Return to Transcripts main page

Nancy Grace

Defense Kicks Off in Michael Jackson`s Case; Runaway Bride Tells Her Side of the Story

Aired May 05, 2005 - 20:00   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.


NANCY GRACE, HOST: Tonight, the defense kicks off in the Michael Jackson child sex trial. Defense witness number one said he started sleeping in Jackson`s bed at the tender age of 7 years old.
And remember the California nanny, high on Vicodin, Flexural and alcohol? She ran down two children, ages 7 and 10, on their way with their mom for Slurpee drinks? Well, tonight, the children are in heaven and the nanny is headed straight to jail.

Tonight, six days after resurfacing with a blanket on her head, the runaway bride tells her side of the story.

Good evening, everybody. I`m Nancy Grace. Thank you for being with us tonight.

The so-called runaway bride says, "I`m sorry," after feeling the heat after claims she was not remorseful.

And in the first case of its kind, a nanny, strung out on alcohol and painkillers who mowed down two children, answers to a jury in a California courtroom. The children`s father speaks out tonight.

Jackson defense, day one: After ten weeks of taking potshots at the state`s case, the defense kicks off. Defense`s first witness takes a beating on cross-examination.

With us tonight, in Santa Maria, California, "Inside Edition`s" senior correspondent, Jim Moret; in L.A., Jackson`s parents` attorney, Debra Opri; in New York, defense attorney Richard Herman; and psychologist Dr. Jeff Gardere.

But first, to "Celebrity Justice" correspondent Jane Velez-Mitchell.

Hello, friend. Bring me up-to-date.

JANE VELEZ-MITCHELL, "CELEBRITY JUSTICE": Well, Nancy, the defense kicked off its case by bringing to the stand two young men, one after the other, both in their 20s, both handsome and articulate. Both testified that they had spent many nights sleeping with Michael Jackson as boys, sharing his bed, but both insisted absolutely nothing happened.

In fact, both used the same phrase, "absolutely nothing happened." Now, this flatly contradicts the testimony of prosecution witnesses who had testified during the prosecution case that they had seen inappropriate behavior between Michael Jackson and these two young men.

GRACE: OK, you know, we are not referring to the boys` names. Of course, they`re grown up now, Jane. I`m referring to one as the Australian alleged victim, one as the dancer, the choreographer, and one as the "Home Alone" star.

So Jane, what happened on cross-exam?

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, actually, I think that the prosecution took a page from the defense playbook, very effective on cross-examination, using these witnesses for their own purposes to remind the jury of all the adult materials -- we`re not allowed in court to call them pornography -- seized from Michael Jackson`s Neverland estate.

They showed the first young man, the now-famous choreographer who has done choreography for Britney Spears, by the way, a series of books, very graphic, sexual material involving naked young boys with their genitalia exposed and men having sex.

GRACE: Jane, Jane. I`d like to talk to you, but I`m too busy looking at pictures right now. Have you seen this thing, the boy? There are naked kids in here. They`re naked.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: You know, what`s so interesting is that the young man on the stand said, "I never thought that I would be looking at material like this in front of a roomful of people." And it was actually a remark that got everybody kind of chuckling nervously.

It was a very unpleasant experience to watch him leaf through this material. And he was asked by the prosecutor over and over again, "Would you feel uncomfortable about having an adult 35-year-old man share a bed with a young boy who possesses this kind of material?" And at first, he said, "No, no, no." And then finally we got to the book involving sex acts between adult males, and he said very quietly, "Yes."

GRACE: I`m going to go to Jim Moret with "Inside Edition."

Jim, you sat through the cross-exam as well as the direct. What happened on cross?

JIM MORET, "INSIDE EDITION": You saw with the -- first, the choreographer, you saw his body language change a great deal. His voice broke a couple of times. He began to almost become lower in the chair and hunch over and become a bit more soft-spoken.

Ron Zonen, the prosecutor, did an absolutely magnificent job of taking this witness and turning him to his own witness. And you know, if you take this on its surface, that nothing happened, there was one thing that did happen in that courtroom. And it was a rather visceral reaction to what you were hearing.

Because you were reminded over, and over, and over, that then-35-year- old Michael Jackson would invite these boys between the ages of 7 and 14 to share his bed. And that gave you a pit in your stomach, because some of those people in court, like me, are parents. And they were thinking of their own children.

And it`s such an uncomfortable feeling. I frankly felt like I was hit by a two-by-four in the stomach. And it took me a couple of hours to get out of this fog that I felt like I was in. It was only about two hours of testimony, but it was tremendously powerful, Nancy.

GRACE: You know what`s significant, Dr. Jeff Gardere -- he is not only a clinical psychologist, but an author, as well, including a book called, "Smart Parenting" -- Jeff, it struck me that this boy was very pro- Jackson. He said nothing happened, and I`m referring to a boy that was about 7-years-old when he started sleeping in the bed with Jackson.

He took the stand and said nothing improper happened. Doctor, he said he started sleeping with Jackson, age 7, that he went there for years, that he almost always slept with Jackson until he turned 14. Then suddenly, he didn`t get to sleep with Michael Jackson anymore. What does that suggest?

DR. JEFF GARDERE, CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGIST: Well, it suggests to me that, at some point, he woke up and realized that this was very inappropriate that he was sharing his bed with an adult. That`s the first thing.

The second thing is, it`s quite possible that there may be memories that are repressed as to what may have happened in that bed. And who knows what may have happened when he was asleep? We`ve heard some people say, "Hey, while he was -- while Michael was in bed with some of these kids, he was inappropriately touching them while the kids were in bed sleeping."

GRACE: And Richard Herman, defense attorney, when you are dealing with a pedophile, a child molester, their interest is for a specific age category. And if you take a look at all of these so-called similar transactions, all the other little boys that allegedly were molested by Jackson, they all fit within a certain age, from 7- to about 13-years-old.

RICHARD HERMAN, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Well, that`s definitely a troubling issue, Nancy. But where was Mesereau? Where was the objection to allowing this layman witness to give his opinion as to the pictures that he was looking at in a book that was taken by the police in the 1993 raid out of a locked box, that this witness testified he had never seen before in his life? Where was the objection to relevance?

GRACE: And what, the objection to relevance? It goes to Jackson`s state of mind.

HERMAN: It goes to Jackson`s state of mind?

GRACE: You`re darn right. Jackson is sleeping in the bed with a 7- year-old boy.

Elizabeth, if we don`t get arrested for this, put up those stills that are contained in these books. This is a book that my producer, Elizabeth, presented to me today. This is one of the -- it`s an exact replica of something that`s been entered in the courtroom, that came out of Jackson`s house.

We`re showing you photos like, photos mosaiced out. There are naked boys in this book with their private parts on full display. I`m not even going to describe it. But I can tell you this much: I`m sure it did slow the witness down on the stand.

Let`s go to Debra Opri. Debra, response?

DEBRA OPRI, JACKSON FAMILY ATTORNEY: Yes, I have a big response. First of all, who cares what anyone thinks about this book, whether it`s porn or otherwise? It`s what the jury`s going to think.

And what the prosecution, and I think effectively what Ron Zonen, who is very well-known as a sex crimes expert in the county of Santa Barbara, what he did was make that young man the 13th juror by asking for his opinion. It`s not relevant.

That book has been gone since 1993 when it was taken out of a locked cabinet. That book was never seen by the present accuser. And this man who testified never saw the book.

Other than shock value, what do I think Ron Zonen accomplished? All he did was make this boy, young man, make his opinion heard to the jury. And why didn`t Mesereau stand up and make the objection? I have pondered that today.

And what I think was, Mesereau didn`t want to make such a big deal out of it, but he shouldn`t let that go by again. It`s simply not relevant.

An as to state of mind, Nancy, I`m totally in disagreement with you. Not state of mind at all. It`s nothing to do with this case, just shock value.

GRACE: To Jane Velez-Mitchell, Jane, what were the dates that this young boy -- we`re not giving his name, we`re referring to him as the dancer or the choreographer -- what dates was he at Neverland?

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Oh, he was -- he said he slept in Michael`s bed more than 20 times. And the second boy, the witness...

GRACE: The dates. The dates.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: I don`t have the specific dates.

GRACE: The years.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: I mean, this occurred over many years. This is all back in the early `90s. Both of these young men...

(CROSSTALK)

GRACE: OK, hold up. Wait, wait, wait, wait. That`s all I needed. You`re dead-on.

So back to you, Ms. Debra Opri. You say this is irrelevant? The time...

OPRI: It`s not relevant, Nancy.

GRACE: I`d like to finish. The time that this book was taken out of Jackson`s Neverland is exactly the time this 7-year-old was bunked up in bed with Jackson. You want to still tell me it`s irrelevant?

OPRI: And did you ever see the book, he should have asked him on redirect. "I never saw the book." For all we know, it could have been his own personal, private art collection. It`s a coffee-table book, Nancy.

GRACE: Art?

OPRI: If you`ve traveled extensively in Europe like Michael Jackson and I have, it`s a very, very common art book. It`s very, very common.

GRACE: Hey, guess what?

OPRI: What?

