Return to Transcripts main page

CNN LARRY KING LIVE

Broadcast News Anchors Join Forces

Aired August 5, 2008 - 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, criminal charges filed in the case of the missing toddler. Caylee Anthony's disappearance wasn't reported for weeks and now her mother is officially on the hook.
What does the State of Florida accuse her of doing?

And how about those FBI tests on supposed blood evidence?

Are the results about to be revealed?

But first, the broadcast news anchors join forces to fight a killer.

Brian Williams...

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BRIAN WILLIAMS, ANCHOR, NBC NIGHTLY NEWS: We're losing an American a minute.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: Katie Couric...

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KATIE COURIC, ANCHOR, CBS EVENING NEWS: We're forgetting our competitive differences.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: Charlie Gibson...

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CHARLES GIBSON, ANCHOR, ABC'S WORLD NEWS TONIGHT: It's an effort a lot broader than the three of us.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: They're all here together and they want all of us to join the war against cancer right now, on LARRY KING LIVE.

It would take something extraordinary to bring all three network anchors together in the same studio at the same time, but we have done it. And what brings them to LARRY KING LIVE is a very important public awareness and fundraising event coming in September.

And with us are Katie Couric, the anchor of the "CBS Evening News;" Charles Gibson, the anchor of ABC's "World News" and Brian Williams, anchor of "NBC "Nightly News"."

Well, Katie I guess this is your baby, right?

Tell us how this came together.

COURIC: Well, it's not really my baby. I mean I think a bunch of people made...

GIBSON: You're pregnant?

(LAUGHTER)

COURIC: Now that would be news.

GIBSON: She's pregnant. There's news, Larry. She's pregnant. Whoa!

COURIC: A lot of people actually had this idea at the same time. It was sort of a serendipitous coming together of people who really care deeply about cancer research. And Charlie and Brian are two people in that group.

And we're just very excited that this, hopefully, will start a movement, get people much more involved, make them become much more aware about the need for badly necessary research dollars so that we can come up with better treatments and a cure for a disease that strikes one in two men in this country, and one in three women in this country.

And I'm just very excited. Not only do I get to spend some time with Charlie and Brian, but I think it's a great message that the networks are collaborating, that we're forgetting our competitive differences, coming together for the good of the nation and, hopefully, performing a real public service.

KING: All three networks will carry an hour each on the night of September 5th. It's called Stand Up To Cancer.

How did they enlist you, Brian?

WILLIAMS: Oh, this was the easiest decision I've ever made.

Our network, like CBS and ABC, was four square behind it. I've lost my mother to lymphoma. I've lost my sister to breast cancer. You know, we're losing an American a minute, is probably the easiest way to put it.

The three networks did these kinds of programs called road blocks, where it's across the board, if you're a network television viewer, you have no choice.

But this is a good thing. We did this after 9/11. We did it for Katrina.

What do they have in common?

They were emergencies. And, in a way, no one's doing anything wrong here. No one's intentionally failing here. All the people in research and medicine are doing the best they can. But we have no less of an emergency here. And that's the tie that binds.

KING: Now, Charlie, are you -- are the three of you like the co- hosts for the evening?

GIBSON: No, no. This is going to be a lot more than the three of us. My goodness, if it was just the three of us co-hosting, I'm not sure anybody would watch.

(LAUGHTER)

GIBSON: But we will participate and we're going to each do pieces that will reflect some of the advances that are being made in various areas. But there is so much room for more research and need for more research in so many different areas that we're simply there to participate, to lend our -- what little prestige we have to the event. But there are going to be lots of entertainers. There's going to be entertainment.

When people call in to give, we hope, large amounts of money, they'll be able to talk to some very famous names who will be manning the phones.

It's an effort a lot broader than the three of us.

WILLIAMS: Indeed, if you want to come down and answer some phones, Larry, we should enlist you.

KING: You know, I think I would. If you -- I'd be happy to. I'd be honored.

COURIC: We'd love you to.

KING: All right. You're -- done.

COURIC: Look, we just recruited another celebrity.

