lawyers, community... I


just want them to know that I am thinking of them. And I will always


think of them. Do you want to take a moment? I am


OK. You talk a lot in the book about faith. Do you still believe in God?


Not in the same way that I did before. But I wonder if you had


religion before in a different way, whether you believe there is a God.


I don't know, I go back and forth. The one thing I have hoped for again


and again is that in some moment in this present life, or in the


position or in the future like I will see him again. I am hoping I


will see him again. The moment you believe in good and evil, you might


be in a different place. I know. A lot of people will read this book in


different ways because it means a lot to different groups, so it will


mean a lot to the victims' families, to the survivors, some of whom are


still in a wheelchair. What would you say to them? What do you say to


them now? I have this feeling of wanting to say over and over again I


am sorry, I am sorry, I am sorry. I know that such a thing is so


completely inadequate. But I don't know what else to say besides I am


sorry. I am just so sorry for what Dylan did. Thank you very much.


And you can see the full-length version of that interview


with Susan Klebold on a special edition of Our World on the BBC


News Channel this Saturday and Sunday at 9.30pm.


At the start of the week which may well define Britain's chances


of staying in Europe or leaving it, and as David Cameron


and Francois Hollande have a hastily arranged meeting in Paris tonight


ahead of Thursday's Brussels summit, the European Council President sent


Risk of break up is real as UK in EU negotiations very fragile.


"Fragile" is the word that could be applied to many elements of this


Both the Government and the opposition are divided,


and as our Political Editor David Grossman found out Labour officials


have been attempting to keep a lid on their party's Eurosceptics.


Labour used to be Britain's most Eurosceptic party.


Here is Labour leader Hugh Gaitskell issuing dire warnings about joining


We must be clear about this. It does mean if this is an idea the end of


Britain as an independent nation state. I make no apology about


repeating it, the end of 1000 years of history. You might say, it ends,


but it is a decision that needs care and thought.


I think it is anti-democratic, it is anti-socialist


Its employment rate is high and its growth rate is low


and looking at Southern Europe it has done terrible damage


We have been on a long journey with this.


Of course in 1983 famously we campaigned to pull out


of the European Union and that helped to contribute to our most


disastrous election result for a century.


Our pivotal moment was Jacques Delors's speech to the TUC


Congress in 1988 when he laid out the vision of a social Europe.


Bruised from their third election defeat the labour movement became


enthusiastic pro-Europeans almost overnight as a way of using Brussels


to fight for the rights of working people.


It is no secret that many of us have been sceptical about the benefits


Colleagues, in the short term we have not a cat in hell's chance


The only card game in town at the moment is in a town called


Brussels and it is a game of poker where we have got to learn the rules


By the mid-90s Labour had its most Euro enthusiastic leader ever,


but many particularly on the left were unconvinced.


They saw the EU as profoundly anti-democratic.


We have European bureaucracy totally unaccountable to anybody. The powers


have gone from national parliaments and they have gone to the commission


and the Council of ministers and these are serious matters.


Jeremy Corbyn did come down in favour of Britain's EU membership.


There would have been mass resignations and rebellion


I certainly let him know my view and this was a clear choice


The word "maybe" is not on the ballot paper as I have always


But I would give Jeremy Corbyn credit for being clear,


not just on one occasion, but on many occasions since he took


over the leadership, that he is going to campaign to stay


But is the Labour Party trying to stifle debate on the referendum?


Newsnight has obtained an e-mail from the party's general secretary


Ian McNicol warning constituency parties that they should not


be organising debates on whether to stay in the EU or not,


but instead get fully behind the party's policy of


The e-mail was sent to a local party officer who had enquired


about organising an in-out referendum debate.


The answer they received was a forwarded message


from Ian McNicol, the party's general secretary, which pointed out


that party conference had voted unanimously to support remaining


Rather than having a debate, the e-mail said, on whether to


support Britain's EU membership constituency Labour parties should


be campaigning to keep Britain in the European Union in line


with Labour's values and labour policy.


I think they should not be nervous about having the debate.


If they have got a strong case, let's hear it.


We have got our case and we want to put it.


We asked the Labour Party to comment on the e-mail.


They denied banning Labour leave speakers, but said it was right that


all official Labour events and meetings focused


on their campaign to stake in the EU.