GRACE: If it were art, it would be up on the wall with a light shining down. Instead, I`d like to finish. Jackson had it locked away in a file cabinet. So don`t even start with art.

OPRI: I`m sorry...

GRACE: You know what? You`re right. It doesn`t matter what you or I think.

OPRI: Thank you.

GRACE: Let`s go to the source.

What about it, Jim Moret? When the jury got wind of this, and when this young man was on the stand describing this, which Michael Jackson had art during the time this boy was sleeping with him, how did they react?

MORET: I think that they reacted just -- you can hear the discussion here. I`ll tell you what made this relevant. You talk about relevance. The boy was asked, when he looked at these pictures, what do you see here? And they were shown, as you see, pictures of young boys.

And Ron Zonen asked, "What age would you think those boys are?" And he said, "About 10 or 11, 11 or 12." "And how old were you when you began sleeping with Michael Jackson?" "About 11 or 12." You know, that`s what made it relevant.

The jurors were very interested. They were trying to see into the book. Because you have to remember they haven`t seen these pictures. And they were craning their necks trying to see these pictures. But based upon the description that the young boy gave, you didn`t need to see the pictures. They were troubling just to hear about them.

GRACE: Quick break, everybody. We are live in California at the Santa Maria courthouse. The defense has kicked off. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MICHAEL JACKSON, SINGER ACCUSED OF MOLESTATION: What`s wrong with sharing your bed? I didn`t say I slept in the bed. Even if I did sleep in the bed, it`s OK. I am not going to do anything sexual to a child. That`s not where my heart is. I would slit my wrists first.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GRACE: That is from Michael Jackson`s first public response to this set of child molestation charges. Let`s go straight back out to the courthouse. As you know, today, day one in the Michael Jackson defense.

Let me tell you something. This guy has poured millions of dollars into his defense. Jane Velez, remember way back when, when Benjamin Brafman and Mark Geragos were representing Jackson? They got the boot. The other day, Oxman, bye-bye.

OK, it`s down to Mesereau. How did Mesereau do? Give me the high and the low of the testimony today.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Nancy, I have to say that the big picture is that a lot of the analysts were saying the prosecution`s case was over, it was dead, that they ended with a whimper, that this had become a joke, predicting that the judge would in fact acquit Jackson of the conspiracy charge and maybe even dismiss the entire case.

And now suddenly we`d expected this steamroller of the defense to just absolutely pulverize what remained of the case. And look what happens. Out of the ashes, the prosecution`s case rises again. I think that illustrates how hard to predict this case is.

Everything you expect, the opposite always seems to happen. And it`s ironic that, right now, this is the beginning of the defense case. And we`re all talking about Ron Zonen`s cross-examination. I think the prosecutors did a very brilliant job today.

GRACE: Well, let me go to Richard Herman. He`s a veteran defense attorney. Richard, I don`t know what all these pundits are saying out in California. But you know it`s a cold day in you-know-where when a judge grants a motion for acquittal or a motion for directed verdict at the end of the state`s case. Never.

HERMAN: Never.

GRACE: Really, never happens. This is not a big surprise.

HERMAN: No, never. And that`s just for the record on appeal.

But you know, Nancy, Jim and Jane, I think they give some of the best objective reporting on this case.

GRACE: True.

HERMAN: And I am very concerned with their impression of the cross- examination and the impact that had on the jury today. Because, as you`ve said earlier, at least I think the prosecution did a horrible job in this case. And the defense were riding the coattails.

And you know, I don`t even know that I would have put on a defense in this case. That`s how bad I think the prosecution was. But once they take that opportunity and they do it, you know, I saw you on Court TV today. You made a statement that anyone could do a direct examination.

In a defense case, there`s a real strategy to a direct. You keep it short and sweet and limit that cross-examination. And I think the first witness got away -- Mesereau got away from that with the first witness. But I think the second witness was crisp.

GRACE: I`m sorry, you know what? You know what? What did you say? I`m sorry. I`m looking at "The Boy" -- wait, is that the name of it? "The Boy," a photographic essay. I tell you what. I`m afraid I`m going to get arrested having this thing on the set.

So before we go back to Debra Opri, take a listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

OPRI: Well, forgive my candor, but this woman is nothing to me but a breeder. She was hired to carry Michael`s children, to bear them, and to sell them to him. And that`s what she did.

GRACE: Debra, but now, now that she worked out for the defense, you want me to believe her?

OPRI: No, no.

GRACE: Yes.

OPRI: She`s still a breeder.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GRACE: So Debra...

OPRI: She`s still a breeder, Nancy.

GRACE: Who do you want me to believe today, this witness on direct or this witness on cross?

OPRI: This witness on direct. You know why? Your other guest, who`s a criminal defense attorney, is right on the money. All you have to do on direct is say what you need them to say to challenge what the witness had said in the 1108. And they did.

GRACE: Whoa, whoa, what?

OPRI: Let me break it down for you. First of all, under the evidence code 1108 they brought in all the prior bad acts.

GRACE: I thought you said you were going to break it down.

OPRI: That`s step one. 1108, prior bad acts testimony came in and said, these three young men, the dancer, the movie star, and the guy from Australia, as you`re captioning them tonight -- and these guys are going to come in, in person. Two of them already came in and said, "No, no, no, no, it never happened."

And Ron Zonen, who I do respect -- he`s a very fine attorney -- he did his job. But I don`t think he got the brass ring. I think he did what he needed to do. And when, in desperation, what does the prosecutor do? They go for the desperate shock-value tactics. And that`s what he did by bringing out this book and saying, "And what`s your opinion of it?"

I don`t care what his opinion is of it. It doesn`t mean a thing to me. The only testimony that meant anything to me from those two young men was, "It didn`t happen to me." You had all these people in there last time. It didn`t happen to me.

GRACE: Well, on this one, Debra Opri, you`re right. At the very beginning, Mesereau got this witness to say, "I was not molested by Michael Jackson."

OPRI: That`s right.

GRACE: To Jim Moret, the significance of this book, "The Boy," and the other books that were found, is that they were at Neverland under lock- and-key in Jackson`s file cabinet. They belonged to him, as a matter of fact. They had his inscriptions in the front of them.

They definitely belonged to Jackson at the time this boy was sleeping in the bed with Jackson. Now, tell me about the next witness.

MORET: The next witness, incredibly enough, were the two moms of these boys. And I think that there is a risk in putting them on. Because you remember the mother of the `93 accuser, she was on the stand.

And I think that people had a reaction to her, how could you do this to your boy? How could you give your boy, basically, to Michael Jackson? That was the sense that most of the people in the courtroom had.

And you`re going to have these two moms who are going to be on the stand. I can`t imagine what they`re going to say when you talk about relevance. Because they weren`t in that bedroom with Michael Jackson and these boys. So I think it`s a big risk to put them on.

GRACE: Well, back to Jane Velez-Mitchell. How important will it be when the child star, the star of "Home Alone," takes the stand? I firmly believe, regardless of the facts, when celebrity comes into the courtroom, it`s a whole different ballgame, i.e., Robert Blake, Jane Velez.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Absolutely. But I have to say, I think the bottom line is with all these three young men, in them explaining that nothing happened, they first have to explain what happened. Namely, that Michael Jackson slept with them over, and over, and over again in the same bed.

And the "ick" factor of that, the disturbing nature of that for a lot of people is enough to kind of sour them as witnesses. In the process of saying, "Nothing happened," these young men have to explain what happened as boys. And I mean, the second witness who was up today explained that he traveled all over the world with Michael Jackson sleeping with him in the same bed.

GRACE: Very quickly back to Jim Moret.

Elizabeth, could you run that video? You just showed it of Jackson coming in, in the Cinco de Mayo vest, OK? Elizabeth`s going to pull that up.

Jim Moret, remember, just a few short days ago in court, one of Jackson`s posse called the alleged victim and his mother "stupid Mexicans"? Remember that? And now this today?

MORET: Well, and theoretically, because it`s Cinco de Mayo today, I can`t imagine otherwise why he was wearing this particular vest and the arm band.

Nancy, there was one other thing that I wanted to bring up about this testimony when you talk about the facts, and that relates to the accuser in this case. Both of the boys on the stand today said that they considered Michael Jackson to be a father-like figure. And he would call them son, or consider them to be part of his family.

That recalls specifically the allegations in this case where the mother and the accuser say that Michael Jackson said, "Call me Daddy Michael, consider me your family." So that`s a trend which we`re seeing. It goes with that pattern evidence, that the prosecution was trying to bring in all along.

GRACE: Quick break, everybody.

As we go to break, to "Trial Tracking": Tonight, a Palm Beach County sex predator on the loose. Florida police are looking for this man, Patrick Bell. Now, Bell served six years behind bars for sex crimes on children and was under a court order to wear a GPS tracking device. Police now say Bell cut off the device and disappeared. Bell had more than two years left on the GPS monitor.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DEBBIE ROWE, EX-WIFE OF MICHAEL JACKSON: He would never hurt a child, never. It`s not in him. It`s no way. He would never do anything inappropriate with a child. It`s the furthest thing from his mind. When those allegations came in `93 I think it was, devastated. I mean, talk about going for the jugular.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GRACE: Debbie Rowe, Jackson`s ex-wife, now taking Jackson to court for custody of their children.

