Hillsborough Verdict In; Tuesday Primaries Previewed; Election and Business; Twitter Earnings Examined; Mitsubishi Admits Decades of False



Business; Twitter Earnings Examined; Mitsubishi Admits Decades of False

Fuel Numbers; Al Qaeda Affiliate Says It's Behind Bangladesh Killings;

First Exit Polls To Be Release in U.S. Primaries; Spain Faces New

Elections; Prince Did Not Leave a Will; T-Mobile Adds 2.2 Million

Subscribers. Aired 4-5p ET - Part 1>

Robertson, Paula Newton>

unlawfully killed. Today's primaries looked at. Business and the US

election discussed. Mitsubishi troubles explored. T-Mobile has added 2.2

million customers this quarter. Apple's quarterly results show a 16 percent

loss in iPhone sales. Big Ben the iconic clock in London is getting a

facelift. The repair will take several months, meaning months of silence

when the bells won't chime. The Eurovision Song Contest has expelled

Romania from this year's competition.>

Elections; Donald Trump; Auto Industry; Mitsubishi; Technology; Europe;

Electronics; Television and Radios>



RICHARD QUEST, HOST: (In progress) - to you, as soon as it happens. And 25 years of fiddling the fuel numbers, scandal at Mitsubishi is accelerating.


QUEST: I'm Richard Quest. We have an hour together. And I mean business.

Good evening. It took more than a quarter of a century but now after disaster that changed the face of modern football around the globe the long fight for vindication and justice has arrived.


QUEST: An inquest into the stadium tragedy found that the 96 Liverpool fans, that were trapped and crushed to death on the infamous day in April 1989 were in the words of the jury unlawfully killed. The jury found in their words gross negligence and police planning errors created a situation that was rife with danger. And crucially for the family of the victims, fan behavior was said not to have caused or contributing to the tragedy. And so, concludes the longest jury case in British legal history and criminal charges are now going to be considered by the various prosecutorial authorities.


QUEST: CNN's Phil Black is in Liverpool and has sent this dispatch.



PHIL BLACK, CNN CORRESPONDENT: This was the day that hope finally gave way to justice. The families, friends of the 96 who died plus many, many more, the result they had fought for, for more than a quarter of a century. Liverpool football fans exonerated, instead an inquest jury finding the victims unlawfully killed. Brenda, Debbie and Dianne lost their brother Brian.

BRENDA MATTHEWS, LOST BROTHER, BRIAN: I was elated and like a weight lifted off our shoulders after 27 long years of just trying to get justice for our brother Brian.

DIANNE MATTHEWS, LOST BROTHER BRIAN: Today has been a victory and I think, you know, we can go home and maybe have a good night's sleep after 27 years.

BLACK: Margaret Aspinall lost her 18-year-old son James.

MARGARET ASPINALL, LOST SON JAMES: I don't mind truth and I don't mind justice and I don't mind the wars but give me the truth on my son's death certificate and people said you've had the truth. A lot of people were saying then you've had the truth. No, we knew we never had the truth and we proved now I can get my son's death certificate with the right verdict.

BLACK: The man in charge of the policing operation for the match, Chief Superintendent David Duckenfield of South Yorkshire Police was found responsible for manslaughter by gross negligence. He could now face criminal proceedings. He admitted to the inquest he had lied when he blamed Liverpool fans for causing the crush. The man in charge of South Yorkshire police today admitted his predecessors got it catastrophically wrong.

DAVID CROMPTON, SOUTH YORKSHIRE POLICE: The force failed the victims and failed their families. Today, as I have said before, I want to apologize unreservedly to the families and those affected.

BLACK British Prime Minister David Cameron in a tweet called it a landmark day which had brought long overdue justice. England football captain Wayne Rooney whose hometown is Liverpool tweeted at last justice for the 96 and their families. Well done to all who never gave up.

