Skip to main content
Search
Services


 

Return to Transcripts main page

CNN LARRY KING LIVE

High-Profile Defense Attorney's Wife Murdered

Aired October 18, 2005 - 21:00   ET

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


LARRY KING, HOST: Tonight, a high profile defense attorney finds his wife brutally murdered at their home Saturday night. What's the latest on this shocking mystery and how is it that attorney Daniel Horowitz is still holding up after all of this? We'll ask his friend and colleague, Mark Geragos, the renowned defense attorney. Ivan Golde, Horowitz's co-counsel in a sensational murder trial. He's been speaking with the grieving lawyer. And defense attorney Michael Cardoza. He and Horowitz represent co-defendants in a pending drug case. Plus Harvey Levin, the attorney and investigative journalist who spoke today with the tenant on the Horowitz property who has been interviewed by police. And CNN's Ted Rowlands with the latest on the investigation.
All next on LARRY KING LIVE.

One program note, Charlize Theron will be with us tomorrow night, amazing, in a new movie, not bad to look at either.

Let's get to the case at hand and start with Ted Rowlands for an update. What happened?

TED ROWLANDS, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Larry, what happened was Saturday night, Daniel Horowitz came home about 6:00 p.m. and called 911, called the police to report that he had found his wife, Pamela, dead in their home.

They were living in a trailer while they were building their dream house in Northern California, in the city of Lafayette. They were living in a rural area of Lafayette, they had about 12 acres there.

Today investigators continued what has now been a third full day scouring the crime scene and scouring the acreage around that area. Yesterday they met with the media, saying that all of the options were open in this case. They are looking at many different leads. They have made many different contacts with people in and around that area but they say they have a lot of work to do.

Today they had no meeting with the media, no updates and said they will not update the media until there is something, quote, "significant." Tonight, most of the investigators have gone home. It has pretty much cleared out here at the Contra Costa County Sheriff's Office. Presumably nothing will happen tonight. They'll be back at it tomorrow.

KING: Mark Geragos, generally true when a spouse is murdered the first suspect is the spouse? MARK GERAGOS, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: It's almost always true. I think in Danny's case they had him in the back seat of the patrol car for a minute or two before they took him out and they had him handcuffed or whatever else. They've said or stated that he's been very cooperative and I think that people tend to always jump towards somebody is either a spouse or a family member, that tends to be...

KING: Any question in your mind that Danny would be involved in?

GERAGOS: None whatsoever. Danny has nothing to do with this. He adored her. That house you were taking a look at on the screen, when I first met him, was Judge Delucchi in chambers telling me about the house, and how it was his dream and introducing me to Danny and talking about how much he doted on her.

KING: Do you know his wife?

GERAGOS: I had met her a couple of times up there.

KING: Ivan Golde, how well do you know Danny?

IVAN GOLDE, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Well, I know him very, very well. I've worked with Dan very, very closely for 13, 14 years. He essentially trained me. He is one of my very best friends. I'm extremely shocked by this. We are all grieving for Dan and Pamela Vitale's family also.

KING: Michael, how well do you know Danny?

MICHAEL CARDOZA, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: I've known him for about 15 years, Larry. I knew him when I was in the district attorney's office in Alameda County and then when I became a defense attorney, I continued to know Dan. We've done a case together. We're representing co-defendants in a case.

We're not social friends but we're certainly business friends. We'd have lunches together but never did go out in the evening with his wife. In fact, I just met his wife last week right before opening statements in the Polk case, that is where he was defending Mrs. Polk for killing her husband.

KING: At 11:00 p.m. Eastern tonight, a live special on COURT TV, "NANCY GRACE INVESTIGATES" is part of it. Nancy spoke with Daniel. Watch a clip.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DANIEL HOROWITZ, WIFE MURDERED: And I saw her and everything -- I understood everything that I could see. I took it all in, and I knew she was dead, but still, even though I knew, I kneeled down and I touched her just to see if she was OK.

I didn't even know -- it's like I did things even though I knew it wasn't going to do any good, and then I walked quickly into the house to the 911 -- to call 911 on my phone, dialed it and it was like my ears were ringing and I couldn't even hear what I was saying, and it didn't matter.

I knew then, I didn't want -- I just threw down the phone and I got out of there. I didn't want to -- because there was like two modes going on. Right now you're seeing really the thinking mode, you know. I just -- the mode that I was in, I ran out, and then...

NANCY GRACE, HOST, "NANCY GRACE INVESTIGATES": And then out to where?

HOROWITZ: Just to the front door and I touched her neck again just to be sure, and then I saw her hand and I just knew from what I know that she wasn't alive. And then I just know -- then I peeled out my phone and I knew I had to call the police and tell them.

So I dialed the regular police number and then I just was with her, and I just -- I don't know exactly what I said in between. I mean, you scream, you cry, but I know I just basically sat with her and I just told her, i love you, and you're beautiful, and just whatever things you say to somebody you love, because to me, at that point, all that was there was the person I loved.

I mean, it didn't matter anymore what was around her or the horror. I had so much time with Pamela, so I just looked at her face and it was beautiful.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: We'll be seeing other clips of that throughout the program. Mark Geragos, this kind -- they had a suspect, I mean, there was someone that they were saying was threatening, right?