Dr. Jeff Gardere, response?

GARDERE: Well, she`s made the point -- and I think the defense wants to make the point -- that nothing happened as far as molestation. Good and dandy. But something did happen in the minds of the jurors. Something happened. These were kids sleeping with an adult and there can be very severe effects on their maturation and in their lives.

GRACE: Jane-Velez, what happens tomorrow?

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, we`re going to wrap up with the second boy and then some of the sisters and the mothers may take the stand. And then, possibly the beginning of next week, the "Home Alone" star, the very, very blockbuster witness for the defense. We`ll see how he does on the stand.

GRACE: Oh, I thought the blockbuster was going to be Michael Jackson, according to Mesereau`s opening. Big thank you to Jane Velez-Mitchell and Jim Moret at the courthouse. The rest of the panel`s staying on. Please stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(NEWS BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REV. TOM SMILEY, FAMILY PASTOR: Jennifer writes: "At this time, I cannot fully explain what happened to me last week. Please, may I assure you that my running away had nothing to do with cold feet, nor was it ever about leaving John. I was simply running away from myself and from certain fears controlling my life."

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GRACE: That was a spokesperson for the so-called runaway bride. That was Reverend Tom Smiley from the Lakewood Baptist Church.

Welcome back, everybody. I`m Nancy Grace.

Let`s go straight down to Georgia.

In Gainesville, Georgia, CNN correspondent Charles Molineaux.

Hi, Charles. Bring us up to date.

CHARLES MOLINEAUX, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Hi, Nancy.

Well, you know, that communication today was the most detailed communication that Jennifer Wilbanks has given to the public since this entire adventure began.

It was a statement delivered by Tom Smiley, who`s actually the pastor of her family here in her family`s hometown of Gainesville, Georgia, at the Lakewood Baptist Church. In it, as you heard, she denied that this was a case of cold feet that drove her into this cross-country flight that ended in Albuquerque, New Mexico, but rather a flight from some inner demons of her own, issues that were unresolved, things that she felt could not be confided in anybody, could not be addressed, could not be confessed, and ultimately drove her into this fugue across the country.

She said she was very sorry to her fiance, John Mason, to his family, as well as to the people of Duluth, Georgia, where the two of them lived, a place which turned itself inside out in a frantic search for her when she went missing a week ago Tuesday. The message was full of lots of emotion. And comments from Reverend Smiley also indicated that she was feeling very emotional about all this and very remorseful, repeatedly expressed regret for what she had put this community through and said she was very profoundly sorry for this.

This, of course, has gone over so-so with people in Duluth, Georgia, some of whom went through an awful lot of trouble looking for her. The city did expend an awful lot of money in this effort to track her down. Of course, it was a wild goose chase, because she wasn`t even missing, except of her own accord. Some folks looking at this said that, well, it`s a start, and maybe she can start talking now about making good on what she has done and what she has cost that city.

But, at least now, we are hearing something along the lines of a very public, very unequivocal apology coming from Jennifer Wilbanks, our runaway bride, for this entire misadventure -- Nancy.

GRACE: Charles, don`t move.

Well, it wasn`t just the citizens of Duluth that suffered. Take a listen to Wilbanks` father.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HARRIS WILBANKS, FATHER OF JENNIFER WILBANKS: They`re devastated, absolutely devastated. It`s the hardest thing we`ve ever gone through in our life. We -- today -- tonight was supposed to be the rehearsal dinner, tomorrow the wedding. We were all looking so forward to it. It`s just -- it`s just -- I can`t describe the feeling.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GRACE: Dr. Gardere, when we were in commercial break that night, when I was speaking to Mr. Wilbanks, he broke down and cried, cried, his heart broken, thinking his daughter was in somebody`s trunk flying up the interstate. So, it`s not just the money issue. People`s hearts were broken. They suffered.

What do you think it possibly -- if it`s not jitters, if it`s not cold feet, what is it?

GARDERE: I think Charles was absolutely right on. He`s not a shrink. He`s a newsman. And he uses the terms fugue and inner demons.

And I think what we`re hearing from Jennifer Wilbanks` father is not only the disappointment as to what happened with his daughter, but the revelations that are now in front of us, that this is a woman who had some serious psychological issues. And now the family has to face that themselves, that she has serious issues that need to be dealt with. And she`s just not that cheery, happy-go-lucky girl that everyone thought that she was.

GRACE: Well, I don`t think that disappearing is that horrible of a thing. That doesn`t indicate you`re a fugue state. Many times, when I`ve got to hop on a plane, I walk by the plane to Las Vegas and the one to Tampa the one to St. -- you know, and I think, gee, how great it would be to hop on one of those planes and go lay on a beach somewhere. She carried it a step further.

GARDERE: Well, that`s the thing. It`s not just -- cold feet would be perhaps just running away. But it becomes downright bizarre when you come up with this whole hoax of being kidnapped. Everyone around you is looking for you and you`re oblivious to what`s going on.

(CROSSTALK)

GRACE: Back to Charles Molineaux, CNN correspondent.

You know, I haven`t heard much from the district attorney, Danny Porter, lately. And he`s not a shy one. I can tell you that much. Has he backed off criminal charges?

MOLINEAUX: Oh, no. In fact, what Porter told me just this evening was that he is actually in the process of investigation. His staff is working on an investigation report on this case, which could be ready at the beginning of next week or possibly as early as tomorrow.

And, again, as he has mentioned a few times, talking about charges, which could be either making a false report or making false statements to an official in his official capacity, which is a felony and could get up to about five years in jail on conviction.

GRACE: Yes.

MOLINEAUX: So, very serious charges that he is certainly not backing off from by any stretch, oh, no.

GRACE: Well, you know, Debra Opri, I`m OK with giving a civil settlement with her for her to pay back for some of the overtime the police put in. But I guess they want to throw Jennifer Wilbanks in with the robbers and the rapists and the murderers. I don`t see it.

OPRI: Well, I`m going to speak as a criminal defense attorney.

Recently, Goldie Hawn has written a book, "A Lotus Grows in the Mud." This young woman, Jennifer, she is going to be dragged through the mud, primarily because she became a major news story only because it became a major news story because of who she was, the major wedding. It was perfect for the press.

And, you know, I watched your show and I heard you on the break, break down. And I heard that man break down. And my heart broke. And I come from a large family. And there are times when I need to disappear, too, because of the stress. But you tell someone. And she made a mistake and she does have serious problems. I`m not a shrink.

But what will happen to her and what should happen to her? And I`ll tell you without getting too emotional. First of all, she should be charged with a misdemeanor for making a false report. From the moment she disappeared to the moment she made that false report, she didn`t do anything other than disappear. She rode a bus.

Part of her punishment should be in community service driving a bus around, seems -- since she likes to think on a bus. But the bottom line is, she will be charged with a misdemeanor. She probably will pay a fine, will have community service. But absolutely not, should she serve any time. Let`s save that for the hardened criminals.

Richard Herman, do you think you could keep Wilbanks out of jail?

HERMAN: Oh, I think so, Nancy. This is ridiculous, to prosecute her criminally.

But they should take that blanket that they have her in, drag her in front of the press, put a microphone in front of her and let her personally apologize to everyone.

(CROSSTALK)

GRACE: No, wait a minute. Richard, why does everybody want this girl -- you know what? I`ve had serial killers, for Pete`s sake, that never said, I`m sorry, kiss my foot, nothing.

And why do we want the public spectacle? Why do we have to see Jennifer Wilbanks crying and sobbing and begging? Why?

HERMAN: Because that`s what the people of Duluth want, Nancy.

GRACE: So? So?

(CROSSTALK)

GRACE: Does that make it right, just because the people of Duluth are P.O.d?

Look, I was distraught, thinking some meth freak had grabbed this girl and taken off with her. I was distraught, seeing what her father was going through. But that does not make it a crime.

Now, giving the false report as to who had taken her, blaming an Hispanic male and a white female, OK. I see it. But is that worth taking -- I don`t know, Richard. I`m used to murder, rape, child molestation, those kind of cases. If you all think that this girl needs to be criminally prosecuted, I don`t get it, Richard.

HERMAN: And, Nancy, you know, this was a two-hour window where she made one statement, and then, by the end of the two hours, she retracted everything and she told the truth. It`s not like someone making false reports to FBI agents and then waiting a week or so or two weeks and never changing her mind.

GRACE: True. True.

HERMAN: She came clean within two hours.

GRACE: Quickly, Jeff.

GARDERE: But, Richard, when you talk about she should come out and give an apology, I don`t think she`s ready psychologically. I think she`s still a wreck.

HERMAN: Oh, please.

GARDERE: I think she`s still disorganized emotionally. She`s not ready to do it. She`ll break down, all right, but she`ll be blubberingly breaking down.

(CROSSTALK)

GRACE: I agree with Richard on that one. Just talk to the hand.

(LAUGHTER)

GRACE: But the reality is, I don`t know why everybody is so intent...

GARDERE: And I`m not even married to you. Talk to the hand.