In Liverpool, itself, a candle for each of the 96 beneath banners bearing their names and then slowly the two words people here had been waiting for. Truth and justice.

Phil Black, CNN, Liverpool.


QUEST: Now football, the game itself, had to learn painful lessons from Hillsborough. In 1990, there was an inquiry into the disaster it was called the Taylor report, done by Lord Justice Taylor, and that recommended stadia be completely overhauled. It said that the standing room terraces should be replaced with seated areas to prevent overcrowding. All seating areas.



QUEST: Years later, Top Flight Stadia still had those terraces. I want you to look at these pictures. This was what Chelsea stadium looked like as late as 1992. And hooliganism - hooliganism was thought to be responsible though wasn't to blame for Hillsborough was still a major problem. This was the way it looked at Chelsea.

Now, take that same picture and look again at particularly at the ends and you see it's completely all seating. All seated stadiums are now the norm. There are no terraces where people can stand. There's no room for those sorts of crushes. Safety has been made a priority at the matches. Clubs now to attract affluent middle class crowds.

CNN's world sport Don Riddell has been exploring Hillsborough's impact on modern football for a new CNN documentary.

DON RIDDELL, CNN WORLD SPORT: The premier league is promoted the best in the world. Every week its games broadcast all over the world taking people inside England's state of the art all seater stadiums. But 27 years ago it was a very different story. Stadiums were decrepit. Many fans stood. The scourge of hooligans meant that rival supporters were kept apart by fencing. They were penned in on all sides.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The conditions of the stadium, we took them for granted. We would cheer when people were handed down who'd fainted in the cop and they were handed down to the front and passed over to the ambulance people. We cheered because it was just part of the way it was.


QUEST: Don Riddell joins me now from the CNN Center. Don, as we look at Hillsborough and you obviously have looked at it extremely closely, we'll comes to the changes in football in a minute but I just want to dwell on, all these different reports, you've had numerous inquiries. The initial one, then you had Taylor and you had various earlier coroners' inquiries but none of them came to this conclusion. Was that because people lied or they just didn't look for the right facts or they ignored what was there?

RIDDELL: Well, Richard, I think it was a little bit of everything. I think now that we have got to the end of this 27 years later, it becomes rather apparent that the authorities perhaps didn't really want the real story to be told.


RIDDELL: And that is certainly how the fans and the families of the victims would present the argument. For example, you take the origin inquest which ended in 1991 when the 96 verdicts were essentially accidental death. That infuriated the families and one of the reasons the jury got to that conclusion was that basically the stage was set with that inquest where no evidence was permissible after a 3:15 p.m. cutoff. The decision was taken before the inquest even began that the injuries sustained by 3:15 were basically irreversible and people -- and/or people had ceased to be by 3:15.

It now transpires that many of those fans were alive long after the 3:15 p.m. cutoff and that is why we now saw so much evidence that hadn't been heard for the last 27 years, finally presented at this inquest. The families will argue that basically the authorities didn't want them to know what the real truth was and that's because the authorities were responsible for what happened.

QUEST: Right. And so, in that sense, we can say conspiracy.


RIDDELL: Well, the families would certainly phrase it that way. They have called this a cover-up of industrial proportions.


RIDDELL: That is the narrative that they have believed all along. Now, the police force deny this. But when you begin to look at some of the evidence and some of the research that has been done, when you look at, for example, the police statements, which were taken in the aftermath of the disaster, it's been revealed that some of the statements were altered, some of them were basically copied from one pc to another and presented separately but is basically the same story.


QUEST: Is there a danger here that Duckenfield, the chief superintendent involved, who admits to lying, who admits to having covered up, who admits to having put his head in the sand, becomes the scapegoat because it's easy to pin everything on him rather than wider institutional police, ambulance service and all the other (inaudible) that did condition spire to keep it from the public for so long?

RIDDELL: Well, it's a very simple narrative to blame David Duckenfield and certainly there is no sympathy for that particular individual on Merseyside.