(CROSSTALK)

COURIC: We've got Reese Witherspoon, Jennifer Aniston, Larry, Forrest Whitaker, Jimmy Smith. Marge and Homer Simpson will be making an appearance during the hour.

GIBSON: Yes, you could be sitting next to Homer Simpson, Larry.

COURIC: Homer will find himself in a very interesting predicament, which I can't really say more than that. But you'll find out. We'll be making an announcement about that shortly.

But it's really going to be a star-studded event with a lot of celebrities, as Charlie just mentioned; a lot of singing stars, like Sheryl Crow, will be performing; Melissa Etheridge.

And, yes, it's not going to be just the three of us.

But we are going to be focusing on cutting edge cancer research, which will hopefully inform people about how close we are to new therapies and new approaches and how these hardworking scientists who are really at it 24/7 need additional funding so these can be -- go from the lab to the clinic and hopefully, eventually, save a lot of lives.

WILLIAMS: And it's...

GIBSON: And it will give you one more...

KING: Yes, go ahead.

GIBSON: And to give you one more indication of how the networks are cooperating, Larry, it's not just the news departments. It's the entertainment divisions, as well. And participating that night will be the cast of "Lost," which is a leading ABC program. And then the cast of...

COURIC: "CSI Miami" and...

GIBSON: "CSI."

WILLIAMS: "30 Rock."

GIBSON: "30 Rock." Right.

(LAUGHTER)

KING: That's great.

Now, Brian, there's a bitter irony connected here. Christina Applegate, the wonderful actress, scheduled to be part of the special, recently reveals that she's got breast cancer.

WILLIAMS: I know it. And we all saw that -- that bit of news. And then, of course, you match it up with her age. But this is my recurring theme. We all know the title of the movie and the play and the book, "Six Degrees of Separation."

Cancer may be at one point, and especially those willing to discuss it in this country in years gone by might have been six degrees of separation.

No more. It's part of our national story. It's part of our personal story. I worked for a company run by CEO Jeff Zucker, who is a colon cancer survivor. I was at NBC, part of the family, when Katie lost Jay. We all knew Jay was all -- we all hurt together.

This is -- and, of course, you add that to my family story, Charlie's family story. This is what brings us together. It's now part of the collective American conversation. There's no such thing as not participating. KING: Is the show only one hour?

COURIC: It is.

GIBSON: Yes, it is.

COURIC: It's only one hour, commercial-free, though. And we're going to hopefully pack a lot of great information and entertainment. We want it to be very engaging and informative. We don't want to be morose about this. We want to really inspire people to really join forces. And as Brian and Charlie have so eloquently said, you know, just get people involved.

And not only people who give a lot of money can talk to a celebrity. We want people who can make $5 or $10 donations. And we have an incredible Web site that's set up, which is standup2cancer.org, where people can actually purchase a star for just a dollar to honor someone who is a survivor, who's undergoing treatment or -- I bought one for Jay, who -- someone who lost his or her battle with this insidious disease.

And it's a very entertaining, fun and educational and informative Web site. So I urge anybody watching to check it out and maybe buy a star honoring someone.

KING: A great idea.

We'll be talking about a lot of things in our remaining moments coming up.

But, Charlie, in 1970, Richard Nixon declared war on cancer. He may be the only president to ever mention it in a speech.

Why did we apparently lose that war?

GIBSON: Well, I don't think it's been lost, Larry. But I don't think there's been the -- first of all, other presidents have mentioned it. Indeed, it's been -- it's come up in states of the union address and those things.

But, yes, he declared war on cancer. It was to be a national priority. And yet progress is slow. It comes very incrementally, step by step.

And one of the really nice things about this effort, I think, is this money, the way it's going to be divided up, all the cancer research now -- the researchers will tell you there's no aha moment where some guy alone in a laboratory makes a discovery. It's collaborative.

I'm doing a piece, for instance, on breast cancer. One of the interesting new developments is how metastatic breast cancer is treated now and the way they have -- there's about 20 percent of the cancers they really have some new drugs that are in the works to attack this. And it's being done with a consortium of 16 different hospitals around the country and medical schools. And so that's what this is going to be. This is money that's going to collaborative efforts, dream teams of really great cancer researchers.