(CROSSTALK)

GRACE: Yes, so intent, Charles Molineaux, in having this girl come out and cry and beat her head and wear ash cloth. Get on with it. Let`s go prosecute some real criminals. Let the woman pay off a fine and be done with it.

GARDERE: And get psychiatric care.

MOLINEAUX: If you ask around town, there will be people who don`t want to hear that, and then there are those who say that they were only inconvenienced for a few hours and maybe they`re putting a little too much importance on themselves.

There was varying degrees of outrage and you might call it modesty among the people that we talked to this afternoon when she was making an apology on paper, but an apology nonetheless.

GRACE: Well, Charles Molineaux, you`re telling me tonight that Porter is not backing off criminal charges, right?

MOLINEAUX: He is not.

The grand jury in Gwinnett County will meet next week. Porter says he will not be bringing a case before it then, but that he is preparing his report and is going to have one ready within the next few days.

GRACE: OK, Charles Molineaux at the scene.

Quick break, everybody.

Update. A grand jury today indicted the Atlanta courthouse shooting suspect, Brian Nichols, on four counts of murder and 50 other charges related to the March 11 shooting spree. Nichols was being transported to court on a rape and sodomy charges that day when he overpowered a deputy, stole her gun.

These lost their life that day, Superior Court Judge Rowland Barnes, a friend, court reporter Julie Brandau, a friend, Sheriff Deputy Hoyt Teasley. He guarded my courtroom. And federal agent David Wilhelm. The Atlanta DA has announced he will seek the Georgia death penalty.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BOB PACK, SON AND DAUGHTER KILLED IN CAR ACCIDENT: I came to the scene shortly after, within about three minutes after the children had been hit. And then I rushed to Troy and two women were giving him CPR and mouth to mouth. Alana was -- I didn`t want to admit it, but was clearly gone at the time, blood coming from her nose and mouth. And I began to give Troy mouth to mouth. But both -- both my kids died.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GRACE: Well, they are angels tonight. The woman that mowed them down, headed to jail.

Tonight in San Francisco, the father of 10-year-old Troy and 7-year- old Alana, Mr. Bob Pack, and Jimena Barreto`s lawyer, Craig Wormley.

But first, to "San Francisco Chronicle" reporter Cecilia Vega.

Welcome, Cecilia. Bring me up to date, friend.

CECILIA VEGA, "THE SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE": Hi, Nancy.

Well, yesterday, Jimena Barreto was convicted by a jury in Contra Costa County here in the Bay area on two counts of second-degree murder. She faces 30 years to life in prison now for her role in the October 26 death of Troy and Alana Pack. A jury found her guilty of driving while she was drunk and on prescription painkillers and muscle relaxants when she ran over the kids, jumped a curb.

GRACE: Craig Wormley is Barreto -- he is the nanny`s defense attorney.

Craig, wasn`t she en route to take care of the child she normally cared for, an infant?

CRAIG WORMLEY, ATTORNEY FOR JIMENA BARRETO: Good evening.

She was actually en route. And there was no evidence whatsoever she was intoxicated at the time. She had a conversation with her employer.

GRACE: Two witnesses that she car-jumped, that she jumped in the car with them, two witnesses said she smelled of alcohol. And one of the first places her I employer called to try to find her, called her home, called her cell, and the bar.

WORMLEY: Well, there was actually only one witness. And she only smelled a whiff of alcohol. And this was a witness who had a margarita that night herself. And she didn`t see the margarita being poured. She didn`t know it was a double or triple shot whatsoever. And, on cross- examination, that came out.

GRACE: OK, so you`re saying that maybe she smelled her own breath?

WORMLEY: Exactly. I asked her if it was possible you smelled your own breath and she said it wasn`t even possible. We know everything in human life is possible.

GRACE: Well, Craig Wormley, I have got to respect you for trying that one.

Let me go to Bob Pack, the father of these two beautiful children.

Elizabeth (ph), can we show them one more time?

Mr. Pack, you have just been through hell. I`m taking a look at your little girl with a softball bat, and your little boy. It looks like a school picture. What`s your reaction to the verdict? I think -- and I`ve researched this -- this is a one-of-a-kind conviction. The grand jury came back with murder two without a toxicology report in basically a vehicular homicide case.

PACK: Yes, Nancy, that`s right.

This case had an overwhelming amount of evidence that Ms. Barreto was drunk, she was high on painkillers, and Flexeril muscle relaxant. She had a long history. And we`re so happy that she`s off the streets.

GRACE: I want to also let everybody know some good news. Even though Mr. Pack and his wife lost these two beautiful children in such a horrible way, too, walking with their mom along the side of the street to go get a Slurpee -- it`s kind of a fizzy soft drink -- Mrs. Pack is now pregnant with twins. So, that is a happy blessing.

Mr. Pack, I`m so happy for you on that regard.

PACK: Yes. Thank you very much, Nancy. We`re very proud.

GRACE: Debra Opri, what do you think about -- this is really a one of a kind. There was no toxicology report. The state`s case was built on the fact that a witness who she jumped in the car with to get away from the scene, as well as Mrs. Pack, believed that this woman had been drinking, no blood alcohol test, nothing.

OPRI: Well, let`s put it this way. I try a lot of niece cases. These cases are very difficult to plead out.

This country, as well as this state, has taken a very hard line with drivers who are under the influence. And, as your guest, the father said, she had a long history.

GRACE: Oh, yes.

OPRI: That was damaging. And the bottom line is, you have testimony saying, I smelled it, I smelled the alcohol. And police officers say, I observed the symptoms. Even though there was no toxicology blood alcohol report, there was enough circumstantial evidence. When would I have done? You can`t plead out these cases. This woman is looking at a lot of hard time.

And let me tell you something. It`s very difficult ethically representing these clients, because she should have known by this time in her life, I`m going to kill someone. And it`s good...

GRACE: Very quickly, Dr. Jeff Gardere, what is Vicodin and Flexeril? Mix that with alcohol, what do you get?

GARDERE: Well, you get a disaster.

And we`re talking about the painkillers, muscle relaxants, alcohol together. And you have to look at that. Your previous guest is absolutely correct. When you look at the history of this individual, the mixtures of the alcohol, even if she were just on the painkillers, the fact that there may have been a mixture that she`s taken in the past was just enough to paint the character of this woman as being very, very negative.

GRACE: And, of course, Craig Wormley, I`ve only got 20 seconds before we all come back. But you managed to keep out an arrest for cocaine, right?

WORMLEY: Yes, I did. She actually pled to that before the trial and I did that. So, the jury couldn`t hear about it. But one of the prosecution witnesses slipped up anyway and brought it into evidence.

GRACE: Well, a valiant effort on your part. You kept that out for the most part for your client. A guilty verdict in a California courtroom.

We`ll all be right back.

But first to tonight`s all-points bulletin. FBI and law enforcement on the lookout for this man, Gary Edward Lasher, wanted in connection with the rape and assault of his wife, a sex assault on a 9-year-old girl and kidnap. Lasher, 27, 5`10``, 180 pounds, blond hair, blue-green eyes. Any info on Lasher, call the FBI, 310-477-6565.

Local news next for some of you, but we`ll be right back.

And remember, live coverage of the Jackson trial tomorrow 3:00 to 5:00 Eastern on Court TV.

Please stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

GRACE: We at NANCY GRACE want very much to help solve unsolved homicides, to find missing people.

Take a look at Jesus Martinez. Martinez disappeared October 2004 from Houston, just 5 years old. Police think he was abducted. If you have any information on Jesus Martinez, please call the National Center For Missing and Exploited Children, 1-800-THE-LOST.

Welcome back, everybody. I`m Nancy Grace.

I`m bringing you a story out of California, two children mowed down by a nanny on her way to take care of an infant child. A jury determined she was under the influence of Vicodin, Flexeril and alcohol.

To the father, Bob Pack. How has this affected your life, Bob?

PACK: Well, it`s taken away the most valuable things in our lives.

I`ve lost my two precious children. And it`s almost impossible to recover from that.

GRACE: Everybody, Mr. Pack went to the scene immediately -- they were just down from the house -- and tried to give his children mouth-to-mouth resuscitation and save them.

Mr. Pack, are you planning to work to reform California DUI laws?

PACK: Well, I`ve worked very hard in the past year and a half.

And, thankfully, the California legislature has recognized some of the flaws in the DUI laws. Last year, we were able to pass three DUI-related laws, the main one, moving the statute of limitations on your DUI record from seven to 10 years. And this year, we have a bill in the Senate that will increase the penalty from one year on leaving the scene of an accident to five years.

GRACE: Yes.

I want to thank two very special guests. Craig Wormley is the nanny`s defense attorney.

And I disagree with you, but I thank you for being with us, Mr. Wormley.

And especially to Bob Pack.

Sir, our prayers are with you.

PACK: Thank you very much.

GRACE: I want to thank all of my guests tonight. But, as always, my biggest thank you is to you for being with us and inviting all of us into your home.

Coming up, headlines from around all the world and, of course, Larry on CNN.

Live coverage of the Jackson trial tomorrow, 3:00 to 5:00, on Court TV`s "Closing Arguments."

I`m Nancy Grace, signing off for tonight. And until tomorrow night, see you right here at 8:00 sharp. Good night, friend.