RIDDELL: Not just because of his failings but because of the way the cover- up if you want to call it that manipulated from the very - from the very off.


RIDDELL: I think the families want all who were responsible to be held accountable. And so that goes way beyond just David Duckenfield. It's very important that the jury when they considered these 14 separate questions were also looking at the responsibility of the Sheffield Wednesday who owned the Hillsborough stadium, of the structural engineers who provided the fixtures and fittings on the terracing which were proved to be woefully inaccurate.


RIDDELL: The ambulance service, the city council who provided the safety certificate for the stadium which was ten years out of date. All of these people have been proven to be responsible. The only group or organization that wasn't responsible were the fans. They were unanimously exonerated for their part in the disaster and for so long, Richard, that wasn't the case. The original narrative was that the fans caused this by arriving late, drunk and without tickets. Kicking in the gates, those were the words of David Duckenfield originally and that was proved absolutely today that that was never the case.

QUEST: Don Riddell who has followed this very closely, Don, thank you very much. Don at the CNN Center and you can see more of Don's extensive reporting on this tragedy tomorrow night. It's a CNN documentary, "Hillsborough, They'll Never Walk Alone." It's on Wednesday it's at 8:00 o'clock in London time, 9:00 o'clock in Central Europe, and of course, it's on CNN.


QUEST: We're expecting to have results from twitter any moment now and we're waiting to see whether the social network users have come to the nest or flown away because the crucial point where twitter's concerned is how many people are using it and how many have stopped.



QUEST: Just an hour from now or so and the first exit polls of five states that is voting in the primaries across the American northeast. Donald Trump is hoping to sweep the board on the Republican side. CNN's chief U.S. correspondent is John King and give us a very good idea of what's at stake.


JOHN KING, CNN CHIEF U.S. CORRESPONDENT: Donald Trump is counting on a big Super Tuesday night that moves his cause forward in the quest to get to 1,237. Our CNN delegate count has Mr. Trump just shy of 850. Ted Cruz in a distant second.

Here's what's at stake in the primaries Friday night. Five states in the northeast, the mid-Atlantic region, the so-called excelsior primary, 172 republican delegates at stake critical because Donald Trump is favored to win them all, and if Donald Trump wins them all on Tuesday night and wins them all with a healthy margin he could add 100, maybe even more, watch that final number, to his delegate count. Get past 950, meaning get past 75% of the way to the finish line; maybe even stretch it out a little bit more if he wins them all big. This is a relatively conservative estimate if Donald Trump ends Tuesday night like this; does that mean he can in the rest of the contest get to the magic number? Doesn't guarantee it but keeps him in play to get to 1,237. Which is why Governor Kasich and Senator Cruz had this new alliance. Let's take a look at what we're talking about.


KING: Senator Cruz says I'm going to Indiana. Governor Kasich says I won't campaign here anymore senator; you take on Donald Trump in Indiana, May 3rd, 57 delegates. In return, Senator Cruz says I won't campaign in Oregon; I won't campaign in New Mexico, that's later in May. On the final day in June, add them up, 109 delegates as part of this Cruz/Kasich alliance. Will it work? Well, let's take a look.

If it plays out the way those two Republicans hope it plays out and Cruz wins Indiana, Kasich wins New Mexico, Kasich wins Oregon, look where Trump is here, the one state to factor in. Even if that plays out the way they want it to, even if Trump wins big, 70% of the delegates in California on the final day, he would be short of 1,237. He'd be pretty close conceivably but still short. That's what they hope happens.

But what if it doesn't work? Right now the polls show Donald Trump ahead in Indiana. What if he wins there? Donald Trump's mocking this deal. He says he's going to go to New Mexico and beat Governor Kasich. What if that plays out there and he wins, they split the delegates but Trump wins.

And let's say Trump runs the board. And goes up to Oregon, as well and wins there and Governor Kasich comes in second. If it played out like that, huge Trump momentum to the end. Under this scenario, he's at 1,236. So if he has a big Tuesday night, he could get a few more. He could conceivably pass 1,237.