So I don't think you can say the battle has been lost. But I don't think that there has been the attention to the battle over the years...

KING: No.

GIBSON: Indeed, it gets eclipsed by other diseases, rightfully or importantly so, in some cases -- not rightfully, necessarily...

KING: It stands...

GIBSON: ...because, as Brian points out, we're going to lose more than half a million people in the United States this year to cancer.

KING: Unbelievable.

GIBSON: And it needs to be front and center in the national consciousness. And that's what this is all about.

KING: Stand Up To...

WILLIAMS: Larry, remember where we were in 1970.

KING: Hold on a second, Brian.

Yes. Oh, that's right. We've come a long way, but there's no victory parade, Brian.

WILLIAMS: No, there isn't. But, 1970, Richard Nixon gives that speech. We had just landed the summer before on the moon. Still had troops in Vietnam.

We should ask ourselves if Nixon hadn't declared that war, where would we be today?

KING: Yes.

WILLIAMS: It just needs -- it needs constant care and feeding.

KING: Well said.

WILLIAMS: That's all. It needs more of a revolution than a declaration of war.

KING: This special will air, Stand Up To Cancer, Friday, September 5th, on all three networks.

And we've got three network anchors, so we'll get to a little bit of the news of the day still ahead.

Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Stand up and start a movement. Stand up to the killer. A (INAUDIBLE), a team. Stand up to no and say yes.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: Do you know anyone who has had cancer?

That's our quick vote right now at cnn.com/larryking. The results will show you how many people have cancer in their lives. There's still time to vote.

Katie, do we expect the presidential candidates to be part of this special?

COURIC: We're hoping, Larry, that each will tape a message about the need for increased funding in cancer research. Now, I know Charlie and Brian were talking earlier. And it's important to note that government funding has really flat-lined or decreased in recent years. And fewer than one in 10 promising or meritorious research proposals is currently funded by the government. That means private industry, philanthropy and citizens like the ones watching tonight are really responsible to help fund some of these really exciting, potentially life-saving clinical trials and laboratory research.

So that's another really important reason. And, hopefully, both candidates will assert their belief in this, as well. And we're hoping that they will make an appearance, probably not live, but via videotape, at some point during the hour.

KING: We'll come back to the cancer special in a couple of moments.

A couple of other areas.

The Project for Excellence in Journalism, Charlie, reports that last week, for the first time since the campaign started, McCain got as much media attention as Obama. They seem to think it had something to do with going negative.

Do you?

GIBSON: No, I don't. I think there is a -- you know, this is an interesting election. We have a totally -- you can't modify the word unique -- but we have a unique candidate, something that is brand new in history. And I think we all are interested in a story that is new.

But I thought it was inevitable that eventually this would settle down and the amount of coverage would equal out. And I think you'll find that to be true all the way through.

You know, we're coming out of an unprecedented primary season, when there was so much attention focused on those two candidates. Obama emerges from that fight. I think it is natural, having known that McCain would be the Republican candidate for some time, that we would have this preponderance of coverage on the new story, in effect.

But as that story -- we get more accustomed with it, we move back to the quality in coverage. And I think you'll see that all the way through November 4th.

KING: Brian, explain something. We have an unpopular president, an unpopular, economic kind of chaos, an energy crisis.

Why is this election close?

WILLIAMS: Well, I think for a lot of reasons. Number one, the formidable candidate and name and reputation of John McCain.

People say what do you think is going to happen?

Is this going to be, you know, for either candidate a walk?

And I think anyone who makes a prediction what happens in November, walk away. Don't believe them. Anything could happen. The old adage a week is a year in American politics -- Larry, anything could happen.

And it stands to reason that this is close, that there's not much room between them in the polls. Americans will bring a complicated set of reasons and issues with them into what is a very visceral, personal decision, especially in the post-9/11 era, when they go into vote. And that is direction of the country, change versus whatever of the status quo they'd like to keep in place.