With me now is John Mills, businessman and Labour donor


who will lead the Vote Leave campaign and from Birmingham


the Labour MP Emma Reynolds, who is a member of the cross party


Good evening. What is your reaction to the idea that the general


secretary is saying you should not be having any debates, you should


only be campaigning for a yes vote? That is very unfortunate. There are


a large number of Labour members who used to the Labour who have gone off


to Ukip and the Conservatives and they have a different view from the


Labour Party nationally. They want to hear the arguments on both sides.


That does not stop you voting to stay in it that is the way you think


the argument goes, but it is not right that the arguments for coming


out should not be heard. They should be. Surely you cannot be happy with


a directive that says you should not have a debate? I think the secretary


general was right to say that we have had that debate at our party


conference and we unanimously agreed on a motion put forward by the GMB


trade union that we should campaign as a party to stay in the European


Union. Jeremy Corbyn has been clear about that as well. We have only got


until the 23rd of June to make that case. I think it is right the party


leadership is saying to party members, the vast majority of whom


are pro-European, let's get on with it and get on with the debate. Hang


on. What John Mills was saying just now, electoral damage has been done


to you in 40 for Labour seats with Ukip finishing second. It suggests


there are some Labour voters who are Eurosceptic. Are you saying they are


out in the cold? No, what I am saying... You are. We are taking a


decision that we are pro-European and that has been the case for


decades. We should have a discussion with Labour voters about these


issues, of course we should. Can I be clear? You as an MP in your


constituency could not have a debate that had people who said leave on


the platform with you? That is the directive, you would not have that


debate? I have had lots of debate with people on the other side of the


argument, but the priority for me as a Labour MP is to go and talk to my


constituents about the decision they will have to make possibly as early


as June. That is my priority, but that is not to say I am not


debating. I did a debate last week with a Eurosceptic. Of course those


debates will keep happening, but the focus in the Labour Party is to make


the case to remain in the union, based on our values. This is a


whipped vote. There is nothing freak about this, there is no suspension


of the whip. Do you believe there should be a suspension? The Labour


Party has agreed that Labour Party members can act on either side and


come out if they want to stay in, so the Labour Party is not stopping


people. Let's talk about the Shadow Cabinet, are there people who want


out in the Shadow cabinet? Yes, there are people sympathetic to


coming out. I dead people in there now? Yes, several. Not vast numbers,


but several. They are stopped by Cabinet responsibility from


advocating coming out, and that I understand. But outside the Cabinet,


as in 1975, people should be allowed to canvas and support staying out


and staying in? Time is of the essence and it looks like there will


be a referendum vote in June. Will we see Shadow Cabinet people coming


out and supporting leading? I am not sure what will happen to be honest.