Or if he can win Indiana, maybe loses the other two, still be in the 1,215/1,220 range which allows him to negotiate his way to the finish line between the final primaries and the Cleveland convention.

So if you're going to stop Trump it's critical that you beat him in Indiana and you beat him in some of these states out to the west. So it's a deal worth trying but Mr. Trump says it desperate. Tuesday night first, then we'll see how that one plays out.


QUEST: John King with the machinations and the numbers. We're in the C- Suite with Bob Nardeli, the former Chief Executive of Chrysler, and Home Depot. How good to see you, sir.


QUEST: Good to see you now.

NARDELI: Thank you.

QUEST: We're in the C-Suite and you were telling me the view of the C-Suite at the moment.

NARDELI: Yes. What I said was the level of the uncertainty in the C-Suite has never been as high as it is today. The level of complexity that we have to deal with, geo political. You look at taxes, you look at when's happening in the M&A market, the administration has shut down $400 billion of potential deals. Today, corporations must do M&A to get the top line growth. They're getting earnings. They're driving productivity. But to get growth, they're looking for synergies of productivity, Richard.

QUEST: Except in this election, big business large corporations are the whipping boys of both the right Donald Trump and the left.


QUEST: Wall Street is being clobbered on both sides.

NARDELI: They really are. And I think we've seen some articles about that. My good friend, Jim McNerney came out the other day and expressed his point of view on that exactly. That this thing could become reality. I mean there's so many people talking about it, and putting a spin on it, that it is creating a lot of uncertainty. I mean if you look at GDP is going to be maybe 11/2 points again this year.

QUEST: But is it damaging or is it just politics? When you get the Bernie Sanders of this world attacking GE, Immelt replies in the newspaper, Verizon also relies. Do you feel that CEOs are feeling under attack by politicians?

NARDELI: Yes, I think so, Richard. I mean I think Jeff was definitely appropriate in responding to some of the criticism that Bernie came out with. I mean, you talk about in Vermont, you know, GE's got a great plant up there and they never visited the plant. You know he's made some other comments about that. I just think there needs to be an outreaching regardless of what, you know, what party takes office. But I think they've got to be more supportive of business today. It is what creates jobs, it is driving the economy and I think it's an error not to lock arms and be supportive of our government -- of our businesses.

QUEST: The question of free trade, obviously you're a free trader probably through and through. You've lived your life in that --

NARDELI: I'm a fair trader. I mean, I think there should be more balance of trade. I'm a fair trader.

QUEST: But you wouldn't be in favor of suddenly racking on tariffs to the Chinese or suddenly building walls in Mexico. Or maybe you would!

NARDELI: No, here's what I think. I think you could go you know a road too far and try to block trade. I mean, I grew up in the old days of economics, you know guns and butter. And kind of a fair trade opportunity. I think we could - we could export more. I think if we had better federal government taxes on big business, I think if we worked towards a balance of trades is what we really need in this country.

QUEST: I want to touch another area. In just a moment I'm going to be talking about the Mitsubishi.


QUEST: And the way they fiddled the fuel emissions and the way they -- not emissions, I beg your pardon, the way the fuel efficiency numbers.

NARDELI: Miles per gallon.

QUEST: Miles per gallon. Thank you -- thank you, sir. Volkswagen did it in a more sophisticated way. It's led me to want to ask you -- when you were CEO, did you all believe that everybody was up to it in some shape or form?


QUEST: Did you all believe that somewhere you all knew that the numbers by some companies were wrong?


NARDELI: No. You know, honestly, I enjoyed my time immensely at Chrysler even though we were going through some real challenging times. But I think, you know, Mary Barr at GM really raised the bar and rightfully so relative to quality and responsibility. I think what's happened now is that has cascaded down, whether it's Chrysler's current recall, you know, for 800,000, whether it is the VW thing, which was malicious intent, willful violation, Mitsubishi, you know, fudging the numbers on miles per gallon, I think that's all coming home roost now.