KING: Katie, what part do you think -- and it would be an educated guess -- race is going to play?

COURIC: I think that is the big question mark. You know, there is the famous Bradley effect, Larry, where people coming out of voting places will say one thing and do something else. And I'm not sure how honest all people are when they talk to pollsters via telephone about matters of race.

That's why pollsters sometimes say well, you feel this way, do you think your neighbor would vote for an African-American candidate?

So I think it's the big unknown, because I think it's really hard to gauge just how big a factor it is. And Senator Obama himself concedes that it will play a role and it is what it is. And I think things will shake out state by state and we'll see as we move on.

But I think it will definitely be a factor. I think anyone who says it doesn't play a role is just not being honest or at least realistic.

KING: Charlie, the moderators were announced for the debates. And Jim Lehrer is going to do one. So is Gwen Eiffel, Tom Brokaw and Bob Schieffer.

Do you have a thought as to why network anchors don't get to do these? GIBSON: You know, it's the same lineup as four years ago, with one difference. I got booted for Brokaw. It was those same three plus me last time. Now I'm out. Brokaw's in.

COURIC: What happened?

Did you screw up something?

GIBSON: No. They very properly -- and I think...

(LAUGHTER)

GIBSON: Yes, probably so.

WILLIAMS: You're trying to protect us.

GIBSON: I -- there is a policy, I think, on the part of the Presidential Debate Commission, not to have evening news anchors do the debates. And so it gives us a free evening in October.

KING: Do you know why?

GIBSON: Yes, I -- first of all, I think if you do one, probably you have to do the others to make everything equal. And, also, it's -- it protects us, to some extent, I think.

WILLIAMS: It does. It does.

GIBSON: And I'm actually sort of appreciative of that.

KING: Dick Cheney apparently not going to the Republican convention.

What's your read on that, Brian?

WILLIAMS: Well, the vice president has made the decision, perhaps with some guidance from the party. I've always said this. We're lucky to be alive in an era of great journalism and historians who are working today. And there's this lag time between an administration and when the really good reasoned books come out and take a look at what it is we have just lived through, whether it's the Eisenhower administration, Kennedy, Nixon, Ford, Carter on through.

So I think we'll know a lot more about the dynamic we have just witnessed. We can see and touch and taste and smell only so much as citizens, and even given our sometimes front row seats as journalists.

But whatever reason, whatever judgment they've come to, it's for, as they like to say at this time of year, the good of the party.

Mr. Gibson is burning a hole...

COURIC: You just artfully dodged...

GIBSON: What does that answer mean?

COURIC: I was like what is he saying?

(CROSSTALK)

GIBSON: You know how you can tell somebody is really looking at you?

WILLIAMS: I think he's going into politics himself.

WILLIAMS: And Katie's over here with the elbow. It's unbelievable. I guess proof that it takes three good friends to put on the special we're going to put on in September.

KING: You're not kidding.

COURIC: Maybe he's doing it to distance himself a little bit from Senator McCain, since the Bush administration is not enjoying a huge amount of popularity right now and the scuttlebutt is there's no love lost between Dick Cheney and John McCain. And that might be playing into it, as well.

GIBSON: By the way, but...

KING: All right, the Beijing Olympics.

Go ahead.

GIBSON: By the way, Larry...

KING: Yes?

GIBSON: You mentioned at the beginning it takes something exceptional to get us together.

KING: Yes.

GIBSON: We get together for hot dogs, you know, on a Tuesday afternoon.

(CROSSTALK)

KING: Where, on the streets?

GIBSON: It's nothing exceptional.

KING: On the streets? Sabretts? On the corner?

GIBSON: Sure.

COURIC: Yes.

GIBSON: Gray's Papaya in the (INAUDIBLE).

WILLIAMS: 79th and The Park.

COURIC: Tube steaks (ph) (INAUDIBLE).

KING: The Beijing Olympics, who's going?

What do the anchors think of the president going?

We'll ask right after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP FROM "STAND UP TO CANCER")

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No thank you.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I like this.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I don't like this.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Why?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You're driving me crazy.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I am?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, you are.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: OK. I'll just sit here quietly.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You won't sit there quietly.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I will.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: One second.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Ow! Ow!