It may well be that Cabinet responsibility will stop that


happening. But that should not stop other people in the Labour Party,


including a substantial minority, from being allowed to express their


views. Why do you think we are not seen so much of Jeremy Corbyn


talking about Europe at all. It has been left at Alan Johnson, yet it is


one of the most important thing we are discussing in decades and Jeremy


Corbyn is not leading from the front. This is important. Jeremy


Corbyn and the entire Shadow Cabinet has signed up to a pro-European


agreement with MPs in Parliament and over 90% of our MPs have signed up


to that group. There are only a small number of MPs who want us to


come out. The vast majority, the consensus, is we should campaign to


stay in the EU. Jeremy Corbyn was very clear from the start of his


leadership that is a party which he is leading we will be campaigning to


stay in the European Union and he has been clear and consistent on


that point. I wonder how many speeches he has made in the last few


weeks about the importance of staying in Europe. He has made a


number of speeches in Parliament because he has had to respond to the


Prime Minister who has come back from a number of summits. But they


are both on the same side. How do you think Jeremy Corbyn is doing in


all this? He is under very substantial constraints because of


Cabinet responsibility. Whether that is where his heart lies is another


matter. Thank you all very much. The United Nations say that almost


50 people have been killed in missile attacks on hospitals


and schools in Syria, which it called a blatant violation


of international law. Two of the hospitals that


were hit were in Idlib, where rebels have taken control


of the province and where Syrian and Russian fighter jets


have been in operation. One target was a field


hospital supported by MSF, and the organisation


says its destruction will deprive At the Munich conferecne


at the weekend, the Russian Prime Minister Dimitri Medvedev denied


Russian planes had killed civilians but activists have blamed Russia


for all three attacks. I'm joined now by Andre Heller


Perache, Head of Programs at Medecins Sans Frontieres UK


who has been monitoring Good evening. What is the latest on


these attacks in Syria? From the information we have got today, there


are rescue operations to find more survivors and it has stopped with


nightfall. Seven people were confirmed dead within the hospital,


including patients and personnel. There are eight still missing


presumed dead that we are aware of and beyond that there are additional


patients who were in the hospital. You are pretty sure you were


targeted rather than it being collateral damage? Effectively it


was direct targeting and by that I mean there were successive air


strikes on the same location, the hospital, totally destroy it in


multiple waves of attacks over the course of 90 minutes. If it was a


bomb hitting that then close by, that discussion can be had, but this


was targeted repeatedly. It is not something one can write off saying


it is an unfortunate event. It is too bad this happened. It is beyond


that. What is the policy now of announcing where you are? It is a


complicated question, particularly in Syria. Over the course of this


conflict there have been multiple instances, it has been a feature of


this conflict, that humanitarian structures as well as protected


human infrastructure has been repeatedly targeted deliberately,


like schools, marketplaces, grain silos, clinics, bakeries. They all


have signage. This structure did not have signage on the outside. What I


am saying is the other ones. Prior to this we have known that they were


hospitals, but in this case we do not openly advertise this is a


hospital? Over 240 hospitals have been


destroyed. One cannot say that this is an identification error of the


structure. This hospital had been relocated from its previous location


where it had been targeted and struck three times. People are


afraid to say they are doing medical work. If you are an aid worker


within Syria right now, and we are talking about Syrians by and large,


they know the risks. They know they can be a target. Aid has been turned


into a target, as well. We talk about the number of hospitals, an


astonishing amount have been targeted and destroyed, what is the


impact on health care more broadly in Syria? I have read some


statistics which says 60% of the general public hospitals within


Syria have been destroyed since the beginning of this conflict. In this


particular instance we are talking about a small hospital with two


operating theatres, an emergency room, and an outpatient department.


They have seen 5500 external cases per month. 1100 emergency cases per


month. You talk about the number of lives being saved. But when you look


at the scale of the conflict, Medecins Sans Frontieres is


supporting a large amount of structures within the country, but


there are millions of people who have been displaced. Millions of


people along the borders trying to escape. The suffering is


unimaginable right now. Aleppo was referred to at the weekend as


Stalingrad. We have been doing everything in our power to support


as many networks as possible. Aid workers, doctors, in the suburbs of


Damascus, this year alone the kinds of risks these people are taking


means 17 separate medical structures have been hit in 2016 and it is only


mid February. This is the fifth structure which has been supported


by some measure by Medecins Sans Frontieres which has been hit alone.


The pressure on people is unbelievable. And that pressure


continues to grow with time. Things are just getting worse. Thank you


very much. A debate on the topic


of "Re-Radicalising Queers" is not taking place at Canterbury Christ


Church University tonight, because one of the participants


didn't want to share a platform So, is Peter Tatchell


guilty by association, or should we applaud student


activitists for doing what they can You do not witness the suffering of


lesbian and gay people. Racist and transphobe are not words that


normally spring to mind when we talk about Peter Tatchell. Your long


history of anti-Semitism, homophobia, and attacks on the


Muslim community... Doctor Greer had offended and insulted some activists


when she expressed her view that transwomen are not women simply by


their desire to be thought of as such.


So, is Peter Tatchell guilty by association,


or should we applaud student activitists for doing what they can


I'm joined by Peter Tatchell and Paris Lees.