GERAGOS: Yes, there was apparently a restraining order that had been filled out by Dan and never been served, is at least what's...

KING: Against some kind of a whacko in the neighborhood?

GERAGOS: Yes. Against somebody apparently who was affiliated or living nearby. There's also been stories about various contractors who have had this or that run-ins and disputes with them, any time you build a house or remodel a house I think that goes with the territory, however, so I don't know what that's going to do.

There's also the issue of -- there's somebody that they called a -- that they were looking at down the hill as well. So who knows? I mean, I -- for all you know, it could be completely random, for all you know, it could be somebody who is connected to the practice. You just don't know.

KING: Ivan, did you meet with Dan today?

GOLDE: Yes. I've talked to him every day, and we've sat and we've talked about everything, life and law and everything else, and it hurts. It really does hurt seeing Dan, who I admire and respect and just I look at him like he's a king. And to see him in this condition, it just -- it's so painful to see Dan like this, and it's so painful to see the Vitale family. This was the perfect marriage. Their worlds revolved around each other, Larry. They had the dream house. They had their entire lives in front of them, and to see this, nothing, nothing could be more painful.

KING: Ivan, does he have a thought as to who might have done it?

GOLDE: Yes, it would be inappropriate for me to say that here, but Dan is pretty sure of who did this crime, of who did this to Pamela Vitale, but he can't say it publicly. The investigators, the Contra Costa County Sheriff's Department is doing an excellent job. They are working with Dan, and Dan is working with them. They will solve this crime, Larry. They will solve this crime.

KING: You won't say, then, if it was the person that they were trying to get the...

GOLDE: It would be inappropriate for me to finger someone. I cannot do that and Dan cannot do that.

GERAGOS: It sounds like they're waiting for some kind of forensic evidence to come back and they've got a pretty good idea who they think it is. And all indications are -- my guess is that they're going to wrap this thing up pretty quickly in terms of making an arrest.

KING: Michael, have you spoken to him?

CARDOZA: I have. I have spoken to him the last two mornings and I'll tell you, it was on a very personal level that we spoke. I mean, we really spoke as friends. And, you know, what do you do for a friend in a situation like this? You listen and you tell him that you're there for him.

But one thing that he asked me to do, and that was to be sure that people knew that the sheriffs of Contra Costa County were doing one bang-up job. He said, Michael, they're working 24-7 and I can't give them enough thanks for what they're doing for me here and the way they're aggressively going after the case.

But just like with Ivan, you know, I asked him if he had anybody, and I'm not going to say who Dan fingered, but Dan was really strong about who he said he thought did it.

And one of the other things that -- I mean, he was very emotional, and went off tangentially at times, but one of the things he really talked about, he was watching some of the news reports and there were people that about would go on the air and talk about him and his wife as if they knew them a long time, and he really got upset at that.

He goes, I don't know why people talk about that when they don't know me. I want people that knew me, that knew Pamela to talk about her on the air and talk about the love that we had.

Like I said, the other day I saw Pamela right before opening statement and we talked, and one of the things that really jumped out at me, in fact, I teased Dan about it right before opening statement, she said, you know, we went through the construction of this home, and not one time did we have an argument.

She said, boy, that really tested the mettle of our relationship and I knew how much Dan loved me. And Dan walked up at that time and I teased him. And I said, you know, better lucky than good, Dan, how did you get such a wonderful woman?

I mean, it was the first time that I had met her.

KING: How long were they married?

CARDOZA: You know, I think it was a short time. Ivan can probably answer that better than I, but I think it was three years.

GOLDE: No, no, no, they were married 11 years, 11 years. And I'd like to add this...

CARDOZA: OK, you know better than I.

GOLDE: I'd like to add this, too, Larry. In the Susan Polk case, Dan and I were counsel in the People v. Susan Polk. I want to tell you this, Pamela Vitale helped write that opening statement. That's a smart...

KING: All right. Let me get a break. I want to pick up on that when we come back. That case was -- they threw that out, right?

GOLDE: Mistrial...

GERAGOS: A mistrial was declared.

KING: It's going to be retried because of publicity attendant to it, investigators working on it. And that dealt with a woman who had been abused over years and then killed her husband, right?

GOLDE: Allegedly.

GERAGOS: That's the defense.

KING: Allegedly. Well, Ted Rowlands I think spoke with her and we'll come back and get to that. We'll be right back. Take your calls later. Don't go away.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GRACE: These days have passed now, what has gone through your head? What do you want to do now?

HOROWITZ: Sort of you got me in a stage where I'm starting to accept that she's not coming back. Until maybe today, I just couldn't accept that it was real, you know? It's just constantly -- I don't know. I just wasn't processing anything in any real way.

GRACE: Right, it didn't seem real. HOROWITZ: Yes. And more than that, I just -- we would be talking about what happened and I'd feel like picking up the phone and calling her.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GRACE: When the police came, Daniel, what did they want from you?

HOROWITZ: At first, they just wanted me to just be OK, and they just sat me in the back of the police car. I just called my family, and when I wanted them I'd knock on the window. I just tried to tell them things, but I don't know really remember what I told them.

GRACE: Knock on the car window?

HOROWITZ: Yes, and they'd come over.

GRACE: Did you stay while they processed the scene?

