Return to Transcripts main page
American Morning
Jackson Allegations
Aired November 24, 2003 - 09:07 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.
SOLEDAD O'BRIEN, CNN ANCHOR: More now on the latest developments in the Jackson case.
CNN legal analyst Jeff Toobin back with us.
Good morning. Nice to see you again.
JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Hi.
O'BRIEN: OK, let's cover a lot of ground in this one. We sort of talked about a bunch of things two hours ago. Impartial jury of all we've heard? I mean, the most famous person in the world, potentially. Could they get a fair trial?
TOOBIN: I think he could, but what's unusual about this case if you compare it to, say, the Scott Peterson case, the Scott Peterson case, the publicity is intensely concentrated in Modesto. I don't see how that trial could take place in Modesto. The Michael Jackson case, it's just everywhere. I don't think moving it out of Santa Barbara would do that much, make that much of a difference. So I think the real task here is going to be incredibly in-depth voir dire, examination of the jurors, rather than perhaps moving it to a different location.
O'BRIEN: We talked a little bit about this before. Why the delay in filing the formal charges? And how unusual -- I mean...
TOOBIN: I can answer your second question first. It's extremely unusual. I've never heard of it. As for why? I have no idea. I think it's really bizarre.
O'BRIEN: And the defense attorney, Geragos, is going along with it obviously.
TOOBIN: Right. He agreed to bring Michael Jackson in, be booked, set an arraignment date, without any charges filed against him.
O'BRIEN: Any reason you can think of?
TOOBIN: I think it probably related to scheduling. That it often happens when you have a defendant who's represented by a lawyer, that you work out a surrender date so that everybody can be together, the system works more efficiently, and perhaps that worked best with Geragos' schedule, and they accommodated him in that way.
But, you know, lawyers usually aren't rushing to bring their clients in to be booked when there are no charges filed against them. And I don't think it particularly helps or hurts either side here. It's just an example about how this case is not business as usual.
O'BRIEN: How much of this case could potentially rely on the case from 1993? Some of the potential witnesses from that case later on went on to sell their stories in the tabloids. So wouldn't the court say, well, they're not really a great witness anymore?
TOOBIN: Well, that would be up to the jury to determine their credibility. But one of the interesting things about the '93 case -- I actually wrote a piece about this for "The New Yorker" at the time -- that was the heyday of "Hard Copy," "A Current Affair," they were paying security guards at Michael Jackson's ranch, at Neverland, lots of money to give interviews. As a result, the prosecutors couldn't use them. They had sign comings and goings of kids. They were important witnesses. But they were so compromised by the fact that they took money that they wound up being almost unusable. Could happen again here.
O'BRIEN: How about the child in that case? Even though they settled for some massive amount of money reportedly? Could that child be brought in to testify in this case?
TOOBIN: You bet. That's a big change in the law since '93. Now, if you were -- there were accusations of child abuse in even distant past, even if there were no charges filed, much less a conviction, those witnesses, that evidence is still admissible. That was brought in because of the Catholic priests cases, where they brought in a lot of evidence of alleged abuse from years in the past, where there were no charges filed. That means the '93 incident should be admissible in this trial.
O'BRIEN: I have a feeling we're going to be talking about this for a long time.
TOOBIN: You think it will come up again in the next month? I'm guessing you're right.
O'BRIEN: All right, Jeff, thanks.
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 November 24, 2003 - 09:07 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
SOLEDAD O'BRIEN, CNN ANCHOR: More now on the latest developments in the Jackson case.
CNN legal analyst Jeff Toobin back with us.
Good morning. Nice to see you again.
JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Hi.
O'BRIEN: OK, let's cover a lot of ground in this one. We sort of talked about a bunch of things two hours ago. Impartial jury of all we've heard? I mean, the most famous person in the world, potentially. Could they get a fair trial?
TOOBIN: I think he could, but what's unusual about this case if you compare it to, say, the Scott Peterson case, the Scott Peterson case, the publicity is intensely concentrated in Modesto. I don't see how that trial could take place in Modesto. The Michael Jackson case, it's just everywhere. I don't think moving it out of Santa Barbara would do that much, make that much of a difference. So I think the real task here is going to be incredibly in-depth voir dire, examination of the jurors, rather than perhaps moving it to a different location.
O'BRIEN: We talked a little bit about this before. Why the delay in filing the formal charges? And how unusual -- I mean...
TOOBIN: I can answer your second question first. It's extremely unusual. I've never heard of it. As for why? I have no idea. I think it's really bizarre.
O'BRIEN: And the defense attorney, Geragos, is going along with it obviously.
TOOBIN: Right. He agreed to bring Michael Jackson in, be booked, set an arraignment date, without any charges filed against him.
O'BRIEN: Any reason you can think of?
TOOBIN: I think it probably related to scheduling. That it often happens when you have a defendant who's represented by a lawyer, that you work out a surrender date so that everybody can be together, the system works more efficiently, and perhaps that worked best with Geragos' schedule, and they accommodated him in that way.
But, you know, lawyers usually aren't rushing to bring their clients in to be booked when there are no charges filed against them. And I don't think it particularly helps or hurts either side here. It's just an example about how this case is not business as usual.
O'BRIEN: How much of this case could potentially rely on the case from 1993? Some of the potential witnesses from that case later on went on to sell their stories in the tabloids. So wouldn't the court say, well, they're not really a great witness anymore?
TOOBIN: Well, that would be up to the jury to determine their credibility. But one of the interesting things about the '93 case -- I actually wrote a piece about this for "The New Yorker" at the time -- that was the heyday of "Hard Copy," "A Current Affair," they were paying security guards at Michael Jackson's ranch, at Neverland, lots of money to give interviews. As a result, the prosecutors couldn't use them. They had sign comings and goings of kids. They were important witnesses. But they were so compromised by the fact that they took money that they wound up being almost unusable. Could happen again here.
O'BRIEN: How about the child in that case? Even though they settled for some massive amount of money reportedly? Could that child be brought in to testify in this case?
TOOBIN: You bet. That's a big change in the law since '93. Now, if you were -- there were accusations of child abuse in even distant past, even if there were no charges filed, much less a conviction, those witnesses, that evidence is still admissible. That was brought in because of the Catholic priests cases, where they brought in a lot of evidence of alleged abuse from years in the past, where there were no charges filed. That means the '93 incident should be admissible in this trial.
O'BRIEN: I have a feeling we're going to be talking about this for a long time.
TOOBIN: You think it will come up again in the next month? I'm guessing you're right.
O'BRIEN: All right, Jeff, thanks.
TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com