Did you get flak at the debate? It was a debate about the future of


LGBT politics. I am sad she did not attend. I would have welcomed an


exchange. She has every right to do this. What I object to is the fact


she labelled me a racist and a transphobe. And when asked to


justify her views she failed to do so. There is the evidence. She


didn't offer evidence even when asked. What has been the impact on


you? We asked the NUS to come on tonight and they wouldn't. It is not


just that you didn't want -- it isn't that she did not want just due


to take part, but she didn't want others to take part, as well. I


respect her. But this is not about me. This is about the rights of


black and ethnic minority background people, and the rights of trans


people. I have constantly criticised those feminist who disrespect


transit people and oppose their human rights. I constantly challenge


those who deny the human rights of black and Asian people and will


continue to do so. Paris Lees, this debate was about gay rights tonight,


it was nothing to do with the rights of trans people. We did defend trans


people. So what is the problem with somebody taking part in a debate


with Peter? I would like to say that Peter Tatchell is not a transphobe


in my opinion. I think it is ludicrous to suggest that. He is a


national treasure as far as I am concerned and one of the few people


who spoke up for transgender rights on a public platform a few years ago


and nobody was talking about this. I'm very grateful to him for that. I


think there is a lot of anger towards Peter because of signing


that letter. Not just signing it, but maybe your reaction afterwards


wasn't that helpful. I think, you know, to call him a transphobe is a


little over the top, but I think it is somebody getting carried away. To


come to the issue of this, I think it is unfortunate Peter has been


involved in this debate. But more broadly, yes I think it is right


that people should not engage with transphobe O'. I don't think Peter


is one of those people, but for some people there is no point speaking to


them. -- transphobes. You take people on in order to have that


debate and you win it when you are fighting for the rights of people.


There is also an argument that marginalised people have had to


explain themselves over and over again. There are certain people who


are just not willing to engage in debate. They have heard the


arguments. That is a different kettle of fish from Peter. This


person has made personal attacks on individual trans people before. They


have argued for conversion therapy, which has proved to be very


dangerous. Those people should not be given platforms to air their


prejudices. I understand the anger. Given the scale of violence towards


trans people, the discrimination, all of the medical issues, the


hurdles they have to go through the transition, and all of those kinds


of issues... We need to be talking about that. But I also think, in my


view, the best way to defeat bigoted prejudiced ideas is to take on a


challenge by taking on people who say it. That is why I have challenge


Germaine Greer and many others. I did a debate last year against


Islamist extremists. I think I demolished them. That was far more


effective than if I had stayed away and they were allowed to say


whatever they wanted. But you can understand why people feel they


don't have a power and they withdraw. Absolutely. I respect


that. And I'm really sorry if trans people felt offended by me taking


that stand and signing that letter. My intention was never to give


endorsement to Germaine Greer or any other feminist who opposes trans


rights. Those people are wrong. They are deniers of human rights. They


are on the wrong side of history. I stand with the trans community for


their writes, acceptance, and dignity. -- rights. The argument is


whether their views should be aired. You believe that these issues should


be taken on and argued down. Exactly. I am lucky because I have a


lot of experience... With a way to get experience is to do it. Others


may not have that experience, and are therefore in a difficult


position. Germaine Greer has been going around saying the most


disgusting, dehumanising things about trans people for decades.


Completely unchallenged. Lauded in the media. You didn't have trans


people on this show 15, 20 years ago, maybe not even five years ago.


You are only aware of us because of social media. We had a number of big


stories, transgender rights, trans people in prisons. We have made


ourselves known, that we are visible, but nobody was challenging


Germaine Greer. When I was in University six years ago I


experienced family rejection, street harassment, I didn't blend in when I


first transition. I was being messed about by the NHS. I faced


discrimination at work. I had mental health issues. Had I known Germaine


Greer was coming to my university, because of all the horrible things


she said about trans people, because, let's face it, if Nick


Griffin goes anywhere he is a known racist and is challenged. But if


Germaine Greer is going somewhere, everybody gets excited about it. I


think that would be enough to tip me over the edge and I'm not a weak


person. It doesn't happen in a vacuum. Do you think there has been


a generational change, and what is acceptable and unacceptable is


different? And maybe the younger activists are even more successful.


Maybe that's true. But I think that is a negative move. I understand why


they say what they say. I have sympathy for those in the NUS when


they wanted to defend the weak and the marginal. That is an honourable


position to take. But I think they are wrong to try and close down


debate, or exclude people, who they disagree with. The best way to


challenge bigot is by taking them on, refuting their arguments,


providing counter evidence, because that, I think, is the way to win


hearts and minds. If we don't convince the bigots, at least we


will convince the wider public. I think free speech has been expanded


for people who never previously had a voice. You are nobody these days


if you haven't been on a platform. Thank you both.


who was at the Welsh open and rolling towards that holy


Then he found out what the prize money was.


He has just had a look at me in the commentary box and I have put


Sometimes he doesn't try if it is not enough.


He didn't look too impressed when you said it was only


See he is not even going for one now.


If they are going to pay you ten grand, it's worth a bit


In-depth investigation and analysis with Kirsty Wark, including an exclusive interview with the mother of one of the Columbine killers and updates on Syria. The team also ask if Labour are scared of Europe debate, and Peter Tatchell discusses free speech.

Download Subtitles