HOROWITZ: They didn't let me see anything. I was far back. They protected me from that. And then there were so many police cars. They responded -- they did -- Nancy, they sent more police than I've ever seen, and then they took me to the police station, and I mean, they were very kind to me. They put me in the room where they put children who have been hurt.

GRACE: Yes.

HOROWITZ: And they watched me to make sure I didn't try to kill myself, which I wasn't going to do but they still watched me.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: Ivan Golde, you were co-counsel, before we get Ted Rowlands who did an interview with regard to this, with Daniel Horowitz in the Susan Polk case. Briefly, what was that case? What is that case?

GOLDE: That's a case about a woman, Larry, who at 15 years old was raped by her 40-year-old psychologist, repeatedly until she was 18, and then they had an actual relationship, got married, had three children, and then Susan Polk at 44 years old defended herself against a knife attack by Felix Polk, her husband, and she is on trial for the murder of Felix Polk.

KING: First degree murder?

GOLDE: First degree murder, that's what the prosecution wants. Our defense is entirely self-defense, Larry. We were doing so well in trial. We were winning that case. We would have freed Susan Polk, Larry. KING: And it was thrown out briefly, why?

GOLDE: Mistrial.

KING: Mistrial.

GOLDE: The publicity here, we just couldn't go forward. I had no choice but to ask for a mistrial. There are some other issues, too. Some of our work product has been seized by the police. Our files aren't all there. There are a lot of problems, a lot of conflicts I put on the record.

The district attorney agreed. We could not go forward. We would have had to excuse the jury for three weeks at least, it made no sense but we were winning that case, Larry.

And let me just say one...

KING: Ted Rowlands, now you...

GOLDE: I'm sorry, let me just say one other thing. Dan Horowitz and I will go back at some point and represent Susan Polk.

KING: That's definite?

GOLDE: That's definite.

KING: Ted Rowlands, now you talked to Susan, is that it?

ROWLANDS: Yes, she's a very complex woman, very intelligent. She was representing herself for some period of time, and she was ready to go to trial, until Ivan and Dan stepped in and took her case. But when I interviewed her in jail, she was going to forage ahead on her own, claiming self-defense, but -- saying that she just wanted a resolution.

This murder took place -- or this killing took place about three years ago. And again, she says it was in self-defense but I think that Dan and Ivan stepping in really would have made the difference in her potentially not going to prison for a very, very long time, because she was really a fish out of water until they came in and started to defend her.

And it was a noteworthy case, getting a lot of press here in the Bay Area. A lot of people thought maybe that this murder had something to do with the case and I don't think that that is the case, but obviously one of the things that is being mulled over and I'm sure investigators looking at, too.

KING: Have you got a clip of that interview?

ROWLANDS: Yes, we interviewed her in jail and she said yes, I did...

KING: Can we see any of it?

ROWLANDS: ... kill my husband, but it was in self-defense.

KING: Can we see any of it?

ROWLANDS: We should be able to see it.

KING: OK. Let's watch.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SUSAN POLK, CHARGED WITH MURDER: My recollection is that I stabbed him five or six times. I was on my back the entire time. He was aggressing the entire time. He was biting my hand and wrestling for the knife, and I thought I was going to die. So I did -- I mean, it was horrible, but I did what I had to do to survive.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: Michael Cardoza, this seems weird, but why is she on trial?

CARDOZA: Why is she on trial? Because the issue is whether it was self-defense or not. She had, according to the district attorney -- remember, these people were getting a divorce. She's up in Montana. She phones down to Dr. Felix and tells him look, I'm going to kill you. Then she comes down.

The doctor phones the police and tells the police, my wife is coming down, she threatened to kill me. He also then calls an attorney friend of his, said, look, I'm really afraid of my wife, she's coming down to kill me.

Then apparently there was some sort of struggle. She doesn't report it for 24 hours. The doctor's car is moved from their house in Orinda to BART (ph), and then her son goes down to the pool house, he's lifting weights. He finds her.

KING: Wait a minute.

CARDOZA: He comes up and -- go ahead.

KING: There's another son?

GERAGOS: Sounds like the prosecutor's opening statement, doesn't it?

KING: Wait a minute, does...

(CROSSTALK)

GOLDE: I should interject here.

GERAGOS: I was going to say, Ivan, Ivan, where are you at? You should be objecting...

(CROSSTALK)

GOLDE: Well, no, no. I'll let Mr. Cardoza talk.

CARDOZA: Hey, I'm telling you what was said.

GOLDE: Well, this is the key, though, Michael. Michael, this is the key. If Felix Polk was so afraid of Susan Polk, and there were all of these threats, then why was he in the adjacent pool house next door reading a book in his underwear?

KING: I don't want to try that case now.

CARDOZA: I'm not trying it with you. I'm not trying it. I just...

KING: I just asked him for the other side.

CARDOZA: Larry asked me what happened, I'm telling you. That's all, Ivan. Those are the facts for the D.A. That's all.

KING: Let me get a break and we'll come back. And we'll ask Dr. Cyril Wecht, the famed coroner of Allegheny County, and forensic pathologist, to join us as to what part forensics is going to play in this. Geragos thinks it may be the key. We'll be right back.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GRACE: Daniel, right now the media is handling you with kid gloves. You know that. We've been there. We've watched it. You know that if this case doesn't crack, people are going to start blaming you. You know that.