QUEST: But did you all know about -- did you all suspect at the time that there was something, you know, you were - I guess was there a cavalier attitude to these issues?

NARDELI: I don't want to say cavalier but, no, I think we trusted one another that they were dealing with integrity and, you know, I just don't think that was the case at all. I would never want to suggest that. I mean we thought we were all dealing fair, equitably and really with a focus towards the market and the consumer Richard.

QUEST: Finally, back to the election, have you ever seen an election like this before?

NARDELI: Never, never. In my entire life I've never seen this, I never would have been able to predict this. I think like so many people we thought there were some distractions going on but as we fast forward, we'll know a lot more by the end of tonight, won't we Richard?

QUEST: We will, sir.

NARDELI: Thank you very much.

QUEST: Thank you, good to see you.

NARDELI: Thank you.

QUEST: Now we were talking about Mitsubishi, it was in 1991, and then it was the Governor of Arkansas, it was Bill Clinton and he was preparing to run for the senate. And as it turns out, that was then 1991, it was when Mitsubishi was just beginning to fiddle the fuel efficiency tests. The miles per gallon as my last guest put it so elegantly.


QUEST: Now Mitsubishi has admitted tests have been rigged for the last 25 years, extraordinary. The automaker made it appear that vehicles had traveled further on less fuel. They did it by overinflating the tires. Mitsubishi's stock fell another 10% and the president said he can't even say how he can keep the company afloat.

TETSURO AIKAWA, PRESIDENT, MITSUBISHI MOTORS CORP. (As translated) Until we get an idea of when this investigation will end, I can't answer your question. That's how big of a problem I feel this is.


QUEST: John Davis, the creator and host of "Motor Week," John, John, John, we spoke last time on Volkswagen, now we're speaking on Mitsubishi. Were you surprised at this first of all that it happened, and secondly, at the scale and range?

JOHN DAVIS, CREATOR, MOTOR WEEK: 25 years, Richard. That means this is endemic with their corporate culture. But I am surprised because this was different. For the first time we've had one automaker, Nissan, who was selling these very small cars that Mitsubishi made for themselves and Nissan. Nissan blew the whistle on Mitsubishi. So they blew the whistle on one of their own, that hadn't happened before and I think that's a game changer going forward that nobody wants to be saddled with these problems, even if they didn't produce them themselves.


QUEST: OK. But the fascinating part about this, and I'm going to ask you the same question I just asked Bob Nardeli who I'm sure you remember and have met many times.


QUEST: Going back all those years, is this the sort of thing everybody suspected that some companies were up to something that was a little bit sniffy and smelly?

DAVIS: Well, in this case, the numbers were not jury rigged that much so it might have escaped most people, most other car companies even looking at it. But in the case say of Volkswagen where you had these diesels getting much better results for fuel economy and emissions than anybody else that was doing similar work, I find it very difficult to believe that, say, Diamler or BMW, especially their engineers could look at what Volkswagen doing and say there's got to be something else going on there because we're using the same parts that they are, maybe not the same engines but the same components, but nobody really wanted to talk about it. So with Nissan actually now saying, pointing the finger at one of its partners, that's what makes this different and could change the whole dynamics going forward. I don't think it's the end of the story.

QUEST: I mean that - that was my next thing. I mean, is there more smelly fish to be unearthed from under the kitchen cabinet?

DAVIS: Unfortunately, because governments keep ratcheting up fuel economy and gets much, much more stringent in the future, car companies are basically designing towards meeting these goals and if they miss them by a little bit it cost them billions of dollars. So I'm kind of afraid there may be a few more skeletons in the closet. I don't mean to say that I think it's going to be huge and widespread. This is two small little vehicle designs but I think there may be some more coming out.