END


Aired May 5, 2005 - 20:00:00   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
NANCY GRACE, HOST: Tonight, the defense kicks off in the Michael Jackson child sex trial. Defense witness number one said he started sleeping in Jackson`s bed at the tender age of 7 years old.
And remember the California nanny, high on Vicodin, Flexural and alcohol? She ran down two children, ages 7 and 10, on their way with their mom for Slurpee drinks? Well, tonight, the children are in heaven and the nanny is headed straight to jail.

Tonight, six days after resurfacing with a blanket on her head, the runaway bride tells her side of the story.

Good evening, everybody. I`m Nancy Grace. Thank you for being with us tonight.

The so-called runaway bride says, "I`m sorry," after feeling the heat after claims she was not remorseful.

And in the first case of its kind, a nanny, strung out on alcohol and painkillers who mowed down two children, answers to a jury in a California courtroom. The children`s father speaks out tonight.

Jackson defense, day one: After ten weeks of taking potshots at the state`s case, the defense kicks off. Defense`s first witness takes a beating on cross-examination.

With us tonight, in Santa Maria, California, "Inside Edition`s" senior correspondent, Jim Moret; in L.A., Jackson`s parents` attorney, Debra Opri; in New York, defense attorney Richard Herman; and psychologist Dr. Jeff Gardere.

But first, to "Celebrity Justice" correspondent Jane Velez-Mitchell.

Hello, friend. Bring me up-to-date.

JANE VELEZ-MITCHELL, "CELEBRITY JUSTICE": Well, Nancy, the defense kicked off its case by bringing to the stand two young men, one after the other, both in their 20s, both handsome and articulate. Both testified that they had spent many nights sleeping with Michael Jackson as boys, sharing his bed, but both insisted absolutely nothing happened.

In fact, both used the same phrase, "absolutely nothing happened." Now, this flatly contradicts the testimony of prosecution witnesses who had testified during the prosecution case that they had seen inappropriate behavior between Michael Jackson and these two young men.

GRACE: OK, you know, we are not referring to the boys` names. Of course, they`re grown up now, Jane. I`m referring to one as the Australian alleged victim, one as the dancer, the choreographer, and one as the "Home Alone" star.

So Jane, what happened on cross-exam?

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, actually, I think that the prosecution took a page from the defense playbook, very effective on cross-examination, using these witnesses for their own purposes to remind the jury of all the adult materials -- we`re not allowed in court to call them pornography -- seized from Michael Jackson`s Neverland estate.

They showed the first young man, the now-famous choreographer who has done choreography for Britney Spears, by the way, a series of books, very graphic, sexual material involving naked young boys with their genitalia exposed and men having sex.

GRACE: Jane, Jane. I`d like to talk to you, but I`m too busy looking at pictures right now. Have you seen this thing, the boy? There are naked kids in here. They`re naked.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: You know, what`s so interesting is that the young man on the stand said, "I never thought that I would be looking at material like this in front of a roomful of people." And it was actually a remark that got everybody kind of chuckling nervously.

It was a very unpleasant experience to watch him leaf through this material. And he was asked by the prosecutor over and over again, "Would you feel uncomfortable about having an adult 35-year-old man share a bed with a young boy who possesses this kind of material?" And at first, he said, "No, no, no." And then finally we got to the book involving sex acts between adult males, and he said very quietly, "Yes."

GRACE: I`m going to go to Jim Moret with "Inside Edition."

Jim, you sat through the cross-exam as well as the direct. What happened on cross?

JIM MORET, "INSIDE EDITION": You saw with the -- first, the choreographer, you saw his body language change a great deal. His voice broke a couple of times. He began to almost become lower in the chair and hunch over and become a bit more soft-spoken.

Ron Zonen, the prosecutor, did an absolutely magnificent job of taking this witness and turning him to his own witness. And you know, if you take this on its surface, that nothing happened, there was one thing that did happen in that courtroom. And it was a rather visceral reaction to what you were hearing.

Because you were reminded over, and over, and over, that then-35-year- old Michael Jackson would invite these boys between the ages of 7 and 14 to share his bed. And that gave you a pit in your stomach, because some of those people in court, like me, are parents. And they were thinking of their own children.

And it`s such an uncomfortable feeling. I frankly felt like I was hit by a two-by-four in the stomach. And it took me a couple of hours to get out of this fog that I felt like I was in. It was only about two hours of testimony, but it was tremendously powerful, Nancy.

GRACE: You know what`s significant, Dr. Jeff Gardere -- he is not only a clinical psychologist, but an author, as well, including a book called, "Smart Parenting" -- Jeff, it struck me that this boy was very pro- Jackson. He said nothing happened, and I`m referring to a boy that was about 7-years-old when he started sleeping in the bed with Jackson.

He took the stand and said nothing improper happened. Doctor, he said he started sleeping with Jackson, age 7, that he went there for years, that he almost always slept with Jackson until he turned 14. Then suddenly, he didn`t get to sleep with Michael Jackson anymore. What does that suggest?

DR. JEFF GARDERE, CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGIST: Well, it suggests to me that, at some point, he woke up and realized that this was very inappropriate that he was sharing his bed with an adult. That`s the first thing.

The second thing is, it`s quite possible that there may be memories that are repressed as to what may have happened in that bed. And who knows what may have happened when he was asleep? We`ve heard some people say, "Hey, while he was -- while Michael was in bed with some of these kids, he was inappropriately touching them while the kids were in bed sleeping."

GRACE: And Richard Herman, defense attorney, when you are dealing with a pedophile, a child molester, their interest is for a specific age category. And if you take a look at all of these so-called similar transactions, all the other little boys that allegedly were molested by Jackson, they all fit within a certain age, from 7- to about 13-years-old.

RICHARD HERMAN, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Well, that`s definitely a troubling issue, Nancy. But where was Mesereau? Where was the objection to allowing this layman witness to give his opinion as to the pictures that he was looking at in a book that was taken by the police in the 1993 raid out of a locked box, that this witness testified he had never seen before in his life? Where was the objection to relevance?

GRACE: And what, the objection to relevance? It goes to Jackson`s state of mind.

HERMAN: It goes to Jackson`s state of mind?

GRACE: You`re darn right. Jackson is sleeping in the bed with a 7- year-old boy.

Elizabeth, if we don`t get arrested for this, put up those stills that are contained in these books. This is a book that my producer, Elizabeth, presented to me today. This is one of the -- it`s an exact replica of something that`s been entered in the courtroom, that came out of Jackson`s house.

We`re showing you photos like, photos mosaiced out. There are naked boys in this book with their private parts on full display. I`m not even going to describe it. But I can tell you this much: I`m sure it did slow the witness down on the stand.

Let`s go to Debra Opri. Debra, response?

DEBRA OPRI, JACKSON FAMILY ATTORNEY: Yes, I have a big response. First of all, who cares what anyone thinks about this book, whether it`s porn or otherwise? It`s what the jury`s going to think.

And what the prosecution, and I think effectively what Ron Zonen, who is very well-known as a sex crimes expert in the county of Santa Barbara, what he did was make that young man the 13th juror by asking for his opinion. It`s not relevant.

That book has been gone since 1993 when it was taken out of a locked cabinet. That book was never seen by the present accuser. And this man who testified never saw the book.

Other than shock value, what do I think Ron Zonen accomplished? All he did was make this boy, young man, make his opinion heard to the jury. And why didn`t Mesereau stand up and make the objection? I have pondered that today.

And what I think was, Mesereau didn`t want to make such a big deal out of it, but he shouldn`t let that go by again. It`s simply not relevant.

An as to state of mind, Nancy, I`m totally in disagreement with you. Not state of mind at all. It`s nothing to do with this case, just shock value.

GRACE: To Jane Velez-Mitchell, Jane, what were the dates that this young boy -- we`re not giving his name, we`re referring to him as the dancer or the choreographer -- what dates was he at Neverland?

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Oh, he was -- he said he slept in Michael`s bed more than 20 times. And the second boy, the witness...

GRACE: The dates. The dates.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: I don`t have the specific dates.

GRACE: The years.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: I mean, this occurred over many years. This is all back in the early `90s. Both of these young men...

(CROSSTALK)

GRACE: OK, hold up. Wait, wait, wait, wait. That`s all I needed. You`re dead-on.

So back to you, Ms. Debra Opri. You say this is irrelevant? The time...

OPRI: It`s not relevant, Nancy.

GRACE: I`d like to finish. The time that this book was taken out of Jackson`s Neverland is exactly the time this 7-year-old was bunked up in bed with Jackson. You want to still tell me it`s irrelevant?

OPRI: And did you ever see the book, he should have asked him on redirect. "I never saw the book." For all we know, it could have been his own personal, private art collection. It`s a coffee-table book, Nancy.

GRACE: Art?

OPRI: If you`ve traveled extensively in Europe like Michael Jackson and I have, it`s a very, very common art book. It`s very, very common.

GRACE: Hey, guess what?

OPRI: What?

GRACE: If it were art, it would be up on the wall with a light shining down. Instead, I`d like to finish. Jackson had it locked away in a file cabinet. So don`t even start with art.

