Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Live Today

Laci Peterson Case

Aired May 02, 2003 - 11:08   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.


LEON HARRIS, CNN ANCHOR: Can a high profile, TV savvy defense attorney actually make a difference? Well, ask O.J. Simpson. CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin joins us now from New York. Let's get his perspective as well.
What do you think about this?

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: I thought we were going to ask O.J., as you suggested.

HARRIS: Got his number handy?

TOOBIN: I have a number or two I can try.

No, he is -- Mark is a good lawyer, very familiar to CNN viewers, especially viewers of "LARRY KING." What he really needs is a theory, who did this, if Scott Peterson didn't? What's interesting about this case is that the actual evidence that at least is public has some holes in it. There's no murder weapon, there's no eyewitness. There's no even cause of death, apparently of the two victims. But the problem here, if Scott Peterson didn't do it, who did? Mark Geragos has got some time now, but he's got to find a way to present to a jury some theory of how someone else would have wanted to do this.

HARRIS: If you think about that, we've heard that term mountain of evidence used in the O.J. case, and it seems that there was plenty of circumstantial evidence to lock that case up. A lot of that seems to be pretty much the same thing we're looking at here in this case.

I want to ask you something else. I don't know how lawyers treat each other, I don't know if you can I wouldn't say cast any aspersions, but at least comment on a colleague. What do you think about the fact that an attorney could be in a position where he's commenting on cases, and on this particular case, on a television show, and they get called in to actually represent a party in a case like that? Does that crossing any lines there at all?

TOOBIN: I really don't think so. I think, you know, while he was talking with Larry King and others, he was clearly an independent expert.

Now when he talks about the case again, presumably he will have come into the case, and we will then know to take his opinions with a suitable grain of salt. He will be a participant.

But I don't really have an ethical problem with what he did. HARRIS: You don't worry about an audience becoming jaded or skeptical in thinking any time they see a lawyer, maybe even you, show up to comment on a case that perhaps you're just anxious to get a piece of it.

TOOBIN: Well, you know, I don't practice law anymore. Tragically, the legal profession has lost me as a participant. I'm just a full-time journalist now. I think -- I give our listeners, our readers more credit than that.

I say, look, they know these people are in private practice. They know the reason he's on the air is that he's a defense attorney, that he's not a prosecutor, so she's supposed to bring that perspective. I guess I can't get too outraged about it.

HARRIS: All right, then fine. If he's going to be the guy that steps in, what's his first move. Obviously delaying is going to have to be a tactic here.

TOOBIN: The first move, very clearly, is delay, get this case put off for as long as possible.

HARRIS: How long?

TOOBIN: And get it out of Modesto.

HARRIS: OK, how long would a delay work?

TOOBIN: I'm sorry, Leon. I'm losing you.

HARRIS: Let's try this again. You say delay. How long a delay here?

TOOBIN: Leon, I'm sorry, I think we have some audio problems.

HARRIS: Sorry. We'll try one more time. Can you hear me now, Jeffrey? Can you hear me now? I guess not. We'll have to move on. Thanks. It was nice having him while we did. Jeffrey Toobin in New York.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com






Aired May 2, 2003 - 11:08   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
LEON HARRIS, CNN ANCHOR: Can a high profile, TV savvy defense attorney actually make a difference? Well, ask O.J. Simpson. CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin joins us now from New York. Let's get his perspective as well.
What do you think about this?

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: I thought we were going to ask O.J., as you suggested.

HARRIS: Got his number handy?

TOOBIN: I have a number or two I can try.

No, he is -- Mark is a good lawyer, very familiar to CNN viewers, especially viewers of "LARRY KING." What he really needs is a theory, who did this, if Scott Peterson didn't? What's interesting about this case is that the actual evidence that at least is public has some holes in it. There's no murder weapon, there's no eyewitness. There's no even cause of death, apparently of the two victims. But the problem here, if Scott Peterson didn't do it, who did? Mark Geragos has got some time now, but he's got to find a way to present to a jury some theory of how someone else would have wanted to do this.

HARRIS: If you think about that, we've heard that term mountain of evidence used in the O.J. case, and it seems that there was plenty of circumstantial evidence to lock that case up. A lot of that seems to be pretty much the same thing we're looking at here in this case.

I want to ask you something else. I don't know how lawyers treat each other, I don't know if you can I wouldn't say cast any aspersions, but at least comment on a colleague. What do you think about the fact that an attorney could be in a position where he's commenting on cases, and on this particular case, on a television show, and they get called in to actually represent a party in a case like that? Does that crossing any lines there at all?

TOOBIN: I really don't think so. I think, you know, while he was talking with Larry King and others, he was clearly an independent expert.

Now when he talks about the case again, presumably he will have come into the case, and we will then know to take his opinions with a suitable grain of salt. He will be a participant.

But I don't really have an ethical problem with what he did. HARRIS: You don't worry about an audience becoming jaded or skeptical in thinking any time they see a lawyer, maybe even you, show up to comment on a case that perhaps you're just anxious to get a piece of it.

TOOBIN: Well, you know, I don't practice law anymore. Tragically, the legal profession has lost me as a participant. I'm just a full-time journalist now. I think -- I give our listeners, our readers more credit than that.

I say, look, they know these people are in private practice. They know the reason he's on the air is that he's a defense attorney, that he's not a prosecutor, so she's supposed to bring that perspective. I guess I can't get too outraged about it.

HARRIS: All right, then fine. If he's going to be the guy that steps in, what's his first move. Obviously delaying is going to have to be a tactic here.

TOOBIN: The first move, very clearly, is delay, get this case put off for as long as possible.

HARRIS: How long?

TOOBIN: And get it out of Modesto.

HARRIS: OK, how long would a delay work?

TOOBIN: I'm sorry, Leon. I'm losing you.

HARRIS: Let's try this again. You say delay. How long a delay here?

TOOBIN: Leon, I'm sorry, I think we have some audio problems.

HARRIS: Sorry. We'll try one more time. Can you hear me now, Jeffrey? Can you hear me now? I guess not. We'll have to move on. Thanks. It was nice having him while we did. Jeffrey Toobin in New York.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com