HOROWITZ: Probably. I don't care.

GRACE: Respond.

HOROWITZ: I don't care. Right now, Nancy, my wife is gone. The only thing that I want from the media is what they've done, which is they put on her pictures. They put on our friends who talk about how beautiful she was, and that's it, OK? So they've done what I need them to do. What they do with me doesn't matter. I don't really care.

GRACE: Why?

HOROWITZ: It doesn't matter. What's the difference? What's the difference?

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KING: Joining us now in Pittsburgh is Dr. Cyril Wecht, coroner of Allegheny County, forensic pathologist and attorney as well. He's, by the way, been retained by Daniel Horowitz and Ivan Golde as an expert witness in that Susan Polk case. He spoke with Daniel Horowitz on Saturday morning.

What's going to be the key here, Cyril?

DR. CYRIL WECHT, CORONER, ALLEGHENY COUNTY, PA.: Well, obviously all the evidence has been searched I'm sure, and perhaps is still going on involving the location of this tragic death; everything from fingerprints and footprints, every kind of possible physical forensic, biological evidence, things for DNA and so on here, and fiber and threads.

To see also what the situation was in the house, had Pamela Vitale eaten, gotten ready to eat, what kind of clothing was she wearing, when was she last seen, and all of those things I'm sure that the police are doing their job.

The forensic pathologist who would have done this autopsy, I'm not sure why it wasn't done right away on Sunday. I did four autopsies on Sunday, I would have been happy to fly out there and fit this one in on Sunday, too.

But anyway, it was done yesterday. And I'm sure that he has ascertained the cause of death, I only know what I've read, bludgeoning, and I assume that that means cranial (INAUDIBLE) injuries, fractures of the skull, and hemorrhage around the brain is what I have inferred.

And the instrumentality, Larry, is going to be very important. One can sometimes determine if there is a pattern and that can maybe have a lead toward the kind of individual, if not the specific individual. The evidence of defensive wounds might suggest that she knew somebody or not.

So these are the things. If there's a multiplicity of wounds too, that's going to be very telling because it could be one of two things or both. One, that she continued to fight and she tried to withstand this brutal attack and it required then multiple blows by the assailant, or that this was someone who disliked Pamela Vitale very much, someone who over-killed. So that's going to be part of the police scenario, too.

KING: Now the autopsy took three-and-a-half hours. Is that about right?

WECHT: For this kind of a case, yes, absolutely, collecting the evidence on the body, the police photographing every single thing, and then moving in and doing a detailed exam. I'm certain that X-rays were taken, and everything was looked for, fingernail scrapings, any kind of extraneous material on or near the body, vaginal, anal or and rectal or swabs, all of these things are done, because you never know what they're possibly going to reveal.

KING: Could anything be told about the fact that it was so horrific, could that tell you anything about the perpetrator?

WECHT: Yes, I think that it can. It is not conclusive. It is not definitive, but certainly, it creates some implications. If you have someone that is coming in and there's a chance encounter, then possibly one blow producing unconsciousness might suffice, if somebody is then going to go around and burglarize.

And of course, depending upon the severity of the wounds, then you might have some wounds of a grazing nature, superficial, tangential which could have produced some obvious discomfort, pain and suffering but not necessarily unconsciousness, thereby requiring this individual to continue to beat Mrs. Vitale.

I did not know this lovely lady. She's 51 years of age. I'm sure that she had some physical strength and power and the fact that she does show some wounds, I'm told, that were a defensive nature would seem to indicate that she at least had a moment of confrontation with this person, and the opportunity to fight back.

KING: Thanks, Dr. Wecht. (INAUDIBLE), we're calling on you a lot, Dr. Cyril Wecht.

Mark Geragos, does the fact that Daniel Horowitz, the fact he is so popular and well-known in the defense community, will it be hard for whoever is charged with this to get a criminal lawyer?

GERAGOS: No, I don't think so. I mean the...

KING: But you wouldn't take it? Geragos wouldn't take it.

GERAGOS: You wouldn't take -- normally you're not going to take a...

KING: Cardoza wouldn't take it.

GERAGOS: You're not going to take a case that involves somebody who is accused of doing something to somebody that you know. So to that degree or to that extent. But depending on who this is, you know, the great majority of criminal cases are defended by the public defender, and so whether they declare a conflict, whether it has to go to an alternate or a panel lawyer or something like that, it's a whole different issue.

KING: Ivan says he feels he knows.

GERAGOS: Well, I don't think that there's any doubt that they have a strong suspicion as to who Dan thinks did it. I think that the police have a pretty strong suspicion as to who they think did it. But obviously...

(CROSSTALK)

KING: ... watching that person?

GERAGOS: Well, I would assume that there's -- they've got whoever this person is under some type of surveillance, and like I say, whenever you have a pretty strong suspicion as to who it is and there's a period of time that elapses, that's generally for the development of forensic evidence.