OPRI: I`m sorry...

GRACE: You know what? You`re right. It doesn`t matter what you or I think.

OPRI: Thank you.

GRACE: Let`s go to the source.

What about it, Jim Moret? When the jury got wind of this, and when this young man was on the stand describing this, which Michael Jackson had art during the time this boy was sleeping with him, how did they react?

MORET: I think that they reacted just -- you can hear the discussion here. I`ll tell you what made this relevant. You talk about relevance. The boy was asked, when he looked at these pictures, what do you see here? And they were shown, as you see, pictures of young boys.

And Ron Zonen asked, "What age would you think those boys are?" And he said, "About 10 or 11, 11 or 12." "And how old were you when you began sleeping with Michael Jackson?" "About 11 or 12." You know, that`s what made it relevant.

The jurors were very interested. They were trying to see into the book. Because you have to remember they haven`t seen these pictures. And they were craning their necks trying to see these pictures. But based upon the description that the young boy gave, you didn`t need to see the pictures. They were troubling just to hear about them.

GRACE: Quick break, everybody. We are live in California at the Santa Maria courthouse. The defense has kicked off. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MICHAEL JACKSON, SINGER ACCUSED OF MOLESTATION: What`s wrong with sharing your bed? I didn`t say I slept in the bed. Even if I did sleep in the bed, it`s OK. I am not going to do anything sexual to a child. That`s not where my heart is. I would slit my wrists first.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GRACE: That is from Michael Jackson`s first public response to this set of child molestation charges. Let`s go straight back out to the courthouse. As you know, today, day one in the Michael Jackson defense.

Let me tell you something. This guy has poured millions of dollars into his defense. Jane Velez, remember way back when, when Benjamin Brafman and Mark Geragos were representing Jackson? They got the boot. The other day, Oxman, bye-bye.

OK, it`s down to Mesereau. How did Mesereau do? Give me the high and the low of the testimony today.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Nancy, I have to say that the big picture is that a lot of the analysts were saying the prosecution`s case was over, it was dead, that they ended with a whimper, that this had become a joke, predicting that the judge would in fact acquit Jackson of the conspiracy charge and maybe even dismiss the entire case.

And now suddenly we`d expected this steamroller of the defense to just absolutely pulverize what remained of the case. And look what happens. Out of the ashes, the prosecution`s case rises again. I think that illustrates how hard to predict this case is.

Everything you expect, the opposite always seems to happen. And it`s ironic that, right now, this is the beginning of the defense case. And we`re all talking about Ron Zonen`s cross-examination. I think the prosecutors did a very brilliant job today.

GRACE: Well, let me go to Richard Herman. He`s a veteran defense attorney. Richard, I don`t know what all these pundits are saying out in California. But you know it`s a cold day in you-know-where when a judge grants a motion for acquittal or a motion for directed verdict at the end of the state`s case. Never.

HERMAN: Never.

GRACE: Really, never happens. This is not a big surprise.

HERMAN: No, never. And that`s just for the record on appeal.

But you know, Nancy, Jim and Jane, I think they give some of the best objective reporting on this case.

GRACE: True.

HERMAN: And I am very concerned with their impression of the cross- examination and the impact that had on the jury today. Because, as you`ve said earlier, at least I think the prosecution did a horrible job in this case. And the defense were riding the coattails.

And you know, I don`t even know that I would have put on a defense in this case. That`s how bad I think the prosecution was. But once they take that opportunity and they do it, you know, I saw you on Court TV today. You made a statement that anyone could do a direct examination.

In a defense case, there`s a real strategy to a direct. You keep it short and sweet and limit that cross-examination. And I think the first witness got away -- Mesereau got away from that with the first witness. But I think the second witness was crisp.

GRACE: I`m sorry, you know what? You know what? What did you say? I`m sorry. I`m looking at "The Boy" -- wait, is that the name of it? "The Boy," a photographic essay. I tell you what. I`m afraid I`m going to get arrested having this thing on the set.

So before we go back to Debra Opri, take a listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

OPRI: Well, forgive my candor, but this woman is nothing to me but a breeder. She was hired to carry Michael`s children, to bear them, and to sell them to him. And that`s what she did.

GRACE: Debra, but now, now that she worked out for the defense, you want me to believe her?

OPRI: No, no.

GRACE: Yes.

OPRI: She`s still a breeder.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GRACE: So Debra...

OPRI: She`s still a breeder, Nancy.

GRACE: Who do you want me to believe today, this witness on direct or this witness on cross?

OPRI: This witness on direct. You know why? Your other guest, who`s a criminal defense attorney, is right on the money. All you have to do on direct is say what you need them to say to challenge what the witness had said in the 1108. And they did.

GRACE: Whoa, whoa, what?

OPRI: Let me break it down for you. First of all, under the evidence code 1108 they brought in all the prior bad acts.

GRACE: I thought you said you were going to break it down.

OPRI: That`s step one. 1108, prior bad acts testimony came in and said, these three young men, the dancer, the movie star, and the guy from Australia, as you`re captioning them tonight -- and these guys are going to come in, in person. Two of them already came in and said, "No, no, no, no, it never happened."

And Ron Zonen, who I do respect -- he`s a very fine attorney -- he did his job. But I don`t think he got the brass ring. I think he did what he needed to do. And when, in desperation, what does the prosecutor do? They go for the desperate shock-value tactics. And that`s what he did by bringing out this book and saying, "And what`s your opinion of it?"

I don`t care what his opinion is of it. It doesn`t mean a thing to me. The only testimony that meant anything to me from those two young men was, "It didn`t happen to me." You had all these people in there last time. It didn`t happen to me.

GRACE: Well, on this one, Debra Opri, you`re right. At the very beginning, Mesereau got this witness to say, "I was not molested by Michael Jackson."

OPRI: That`s right.

GRACE: To Jim Moret, the significance of this book, "The Boy," and the other books that were found, is that they were at Neverland under lock- and-key in Jackson`s file cabinet. They belonged to him, as a matter of fact. They had his inscriptions in the front of them.

They definitely belonged to Jackson at the time this boy was sleeping in the bed with Jackson. Now, tell me about the next witness.

MORET: The next witness, incredibly enough, were the two moms of these boys. And I think that there is a risk in putting them on. Because you remember the mother of the `93 accuser, she was on the stand.

And I think that people had a reaction to her, how could you do this to your boy? How could you give your boy, basically, to Michael Jackson? That was the sense that most of the people in the courtroom had.

And you`re going to have these two moms who are going to be on the stand. I can`t imagine what they`re going to say when you talk about relevance. Because they weren`t in that bedroom with Michael Jackson and these boys. So I think it`s a big risk to put them on.

GRACE: Well, back to Jane Velez-Mitchell. How important will it be when the child star, the star of "Home Alone," takes the stand? I firmly believe, regardless of the facts, when celebrity comes into the courtroom, it`s a whole different ballgame, i.e., Robert Blake, Jane Velez.

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Absolutely. But I have to say, I think the bottom line is with all these three young men, in them explaining that nothing happened, they first have to explain what happened. Namely, that Michael Jackson slept with them over, and over, and over again in the same bed.

And the "ick" factor of that, the disturbing nature of that for a lot of people is enough to kind of sour them as witnesses. In the process of saying, "Nothing happened," these young men have to explain what happened as boys. And I mean, the second witness who was up today explained that he traveled all over the world with Michael Jackson sleeping with him in the same bed.

GRACE: Very quickly back to Jim Moret.

Elizabeth, could you run that video? You just showed it of Jackson coming in, in the Cinco de Mayo vest, OK? Elizabeth`s going to pull that up.

Jim Moret, remember, just a few short days ago in court, one of Jackson`s posse called the alleged victim and his mother "stupid Mexicans"? Remember that? And now this today?

MORET: Well, and theoretically, because it`s Cinco de Mayo today, I can`t imagine otherwise why he was wearing this particular vest and the arm band.

Nancy, there was one other thing that I wanted to bring up about this testimony when you talk about the facts, and that relates to the accuser in this case. Both of the boys on the stand today said that they considered Michael Jackson to be a father-like figure. And he would call them son, or consider them to be part of his family.

That recalls specifically the allegations in this case where the mother and the accuser say that Michael Jackson said, "Call me Daddy Michael, consider me your family." So that`s a trend which we`re seeing. It goes with that pattern evidence, that the prosecution was trying to bring in all along.

GRACE: Quick break, everybody.

As we go to break, to "Trial Tracking": Tonight, a Palm Beach County sex predator on the loose. Florida police are looking for this man, Patrick Bell. Now, Bell served six years behind bars for sex crimes on children and was under a court order to wear a GPS tracking device. Police now say Bell cut off the device and disappeared. Bell had more than two years left on the GPS monitor.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DEBBIE ROWE, EX-WIFE OF MICHAEL JACKSON: He would never hurt a child, never. It`s not in him. It`s no way. He would never do anything inappropriate with a child. It`s the furthest thing from his mind. When those allegations came in `93 I think it was, devastated. I mean, talk about going for the jugular.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GRACE: Debbie Rowe, Jackson`s ex-wife, now taking Jackson to court for custody of their children.