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Did I bite you?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, you bit me.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I didn't mean to.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: Stand Up To Cancer will air on Friday night, September 5th, all three networks.

Our three guests will be all, of course, part of it. You can go to their Web site, which is standup2cancer.org.

Who's going?

Are you going to the Olympics, Brian?

WILLIAMS: Yes, I am. I'm leaving shortly. We'll be in place by Thursday night for "Nightly News". And, you know, "The Today Show" and "Nightly News," in all of the years we've had the Olympics, traditionally go. And there's a lot going on, a lot to report on. Boy, I could make a bigger case this year that we're going to be standing dead center at a huge global news event when we arrive there and go on the air every night, which will be interesting at 6:30 in the morning for a 6:30 p.m. Air time in the States.

But I can't wait to get over there. We're going to keep the trip open-ended. See how China does. See how the visitors do. Everything from the environment to protests and all of that. So I'm very anxious to get over there and get in place.

GIBSON: And I think this will be probably the most...

KING: Katie, you all...

GIBSON: I think this will be the most boring Olympics in the history of time.

WILLIAMS: You know what, I'm just going over there...

GIBSON: And just because NBC has them. I don't say that, you know, just because NBC locks them up and won't let us near them. You know, I just think it's going to be a terribly boring Olympics and there'll be a lot of news that Katie and I will have that will be squeezed out of the NBC show.

KING: Katie, you all...

GIBSON: That's (INAUDIBLE).

KING: Katie, you always went when you were at NBC, right?

COURIC: I know.

KING: You always went there.

COURIC: It's, you know, this...

KING: Are you missing it this year?

COURIC: You know, I am. I've covered eight Olympics. This will be the first one I haven't been at in a very long time. Matt called me from Washington before he left and said I can't believe I'm going to an Olympics and you're not going to be there. And it's -- you know, I am going to miss it. And I think...

WILLIAMS: It's not too late.

COURIC: I think it's going to be a very, very exciting time.

(LAUGHTER)

COURIC: I'm really envious of Brian and all my colleagues, with all due respect to Charlie, because I don't think there is more exciting place to cover global developments and also some fantastic athlete stories, like Dara Torres at 41, who is just going gang busters.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Oh, yes. COURIC: And I think it's going to be a very, very exciting few weeks for the two people who choose to watch.

(LAUGHTER)

COURIC: I have to do something.

(CROSSTALK)

COURIC: CBS has a lot of great counter programming, though.

WILLIAMS: What did I do to hurt you?

(LAUGHTER)

WILLIAMS: I don't get this.

KING: Before we get back to cancer, one other quick thing in the political area.

Do you have any predictions on who will be the vice presidential choices, Charlie?

WILLIAMS: Yes, Charlie.

GIBSON: Well, I mean, I can name the -- you know, the same list that everybody else is naming. I don't know. I think, actually, there's an interesting -- a very interesting choice that John McCain has to make. Because there are a number of very outstanding conservative possibilities that he could take or he could take somebody that might be transformative and break the Republican mold. That's interesting.

And then in the Obama case, does he pick somebody older, gray hair, a little more experienced in foreign policy, perhaps, to balance himself?

Or does he take somebody who is of roughly the same generation as he and really perpetuates the kind of change, you know, word that he's used for his campaign?

So I -- listen, you know, I can name the same names that everybody else is going through. But I think they sort of -- each of them have an interesting choice in terms of groups of candidates.

KING: Brian...

GIBSON: And I think the characteristics of who they choose will say a lot about their -- about their presidencies.

KING: Brian, does anybody jump out at you?

WILLIAMS: No, I think it could go either way. But to amplify Charlie, and not to make it gross or simplistic as a formula, with the Obama ticket, you have diversity and change and newness at the top. So you go with kind of a, perhaps, known commodity. Again, business government, military, perhaps, and perhaps an older person.

With the McCain ticket, you have your known commodity -- military veteran, decorated war hero, former POW at the top and a legislative veteran.