KING: We'll be back with more and we'll pick up what was going be said. We'll be including your phone calls as well. Don't go away. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HOROWITZ: When I went back there, because they wanted me to look at things, I walked through, and I was there as long as I could, and then at some I started shaking a little bit. And when I started shaking, you know, it was time to go. As I walked out the door I stopped, and I looked where she had been, and for that one second I saw her again.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KING: The death of Daniel Horowitz, a big story. The guests in Los Angeles, Mark Geragos, defense attorney, friend and colleague of Daniel's. in San Francisco, Ivan Golde -- I said -- what I did say? It's the death of his wife, sorry.

Ivan Golde, long time friend and colleague of Daniel Horowitz -- Golde is Horowitz's defense co-counsel in the high profile murder trial of Susan Polk, declared a mistrial. In Martinez, California is Ted Rowlands of CNN and in San Francisco is Michael Cardoza, defense attorney, friend and colleague of Daniel and they represent co- defendants in a pending drug case. And we're going to take your calls, too. Pittsburg, Kansas, hello.

CALLER: Hello, Larry. I was wondering ...

KING: Pittsburg, Kansas, hello.

CALLER: Hello? Can you hear me?

KING: Are you there? Yes, go ahead.

CALLER: I was wondering, is this a murder robbery? Was anything stolen from the house and did she have life insurance?

KING: Ivan?

GOLDE: All I can say -- look I really shouldn't comment too much on the investigation. However, it is my belief nothing was stolen. I do not think anything was stolen. As far as life insurance, I do not have an answer on that.

KING: Does anyone know? Do you know, Michael?

CARDOZA: No, I don't.

KING: Farmington ...

GOLDE: I don't think that's an issue, Larry. I don't really think that's part of this case, life insurance.

KING: Farmington ...

GERAGOS: You see what's the pattern here? They're talking about the bludgeoning, they're talking about they know who somebody is. You hear Cyril Wecht talk about this overkill or this rage and you start to be able to kind of put together a picture of what they probably are looking at which is somebody -- when Cyril talks about overkill, if somebody ...

KING: What are they looking that?

GERAGOS: They're looking if somebody did not struggle mightily so that you had to have that many blows or whatever the number of impacts was, then it looks to be a rage killing, which generally means that you've got somebody who is mentally imbalanced or has some kind of a fixation on the victim.

KING: Or very angry?

GERAGOS: And that's usually the fixation, what is the fixation.

KING: I see. Farmington, Michigan, hello.

CALLER: Good evening. Hi Mark. Welcome back to CNN. We've missed but.

GERAGOS: Thank you.

KING: Hearing that familiar Geragos with the background, yes.

CALLER: You've mentioned a couple of times now that you would not cover this case. Would you elaborate on why you would not?

KING: No, not cover. No, you mean represent.

CALLER: Represent, excuse me.

KING: You wouldn't represent the defendant.

GERAGOS: I don't think that whoever is arrested, I don't normally think it's a good idea. I don't know if Michael or Ivan disagree, but I normally, if I know somebody who is related to the victim's family, I think it puts you in an immensely uncomfortable, if not conflicted position.

And, you know, there's always going to be the, you know, if you were to lose the case, somebody at some point saying you were pulling your punches because you wanted them to get convicted or this or that. I just think it puts new a situation where somebody's going to always have their doubts as to whether or not you're doing it.

KING: All right. Let's ask it this way. Ivan, would you be angry if a friend of yours, a defense attorney defended the defendant in this case?

GOLDE: That's a tough question, Larry. Would I be angry? I don't think angry is the right word. Everyone is entitled to a defense. We know that everyone has constitutional rights that must be protected. I just wish that I could put a prosecutor's hat on and prosecute this case myself when they catch this person. That's what I'd like to do, Larry.

KING: And could you, by the way? Could you offer yourself or they wouldn't allow it?

GOLDE: They wouldn't allow it but my brother is a prosecutor. He could do it.

GERAGOS: Yes, he'd be recused.

KING: Michael, would you be angry?

CARDOZA: Would I be angry?

KING: Yes.

CARDOZA: You know, Larry, you understand. I mean, from a subjective viewpoint, without the emotion, as Mark said, you understand whoever did this is entitled to a defense. There's going to be another lawyer coming in. But now on a more emotional, a human level, heck yes, I'd be mad. It's like what are you doing defending, you know, someone that killed my wife? What's wrong with you? You know me and you're going to do this?

No, it mixes up too much emotions and Mark was really spot-on when he said you'd be open to question. There's way too much going on here. Somebody from out of the jurisdiction, if the public defender didn't take it, is going to have to come in, someone that wouldn't be open to question that could really give a good defense to the person under the laws as we have them.

GERAGOS: And trust me, there will be plenty of people volunteering to do it.

CARDOZA: Oh, yes. Oh, you're right, Mark. I mean, plenty ...

GERAGOS: No question.

CARDOZA: ... of people will come forward and go let me do it.

GERAGOS: Yes, right.

KING: Ted Rowlands, how big will this get?

ROWLANDS: Well, it's tough to say. You know, there is, obviously, a lot of media coverage at this point and depending on who ends up being charged for it -- and I think everybody agrees that the investigators are on a track and that there will be an arrest eventually because of physical evidence. Depending on who that person is, I think will dictate the media coverage in this case.