Dr. Jeff Gardere, response?

GARDERE: Well, she`s made the point -- and I think the defense wants to make the point -- that nothing happened as far as molestation. Good and dandy. But something did happen in the minds of the jurors. Something happened. These were kids sleeping with an adult and there can be very severe effects on their maturation and in their lives.

GRACE: Jane-Velez, what happens tomorrow?

VELEZ-MITCHELL: Well, we`re going to wrap up with the second boy and then some of the sisters and the mothers may take the stand. And then, possibly the beginning of next week, the "Home Alone" star, the very, very blockbuster witness for the defense. We`ll see how he does on the stand.

GRACE: Oh, I thought the blockbuster was going to be Michael Jackson, according to Mesereau`s opening. Big thank you to Jane Velez-Mitchell and Jim Moret at the courthouse. The rest of the panel`s staying on. Please stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(NEWS BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

REV. TOM SMILEY, FAMILY PASTOR: Jennifer writes: "At this time, I cannot fully explain what happened to me last week. Please, may I assure you that my running away had nothing to do with cold feet, nor was it ever about leaving John. I was simply running away from myself and from certain fears controlling my life."

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GRACE: That was a spokesperson for the so-called runaway bride. That was Reverend Tom Smiley from the Lakewood Baptist Church.

Welcome back, everybody. I`m Nancy Grace.

Let`s go straight down to Georgia.

In Gainesville, Georgia, CNN correspondent Charles Molineaux.

Hi, Charles. Bring us up to date.

CHARLES MOLINEAUX, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Hi, Nancy.

Well, you know, that communication today was the most detailed communication that Jennifer Wilbanks has given to the public since this entire adventure began.

It was a statement delivered by Tom Smiley, who`s actually the pastor of her family here in her family`s hometown of Gainesville, Georgia, at the Lakewood Baptist Church. In it, as you heard, she denied that this was a case of cold feet that drove her into this cross-country flight that ended in Albuquerque, New Mexico, but rather a flight from some inner demons of her own, issues that were unresolved, things that she felt could not be confided in anybody, could not be addressed, could not be confessed, and ultimately drove her into this fugue across the country.

She said she was very sorry to her fiance, John Mason, to his family, as well as to the people of Duluth, Georgia, where the two of them lived, a place which turned itself inside out in a frantic search for her when she went missing a week ago Tuesday. The message was full of lots of emotion. And comments from Reverend Smiley also indicated that she was feeling very emotional about all this and very remorseful, repeatedly expressed regret for what she had put this community through and said she was very profoundly sorry for this.

This, of course, has gone over so-so with people in Duluth, Georgia, some of whom went through an awful lot of trouble looking for her. The city did expend an awful lot of money in this effort to track her down. Of course, it was a wild goose chase, because she wasn`t even missing, except of her own accord. Some folks looking at this said that, well, it`s a start, and maybe she can start talking now about making good on what she has done and what she has cost that city.

But, at least now, we are hearing something along the lines of a very public, very unequivocal apology coming from Jennifer Wilbanks, our runaway bride, for this entire misadventure -- Nancy.

GRACE: Charles, don`t move.

Well, it wasn`t just the citizens of Duluth that suffered. Take a listen to Wilbanks` father.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HARRIS WILBANKS, FATHER OF JENNIFER WILBANKS: They`re devastated, absolutely devastated. It`s the hardest thing we`ve ever gone through in our life. We -- today -- tonight was supposed to be the rehearsal dinner, tomorrow the wedding. We were all looking so forward to it. It`s just -- it`s just -- I can`t describe the feeling.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GRACE: Dr. Gardere, when we were in commercial break that night, when I was speaking to Mr. Wilbanks, he broke down and cried, cried, his heart broken, thinking his daughter was in somebody`s trunk flying up the interstate. So, it`s not just the money issue. People`s hearts were broken. They suffered.

What do you think it possibly -- if it`s not jitters, if it`s not cold feet, what is it?

GARDERE: I think Charles was absolutely right on. He`s not a shrink. He`s a newsman. And he uses the terms fugue and inner demons.

And I think what we`re hearing from Jennifer Wilbanks` father is not only the disappointment as to what happened with his daughter, but the revelations that are now in front of us, that this is a woman who had some serious psychological issues. And now the family has to face that themselves, that she has serious issues that need to be dealt with. And she`s just not that cheery, happy-go-lucky girl that everyone thought that she was.

GRACE: Well, I don`t think that disappearing is that horrible of a thing. That doesn`t indicate you`re a fugue state. Many times, when I`ve got to hop on a plane, I walk by the plane to Las Vegas and the one to Tampa the one to St. -- you know, and I think, gee, how great it would be to hop on one of those planes and go lay on a beach somewhere. She carried it a step further.

GARDERE: Well, that`s the thing. It`s not just -- cold feet would be perhaps just running away. But it becomes downright bizarre when you come up with this whole hoax of being kidnapped. Everyone around you is looking for you and you`re oblivious to what`s going on.

(CROSSTALK)

GRACE: Back to Charles Molineaux, CNN correspondent.

You know, I haven`t heard much from the district attorney, Danny Porter, lately. And he`s not a shy one. I can tell you that much. Has he backed off criminal charges?

MOLINEAUX: Oh, no. In fact, what Porter told me just this evening was that he is actually in the process of investigation. His staff is working on an investigation report on this case, which could be ready at the beginning of next week or possibly as early as tomorrow.

And, again, as he has mentioned a few times, talking about charges, which could be either making a false report or making false statements to an official in his official capacity, which is a felony and could get up to about five years in jail on conviction.

GRACE: Yes.

MOLINEAUX: So, very serious charges that he is certainly not backing off from by any stretch, oh, no.

GRACE: Well, you know, Debra Opri, I`m OK with giving a civil settlement with her for her to pay back for some of the overtime the police put in. But I guess they want to throw Jennifer Wilbanks in with the robbers and the rapists and the murderers. I don`t see it.

OPRI: Well, I`m going to speak as a criminal defense attorney.

Recently, Goldie Hawn has written a book, "A Lotus Grows in the Mud." This young woman, Jennifer, she is going to be dragged through the mud, primarily because she became a major news story only because it became a major news story because of who she was, the major wedding. It was perfect for the press.

And, you know, I watched your show and I heard you on the break, break down. And I heard that man break down. And my heart broke. And I come from a large family. And there are times when I need to disappear, too, because of the stress. But you tell someone. And she made a mistake and she does have serious problems. I`m not a shrink.

But what will happen to her and what should happen to her? And I`ll tell you without getting too emotional. First of all, she should be charged with a misdemeanor for making a false report. From the moment she disappeared to the moment she made that false report, she didn`t do anything other than disappear. She rode a bus.

Part of her punishment should be in community service driving a bus around, seems -- since she likes to think on a bus. But the bottom line is, she will be charged with a misdemeanor. She probably will pay a fine, will have community service. But absolutely not, should she serve any time. Let`s save that for the hardened criminals.

Richard Herman, do you think you could keep Wilbanks out of jail?

HERMAN: Oh, I think so, Nancy. This is ridiculous, to prosecute her criminally.

But they should take that blanket that they have her in, drag her in front of the press, put a microphone in front of her and let her personally apologize to everyone.

(CROSSTALK)

GRACE: No, wait a minute. Richard, why does everybody want this girl -- you know what? I`ve had serial killers, for Pete`s sake, that never said, I`m sorry, kiss my foot, nothing.

And why do we want the public spectacle? Why do we have to see Jennifer Wilbanks crying and sobbing and begging? Why?

HERMAN: Because that`s what the people of Duluth want, Nancy.

GRACE: So? So?

(CROSSTALK)

GRACE: Does that make it right, just because the people of Duluth are P.O.d?

Look, I was distraught, thinking some meth freak had grabbed this girl and taken off with her. I was distraught, seeing what her father was going through. But that does not make it a crime.

Now, giving the false report as to who had taken her, blaming an Hispanic male and a white female, OK. I see it. But is that worth taking -- I don`t know, Richard. I`m used to murder, rape, child molestation, those kind of cases. If you all think that this girl needs to be criminally prosecuted, I don`t get it, Richard.

HERMAN: And, Nancy, you know, this was a two-hour window where she made one statement, and then, by the end of the two hours, she retracted everything and she told the truth. It`s not like someone making false reports to FBI agents and then waiting a week or so or two weeks and never changing her mind.

GRACE: True. True.

HERMAN: She came clean within two hours.

GRACE: Quickly, Jeff.

GARDERE: But, Richard, when you talk about she should come out and give an apology, I don`t think she`s ready psychologically. I think she`s still a wreck.

HERMAN: Oh, please.

GARDERE: I think she`s still disorganized emotionally. She`s not ready to do it. She`ll break down, all right, but she`ll be blubberingly breaking down.

(CROSSTALK)

GRACE: I agree with Richard on that one. Just talk to the hand.

(LAUGHTER)

GRACE: But the reality is, I don`t know why everybody is so intent...

GARDERE: And I`m not even married to you. Talk to the hand.

(CROSSTALK)

GRACE: Yes, so intent, Charles Molineaux, in having this girl come out and cry and beat her head and wear ash cloth. Get on with it. Let`s go prosecute some real criminals. Let the woman pay off a fine and be done with it.