Do you throw a long ball for the number two spot on the ticket, try to generate some excitement that way?

I think that's the loose formula we'll be following.

The puzzle becomes what day...

COURIC: I don't...

WILLIAMS: ...will this happen?

COURIC: Yes. But I don't even think that that old formula will necessarily be adhered to. Senator Obama has said so much that geographical considerations...

GIBSON: True.

COURIC: ...age or even, you know, ideological balance won't necessarily be adhered to.

I think John McCain may pick Mitt Romney, just because I think he has certainly been campaigning a little bit for the job, the former Massachusetts governor. And I think it might appease some conservatives who are less than enamored with Senator McCain at this point.

And I don't know, I sort of think Obama may choose Evan Bayh for some reason. I know he's spending...

WILLIAMS: You're going for two here today.

COURIC: Yes, I know.

WILLIAMS: You're going for two.

COURIC: I don't know why. Just because you guys won't answer any questions. I'm just going to go out there.

GIBSON: All right. Let's go.

COURIC: But I think that Evan Bayh -- I know Senator Obama's spending the day with him in Indiana tomorrow. I think that he'd be an excellent campaigner.

GIBSON: While Mrs. Obama will be with Tim Kaine in Virginia.

COURIC: Yes. And Tim Kaine, of course, from the Old Dominion, the governor of my former state.

KING: What...

COURIC: But I think he's almost gotten too much publicity. I just don't know if that's real.

KING: Let's go back to the cancer question. Stand Up To Cancer is Friday, September 5th. I'm going to make arrangements to be there, if you really want me to be a part of it. I'll come.

COURIC: We'd love you to be there.

WILLIAMS: OK. You're in, Larry.

COURIC: Are you kidding?

GIBSON: You're in.

COURIC: We'll have a chair with your name on it, Mr. King.

WILLIAMS: This is part of what we can offer.

KING: All right.

We should mention something, Charlie -- and it was your network that was affected -- the passing of Peter Jennings to cancer.

GIBSON: Sure.

KING: I would imagine that will be remembered on the 5th.

GIBSON: Absolutely. Well, if nobody else mentions this, I sure will. It was a -- it was of seismic proportions within ABC News. And we've also been touched, of course, by Robin, who -- Robin Roberts, who very bravely has stayed right at her "Good Morning America" post while she has done battle right in front of the American public with her cancer. And I was thinking just today of Joel Segal, who, for more than 20 years...

KING: Yes.

GIBSON: ...was our entertainment editor at "Good Morning America" and who himself was one of the founders of Gilda Clubs, because his second wife, Jane, died of a brain tumor, who was a wonderful woman. And Joel was moved at that time, with Gene Wilder, to start the Gilda's Clubs that have done so much for families with cancer victims and cancer survivors.

KING: Yes.

GIBSON: And so we're very much touched by that.

Brian mentioned his family. And, of course, Katie -- Katie's involvement with this is well-known.

COURIC: My -- I should mention my sister Emily...

GIBSON: And sister Emily.

COURIC: ...who was running for lieutenant governor of Virginia, who was replaced, ironically, by Tim Kaine because she had to drop out because she was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer.

KING: All right...

COURIC: So as Brian said earlier, it really is six degrees of separation.

KING: It touches everything.

GIBSON: My wife is a cancer survivor. I lost both my folks and a sister to smoking. So this is all...

KING: Huh.

GIBSON: This is all very in the family (INAUDIBLE).

KING: Thank you all very much.

I'll see you on the 5th.

Good -- have a good time in Beijing, Brian.

WILLIAMS: Thanks, Larry.

KING: And you three keep on doing what you do so well.

Katie Couric, Charles Gibson, Brian Williams, Stand Up To Cancer, Friday, September 5th, on all three networks.

Caylee Anthony's mother was charged today in the case of her missing 2-year-old daughter.

Do investigators now know what happened?

Answers ahead.

Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KING: Thank you all very much. I'll see you on the 5th. Have a good time in Beijing, Brian. You three keep on doing what you do so well. Katie Couric, Charles Gibson, Brian Williams; Stand Up to Cancer, Friday, September 5th on all three networks.