KING: We're going to take a break and when we come back, Harvey Levin is going to join us, the attorney and investigative journalist famed on media for a long time, managing editor of TMZ.com. He had a phone conversation with Joe Lynch earlier today. Joe Lynch is the man that's been named and not named around this case. Harvey Levin joins us right after this. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HOROWITZ: I kept saying can I just said good-bye to my wife one more time? Can I just walk over there? And I kept checking, can I just go by? And they said we're sorry, we just can't -- we can't let you back.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Why?

HOROWITZ: Because it's a crime scene. They got to secure it. They can't later on catch the person and have them, oh, did you let Dan Horowitz walk back there? They can't do that. They're professionals.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KING: There's a name we haven't mentioned tonight. Daniel Horowitz apparently had fears about this gentlemen. His name was Joe Lynch. Joining us now is Harvey Levin, attorney and investigative journalist. You know Harvey from "Celebrity Justice" but he's not with "Celebrity Justice" anymore. He's managing editor of TMZ.com. First, what is that?

HARVEY LEVIN, ATTY., INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALIST, MANAGING ED. TMZ.COM: It's going to be an entertainment Web site. This is a joint venture between AOL and Time Warner and it's launching next month and it's going to be everything about entertainment, but breaking these stories and coming up with these really ...

KING: I thought we've been a joint venture for a long time. This is our first joint, joint?

LEVIN: The is going to be the first real deal.

KING: OK. All right. How did you get to talk to -- who is Joe Lynch?

LEVIN: Joe Lynch is a guy who lives on Daniel Horowitz's property.

KING: And is he the guy that Horowitz tried to get a restraining order against?

LEVIN: Not just a restraining order, but actually tried to evict as well. And Dan Horowitz, if you read these papers, he feared this man greatly and said that he was borderline violent. He said that it was only a matter of time until he used violence against them. Said in the papers he was particularly concerned about his wife, and -- which is, you know, kind of chilling.

KING: Did the man make threats against the wife?

LEVIN: Well, I talked to this man today.

KING: And what did he say?

LEVIN: He said he has never made a threat against his wife. He acknowledged to me that he has had -- and this is the way he put it -- erratic violent behavior in the past. What Horowitz says is the guy was a methamphetamine addict and an alcoholic but he says, look, I cleaned up my act thanks to Dan Horowitz. He got me into a V.A. rehab program. And he said I didn't have any kind of real animosity against this guy.

And he says absolutely, I guarantee you I didn't do it. I said have you hire a lawyer? And he said why should I hire a lawyer? I didn't do it. So he adamant about that. He said he even gave the police a hair sample a couple of days ago when they came in there. And he said I'll give them more DNA if they want. He said I have nothing to hide.

KING: And did he talk to the police a lot?

LEVIN: He said he's talked to the police several times. As a matter of fact, yesterday there was an erroneous report that he had been arrested. He says the police went to his property to say look, we're not the ones who were responsible for this erroneous report. We never said you were arrested.

Larry, you know, one other thing, he said something really bizarre to me. He said -- I said well, what about this animosity between the two of you? And he said well, I'm not going to go into reasons I should have animosity toward Dan Horowitz.

And I said well, why would you say that? Why would you say you'd have reason to have animosity? And he said, quote, "a lot of people get pissed off if they get an eviction notice." And I said well, did you get pissed off? And he said no. And I said well, why did you say that then? And he really just wouldn't respond.

KING: He also said he's indebted to him.

LEVIN: He said totally indebted.

KING: So does he sound erratic? He sounds erratic from the way you're reporting.

LEVIN: He sounds odd to me. He sounds odd. I don't know what to read into that. He said a couple of weeks ago he saw Dan Horowitz on the road. He said Horowitz stopped, got down on his knees, patted his new dog and they had a cordial conversation. I mean, you know, you don't know what to make out of something like that.

KING: Before I ask the rest of the panel's opinion of this, were you him, knowing what you know now, Mark, would you get a lawyer?

GERAGOS: If I were Lynch and the police were talking to me?

KING: Yes, if you were Lynch, talking to you.

GERAGOS: Yes, I think that how many ... KING: Even if you didn't do it.

GERAGOS: I smiled just a little bit. I smiled a little bit when I heard that expression, what do I need a lawyer for? There's plenty of guys sitting in state prison who made that same statement.

KING: Ivan, I know you didn't mention Joe Lynch earlier, but based on hearing this, what are your thoughts?

GOLDE: Let me just say this. If I were Lynch, the second this occurred, I would have hired a lawyer right away. This gentleman is going to need a lawyer. He needs a lawyer now.

KING: What do you make of what he said to Harvey?

GOLDE: I make this guy is mentally ill. This guy has problems. This guy has erratic behavior. This guy has a history of mental illness, a criminal history, alcohol, drug abuse, and I think there are threats. He did make threats to Dan Horowitz and Pamela Vitale. Let's wait for the evidence to come out. Let's see what happens, OK?

KING: Michael, what do you make of what he said to Harvey?

CARDOZA: You know, it's strange. Certainly very strange and you look at the guy's violent history, you look at his rap sheet. You know, I know he was a drug user. I know he has a violent past. When people say, you know, I didn't do it, I never really believe that.

I'll tell you what. I've had people come into my office before that no, I didn't do it. There's nothing that I should be ashamed of and then you send them off to a lie detector test, they fail one after another. Then you finally hear well, maybe I did do it.