GARDERE: And get psychiatric care.

MOLINEAUX: If you ask around town, there will be people who don`t want to hear that, and then there are those who say that they were only inconvenienced for a few hours and maybe they`re putting a little too much importance on themselves.

There was varying degrees of outrage and you might call it modesty among the people that we talked to this afternoon when she was making an apology on paper, but an apology nonetheless.

GRACE: Well, Charles Molineaux, you`re telling me tonight that Porter is not backing off criminal charges, right?

MOLINEAUX: He is not.

The grand jury in Gwinnett County will meet next week. Porter says he will not be bringing a case before it then, but that he is preparing his report and is going to have one ready within the next few days.

GRACE: OK, Charles Molineaux at the scene.

Quick break, everybody.

Update. A grand jury today indicted the Atlanta courthouse shooting suspect, Brian Nichols, on four counts of murder and 50 other charges related to the March 11 shooting spree. Nichols was being transported to court on a rape and sodomy charges that day when he overpowered a deputy, stole her gun.

These lost their life that day, Superior Court Judge Rowland Barnes, a friend, court reporter Julie Brandau, a friend, Sheriff Deputy Hoyt Teasley. He guarded my courtroom. And federal agent David Wilhelm. The Atlanta DA has announced he will seek the Georgia death penalty.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BOB PACK, SON AND DAUGHTER KILLED IN CAR ACCIDENT: I came to the scene shortly after, within about three minutes after the children had been hit. And then I rushed to Troy and two women were giving him CPR and mouth to mouth. Alana was -- I didn`t want to admit it, but was clearly gone at the time, blood coming from her nose and mouth. And I began to give Troy mouth to mouth. But both -- both my kids died.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

GRACE: Well, they are angels tonight. The woman that mowed them down, headed to jail.

Tonight in San Francisco, the father of 10-year-old Troy and 7-year- old Alana, Mr. Bob Pack, and Jimena Barreto`s lawyer, Craig Wormley.

But first, to "San Francisco Chronicle" reporter Cecilia Vega.

Welcome, Cecilia. Bring me up to date, friend.

CECILIA VEGA, "THE SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE": Hi, Nancy.

Well, yesterday, Jimena Barreto was convicted by a jury in Contra Costa County here in the Bay area on two counts of second-degree murder. She faces 30 years to life in prison now for her role in the October 26 death of Troy and Alana Pack. A jury found her guilty of driving while she was drunk and on prescription painkillers and muscle relaxants when she ran over the kids, jumped a curb.

GRACE: Craig Wormley is Barreto -- he is the nanny`s defense attorney.

Craig, wasn`t she en route to take care of the child she normally cared for, an infant?

CRAIG WORMLEY, ATTORNEY FOR JIMENA BARRETO: Good evening.

She was actually en route. And there was no evidence whatsoever she was intoxicated at the time. She had a conversation with her employer.

GRACE: Two witnesses that she car-jumped, that she jumped in the car with them, two witnesses said she smelled of alcohol. And one of the first places her I employer called to try to find her, called her home, called her cell, and the bar.

WORMLEY: Well, there was actually only one witness. And she only smelled a whiff of alcohol. And this was a witness who had a margarita that night herself. And she didn`t see the margarita being poured. She didn`t know it was a double or triple shot whatsoever. And, on cross- examination, that came out.

GRACE: OK, so you`re saying that maybe she smelled her own breath?

WORMLEY: Exactly. I asked her if it was possible you smelled your own breath and she said it wasn`t even possible. We know everything in human life is possible.

GRACE: Well, Craig Wormley, I have got to respect you for trying that one.

Let me go to Bob Pack, the father of these two beautiful children.

Elizabeth (ph), can we show them one more time?

Mr. Pack, you have just been through hell. I`m taking a look at your little girl with a softball bat, and your little boy. It looks like a school picture. What`s your reaction to the verdict? I think -- and I`ve researched this -- this is a one-of-a-kind conviction. The grand jury came back with murder two without a toxicology report in basically a vehicular homicide case.

PACK: Yes, Nancy, that`s right.

This case had an overwhelming amount of evidence that Ms. Barreto was drunk, she was high on painkillers, and Flexeril muscle relaxant. She had a long history. And we`re so happy that she`s off the streets.

GRACE: I want to also let everybody know some good news. Even though Mr. Pack and his wife lost these two beautiful children in such a horrible way, too, walking with their mom along the side of the street to go get a Slurpee -- it`s kind of a fizzy soft drink -- Mrs. Pack is now pregnant with twins. So, that is a happy blessing.

Mr. Pack, I`m so happy for you on that regard.

PACK: Yes. Thank you very much, Nancy. We`re very proud.

GRACE: Debra Opri, what do you think about -- this is really a one of a kind. There was no toxicology report. The state`s case was built on the fact that a witness who she jumped in the car with to get away from the scene, as well as Mrs. Pack, believed that this woman had been drinking, no blood alcohol test, nothing.

OPRI: Well, let`s put it this way. I try a lot of niece cases. These cases are very difficult to plead out.

This country, as well as this state, has taken a very hard line with drivers who are under the influence. And, as your guest, the father said, she had a long history.

GRACE: Oh, yes.

OPRI: That was damaging. And the bottom line is, you have testimony saying, I smelled it, I smelled the alcohol. And police officers say, I observed the symptoms. Even though there was no toxicology blood alcohol report, there was enough circumstantial evidence. When would I have done? You can`t plead out these cases. This woman is looking at a lot of hard time.

And let me tell you something. It`s very difficult ethically representing these clients, because she should have known by this time in her life, I`m going to kill someone. And it`s good...

GRACE: Very quickly, Dr. Jeff Gardere, what is Vicodin and Flexeril? Mix that with alcohol, what do you get?

GARDERE: Well, you get a disaster.

And we`re talking about the painkillers, muscle relaxants, alcohol together. And you have to look at that. Your previous guest is absolutely correct. When you look at the history of this individual, the mixtures of the alcohol, even if she were just on the painkillers, the fact that there may have been a mixture that she`s taken in the past was just enough to paint the character of this woman as being very, very negative.

GRACE: And, of course, Craig Wormley, I`ve only got 20 seconds before we all come back. But you managed to keep out an arrest for cocaine, right?

WORMLEY: Yes, I did. She actually pled to that before the trial and I did that. So, the jury couldn`t hear about it. But one of the prosecution witnesses slipped up anyway and brought it into evidence.

GRACE: Well, a valiant effort on your part. You kept that out for the most part for your client. A guilty verdict in a California courtroom.

We`ll all be right back.

But first to tonight`s all-points bulletin. FBI and law enforcement on the lookout for this man, Gary Edward Lasher, wanted in connection with the rape and assault of his wife, a sex assault on a 9-year-old girl and kidnap. Lasher, 27, 5`10``, 180 pounds, blond hair, blue-green eyes. Any info on Lasher, call the FBI, 310-477-6565.

Local news next for some of you, but we`ll be right back.

And remember, live coverage of the Jackson trial tomorrow 3:00 to 5:00 Eastern on Court TV.

Please stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

GRACE: We at NANCY GRACE want very much to help solve unsolved homicides, to find missing people.

Take a look at Jesus Martinez. Martinez disappeared October 2004 from Houston, just 5 years old. Police think he was abducted. If you have any information on Jesus Martinez, please call the National Center For Missing and Exploited Children, 1-800-THE-LOST.

Welcome back, everybody. I`m Nancy Grace.

I`m bringing you a story out of California, two children mowed down by a nanny on her way to take care of an infant child. A jury determined she was under the influence of Vicodin, Flexeril and alcohol.

To the father, Bob Pack. How has this affected your life, Bob?

PACK: Well, it`s taken away the most valuable things in our lives.

I`ve lost my two precious children. And it`s almost impossible to recover from that.

GRACE: Everybody, Mr. Pack went to the scene immediately -- they were just down from the house -- and tried to give his children mouth-to-mouth resuscitation and save them.

Mr. Pack, are you planning to work to reform California DUI laws?

PACK: Well, I`ve worked very hard in the past year and a half.

And, thankfully, the California legislature has recognized some of the flaws in the DUI laws. Last year, we were able to pass three DUI-related laws, the main one, moving the statute of limitations on your DUI record from seven to 10 years. And this year, we have a bill in the Senate that will increase the penalty from one year on leaving the scene of an accident to five years.

GRACE: Yes.

I want to thank two very special guests. Craig Wormley is the nanny`s defense attorney.

And I disagree with you, but I thank you for being with us, Mr. Wormley.

And especially to Bob Pack.

Sir, our prayers are with you.

PACK: Thank you very much.

GRACE: I want to thank all of my guests tonight. But, as always, my biggest thank you is to you for being with us and inviting all of us into your home.

Coming up, headlines from around all the world and, of course, Larry on CNN.

Live coverage of the Jackson trial tomorrow, 3:00 to 5:00, on Court TV`s "Closing Arguments."

I`m Nancy Grace, signing off for tonight. And until tomorrow night, see you right here at 8:00 sharp. Good night, friend.

END