QUEST: John, well hopefully you'll come back and assist us as more (inaudible) behavior is revealed. We'll need you with a firm feather duster get to the bottom of it. Thank you, sir.

DAVIS: Thank you, Richard.

QUEST: Investors in the U.S. couldn't make up their minds on Tuesday. This is where the DOW ..


QUEST: The Fed wrapping up a policy meeting on Wednesday. Nothing expected on that. Look at the market result, up 13 points. But it was a very - it was a very late eking out of a very small gain having been down for most of the afternoon. A bit of a weird day. Twitter shares are down sharply. They're off more than 7%, maybe 9%. The company's revenue missed out on its expectations and the company's lowered its guidance for second quarter.


QUEST: Cristina Alesci is with me. I've got a 15 -- 17-page briefing note.


QUEST: You have read the 17-page briefing note.

ALESCI: Yes, in the last 3 minutes I actually managed. Speed reading is great. So you hit the two major headlines which is why we see the stock tanking. Now revenue is a problem for the company. Right? Investors want to see revenue growth. Revenue is growing even though it missed expectations. You are still seeing revenue up. The problem is the street doesn't care about revenue. It wants to see user growth.

QUEST: Right. Because revenues only today's numbers, user growth is revenue for the next quarter and in the future.

ALESCI: That's exactly it. And if you don't have profits what you want to see is growth on the user side. And this is something that Twitter has struggled with. Don't get me wrong. We saw a 5 million increase in users. Better than the 2 million loss that they had last quarter. But it's still not going gang busters. And the reason that people care about the number of users on the platform is because advertisers care about the number of users at the platform. Twitter is competing for ad dollars with Facebook that has 1.6 billion users. Google which has 8 products that has users with more than a billion products.

So you're talking about, you know, 310 million people on Twitter. The main knock against Twitter is that it's professional audience. It's difficult to use. I was on the phone with an analyst who was a big fan of Twitter and he said that he just only after five, six years of covering the company discovered the help function on Twitter. And the only way that you can get to it is by clicking on your picture and scrolling down.

QUEST: I am terrified.

ALESCI: No, you're not.

QUEST: No, I am. When I tweet I am terrified that I do not understand if it's going to go just to you, if it's going to go to you, if it's going to go to the friends of you and you. And this dreadful thing with the pictures where am I about to send a photograph to somebody that shouldn't receive that particular photograph?

ALESCI: You are hitting the nail on the head. This is incredible because this is exactly the knock that all of the industry has with twitter.

QUEST: Yes, but I'm 54.

ALESCI: No, but it's not just you. I know you like to think so but you're not special.

QUEST: Get away from that woman.

ALESCI: Lots of other people who are intimidated by the fact they don't know what a direct message is. They don't even know what a hash tag is, they don't know why they should be using hash tags.

QUEST: And yet, and yet, twitter has become the venue discourse for people to put out statements. Witnessed when Prince dies, everybody puts out a statement. Look at the Hillsborough inquiry, the first thing the British Prime Minister does is put out a tweet that gives his statement. So it's got an officialdom about it.

ALESCI: It's not a cache right. But the problem with Twitter if you really look at it, Twitter is a news service, OK. It's where people go for news. So you should have a pretty direct correlation between the people who are consuming news to the number of users that you have on Twitter and you don't have that. You just simply don't have it. There's no conversion there.

QUEST: At Cristina --

ALESCI: What are you -- what kind of pictures are you sending me?

QUEST: There's the bell, thank you. Good to see you.

ALESCI: Good to see you, too.

QUEST: Later in the program you're going to hear from Jean Legere of T- Mobile USA. Now, Jean Legere is one of the most prolific Twitter user, certainly as a CEO. He's going to explain to us why he uses Twitter so much. We've got more earnings out in a moment; investors are waiting to see whether the shine has come off Apple. Is it going to be the Apple miss? And the world's biggest company's expected to post the worst result in some 13 years. We'll have that story for you.