You know, and none of that stuff means anything. It's going to be the forensics in this case that solve it. The fact that he's giving it up doesn't mean -- here, take some hair. I didn't do it. I mean, look at all of the killers that were so brash, BTK, all of them. So it doesn't mean a darn thing.

KING: Ted Rowlands, what do you make of it?

ROWLANDS: I talked to Joe Lynch yesterday as well. You know, on the phone he sounds like a fairly normal guy. I asked him straight out if he had anything to do with it, and he said that that's absolutely ridiculous. Today he told CNN basically the same things he told Harvey, that yes, I had real problems with alcohol and drugs but I'm clean now. I have been and I did not do this at all, I wasn't at the estate area on Saturday.

So he's maintaining his innocence and from the investigator's standpoint they mentioned his name which normally most police don't mention any specific name especially when there are rumors circulating around them. They said we've talked to him and he has been completely cooperative and that's all we have to say at this point. So he is cooperative with police. We'll have to see about the physical evidence when it comes back. KING: Harvey, you always have sources. What are the sources telling you?

LEVIN: Well, you know, I talked to one of the cops there and, you know, I think it's kind of been said. This, you know, by all circumstances that we see, it was a rage killing. And, you know, I asked the cop, and they said just an incredibly brutal scene.

I mean, they won't go on the record saying that, but you know what Mark said, I mean, I think at the core of this, which is that somebody had something against either her or this family, but this was not just a blow to the head. This was a really violent act, by somebody who was just out of control.

KING: They haven't told you anything about who they suspect?

LEVIN: They say officially there are no suspects. Just one quick thing, Larry. It's interesting when I asked Lynch this, he said to me -- and this is a quote from him -- "of course I'm a suspect." And he said "of course Dan is a suspect." So I didn't even -- I didn't ask him that. He offered this to me. Of course I'm a suspect, yet he doesn't see any need of getting a lawyer.

GOLDE: Hey, Larry can I ...

KING: Yes, go ahead.

GOLDE: Larry, can I -- hey look. There are a lot of people who had access to that house. Former clients, drug dealers, murderers -- look, there are a lot of people who could have done this really, in addition to Lynch.

KING: That's good to know. Let's be fair. Let's be fair. There's a lot of people.

GOLDE: In addition to Lynch though.

LEVIN: Which, by the way, real quick, Lynch said that the number of people who had access to the house, he said -- he used the word ridiculous. He said so many people in that area had easy access. Although it was hard to get to the house, once you were in that area, you could easily get in.

KING: Thanks, Harvey, as always. And good luck with TMZ.com. Back with more and more calls after this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Any motive of method of murder you can talk about?

CHIEF MIKE FISHER, LAFAYETTE, CALIF. POLICE DEPT.: No, I can't get into that right now. It's a little premature for me to talk about that. I can tell you it was violent death.

(END VIDEO CLIP) (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KING: We're back with some more calls. Jackson, Michigan, hello.

CALLER: Hi, Larry. Earlier in the evening there was a video clip of Mr. Horowitz and Nancy Grace. Mr. Horowitz made reference that he called the main police number, and under those extreme circumstances, why did he think to call that number instead of 911? Could it be that he wouldn't want the 911 call released publicly?

KING: Ivan, what's your guess?

GOLDE: Look, from what I understand, unfortunately, Dan found his wife dead. He knew she had been murdered. 911 would not have been useful at that time. Dan knew. Dan knew what happened. He called the police.

KING: You accept that, Mark?

GERAGOS: Well, look, Ivan could tell you right now. I think, if I'm not mistaken, one of the reasons they got the mistrial was because it's the same sheriff's department investigating the case he's in trial on, it's the same pathologist, it's the same virtually all of the same police investigators and everything else. I'm sure that that number is indelibly imprinted in his brain. He's probably -- the two of you probably have dialed it 500 times in the last four weeks, huh?

GOLDE: Those issues did come up, I must confess. Those issues did come up.

GERAGOS: So -- I mean, I'm in trial -- or in a preliminary hearing with the Glendale Police Department. I could tell you their main number off of the top of my head, only because I've dialed it so many times recently.

KING: Ivan, do you know when the funeral is?

GOLDE: Well, Larry, it's just for friends. I'm not going to say -- well, it was released on "NANCY GRACE." No, it's Thursday afternoon. It was released on "NANCY GRACE," so I can say it here also. But it's just for friends. It's not going to be a media thing. OK? It's not...

(CROSSTALK)

KING: Geragos never quits.

Ottumwa, Iowa, hello.

CALLER: Hi, thank you for taking my call, Larry.

KING: Sure.

CALLER: It's great to see these brilliant minds together in one room, but I'm sorry about the circumstances. As a fan, I've watched Nancy every day, so I see Daniel regularly, probably every -- seems like every night. And a lot of times, you know, I don't agree with the things that he says, and it's so easy as a fan to not remember that you, defense attorneys, are human beings also...

GERAGOS: Are human also? As opposed to prosecutors who are...

KING: Not human.

GERAGOS: Not human, right.

KING: Anyway, what's the question, dear?

CALLER: Well, what my question is, a few things. I believe they had mentioned that he had said that he'd been evicted, and I'm wondering when the eviction notice was served, and what his alibi, Mr. Lynch's alibi is, and if that has been verified by anyone.

KING: Good questions. Ted Rowlands, do you know?

ROWLANDS: Well, as far as the eviction notice, I think Daniel, according to the application for the restraining order, served it to him in person before the June 16th filing of the application for the restraining order, so it was sometime in early June. And then they didn't follow up. Horowitz, Daniel Horowitz did not follow up. And he has said that because he didn't want to make matters worse, is the reason they didn't follow up, and apparently Lynch did seek some counseling, whether it was drug rehab program, I'm not sure of the details, but I think that the eviction notice, the restraining order were sort of pulled back because of what Lynch was doing, and that was saying, all right, I do need help, and he sought help.

But according to Lynch on the phone, yesterday and today, he got the help and he's been sober, and he didn't have anything to do with it.

GOLDE: Can I say something? That's what kind of person...

KING: Hold on, one other thing. Alibi, Ted?

ROWLANDS: Alibi, I'm not sure. He says he wasn't -- what he says, I wasn't at the estate, he's talking about the trailer where Daniel and Pamela were living and the main house was under construction. It didn't necessarily mean he wasn't within the acreage that he lives on, which is a little bit away from there.

KING: Ivan?

GOLDE: An important point is this, Larry. Dan tried to help this man. He could have kicked this guy out. He could have prosecuted him, but he tried to help him. He got him into a drug rehab center. That's the kind of person Dan Horowitz is.

KING: We'll take a break and be back with more, and get a few more calls in, too.

Charlize Theron tomorrow night. Don't go away. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The couple lived in a trailer while they oversaw the construction of a new home. Investigators say they had interviewed Daniel Horowitz and he has been cooperative. They also interviewed 52-year-old Joseph Lynch, a man who lives on Horowitz' estate and a man whom Horowitz sought a restraining order against in June of this year. Horowitz ended up dropping his request, telling CNN he worried it would make matters worse.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KING: We'll take another call. Prestonsburg, Kentucky, hello.

CALLER: Good evening, Larry and company.

KING: Hi.

CALLER: First I would like to commend you for your tireless work, Larry, on such heinous crimes. My question is, should they give more consideration to Pamela's personal life and past history? To me this seems more personal. Second, I don't agree with the investigation of what the emphasis put on Mr. Horowitz and his profession.

GERAGOS: Well, you know, I think that part of the reason they probably start there is because it seems to be so obvious, number one. Number two -- Ivan can substantiate this -- I believe that Pamela was working in the law office, was she not, Ivan?

GOLDE: Yes, she was, Mark. Yes she was.

GERAGOS: If she was, it mean, it would be illogical not to look either at their personal life and professional life first and foremost. So you're right to that degree, but I believe that Pamela and Dan's personal and professional lives were about as interwoven as a couple could have.

GOLDE: Can I say something? Let me say -- this is very important here. I remember Pamela told me after the opening statement in the Polk case, that was one of the very few times she'd ever been in the courtroom to see Dan. I think that was her first time ever seeing Dan in court when Dan made that opening statement in the Polk case, and that was after 11 years of marriage.

KING: Ashland, Oregon, hello.

CALLER: Hi, Larry. How are you?

KING: Hi, fine. We only got a minute.

CALLER: OK, I lived 30 years in Lafayette, always felt safe, low crime rate. Did they have a locked gate, electric gate, and was she outside when the murder -- attack took place? And I also heard she had two German shepherds.

KING: All right, Ivan, want to get us up to date?

GOLDE: Those dogs are as sweet as they can be. They were not watchdogs. They were sweet pets. Those dogs wouldn't hurt a fly. There was a gate. How good it was, I'm not really sure.

KING: And where was she, do you know? She was at the trailer?

GOLDE: Yes, she was by the doorway and just inside the doorway.

KING: Michael Cardoza, do you expect an eminent arrest?

CARDOZA: You know, Larry, there's no telling. Hopefully there will be. I mean, they have certainly, in my opinion, targeted some people. It really depends on how quickly the forensics comes back if they have forensic. I would be speculating. I certainly hope so.

KING: DNA, Mark?

GERAGOS: Yes, they'll have it. I would assume that's the key. I assume that's what they've done. They've sent it over, I'm sure to the DOJ, Department of Justice, crime lab and usually I think their minimum requirements are 72 hours. They'll have an answer by Thursday or Friday.

KING: Thank you all very much. Ted Rowlands, always on top of the scene. Ivan Golde, Mark Geragos, good to see you back here in the studio, Mark.

GERAGOS: Thanks.

KING: And Michael Cardoza. As, again, as time permits and as this story warrants, we'll keep following it.

Charlize Theron will join us tomorrow night. Not too bad, and terrific in this new movie -- incredible in this new movie.

Right now let's go to New York where Aaron Brown is standing by, and in New Orleans, Anderson Cooper -- a familiar site of Anderson there in a different kind of New Orleans now.

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

Search
© 2007 Cable News Network.
A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved.
Terms under which this service is provided to you.
Read our privacy guidelines. Contact us. Site Map.
Offsite Icon External sites open in new window; not endorsed by CNN.com
Pipeline Icon Pay service with live and archived video. Learn more
Radio News Icon Download audio news  |  RSS Feed Add RSS headlines