Caylee Anthony's mother was charged today in the case of her missing two year old daughter. Do investigators now know what happened? Answers ahead. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KING: Today, state prosecutors filed formal charges against the 22-year-old mother of the missing two-year-old girl in central Florida. The mother, Casey Anthony, was charged with child neglect -- that's a third-degree felony -- and filing a false statement, which is a misdemeanor. She's held on bond, 500,000 dollars. That's the bail and those same charges since last month have been set and carried on. Her two-year-old daughter Caylee went missing in mid-June, wasn't reported until July 15th. Standing by at the Anthony home is Adam Longo, a reporter for WKMG TV, and in Orlando is Holly Gagne. Holly is a family friend of the Anthony's, has known the family for years. Casey Anthony, in fact, used to babysit her three boys and she's helping in the search for Caylee. Adam, what's the latest? Is there any chance of bail being posted?

ADAM LONGO, WKMG-TV: That is a chance at this point, Larry, because now that the state attorney's office has moved forward filed these formal charges, the defense in this case certainly has another opportunity to represent its case as far as why 22-year-old Casey Anthony, the client in this case, should have reduced bond. There had been some talk up to this point about appealing an initial bond hearing that happened several weeks ago, appealing it to the Florida State Supreme Court because it already went through an appellate court. That remains in limbo right now because these charges have been filed, Larry.

KING: What's the latest on the DNA testing, the stain in the car, the hair samples? Any results back yet?

LONGO: No, Orange County sheriff's detectives say they're still waiting for those results to come back. And interesting enough, if I can go back to the fact that the charges were filed today. It may seem counter-intuitive, but the defense and the Anthony family is actually saying that this is a victory, because they're saying the state attorney's office clearly doesn't have enough evidence to pursue any higher charges in this case. And they are convinced that this could bring Casey home sooner rather than later.

KING: Holly, you know Casey very well. She used to babysit your boys. What do you make of this?

HOLLY GAGNE, ANTHONY FAMILY FRIEND: There's a lot of confusion, Larry. And, you know, I have answered the question so many times that I just say that the Casey that I knew that babysat my children and that has been in my home and we've been friends with for six years would not harm her child or be a part of her child being harmed in any way.

KING: So you're totally shocked?

GAGNE: That is putting it lightly. That is putting it lightly, yes. When my husband and I had gotten home from our vacation and we heard the news, we went straight to Cindy and George's home, which we were their neighbors for over three years. And I just fell into Cindy's arms and I said, what is going on? And she said, you know, at that time we just don't know. There's been so many twists and turns, Larry, that, you know -- and there's so many scenarios. But in my mind and in my opinion, a scenario that she harmed her child, that she hurt her child, that she knows her child is not alive and she's torturing her parents and putting us all through this, I don't believe that.

KING: Adam, reporter, supposedly photographs have surfaced of Casey Anthony at a nightclub, reportedly taken several days after her daughter disappeared. A freelance camera man says they were taken on June 20th. Where has that gone?

LONGO: Well, Cindy Anthony herself, Larry, has said a lot of people have come out of the woodwork. Being in the media, a lot of people have come out of the woodwork. Until somebody can prove to me beyond -- make it conclusive that these photos were actually taken on the date that they said they were taken on -- that hasn't been proven to my -- I wouldn't go on with confirmation of that right now, Larry. I wouldn't be comfortable in doing that. That's still hanging out there right now.

KING: Adam, thanks for outstanding reporting. Holly will be back with us and we'll have other guests as well. This intriguing case gets more intriguing daily. Don't go away.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CINDY ANTHONY, CAYLEE's GRANDMOTHER: I just found out that they did charge her formally today, which actually is a good thing because of what they charged her with. They didn't charge her with anything but voluntary child neglect and withholding evidence. If they had anything concrete on her, I think they would have used that today.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: Holly Gagne remains with us, the family friend. In Pittston, Pennsylvania is Dr. Lawrence Kobilinsky, forensics expert and professor at John Jay College of Criminal Justice. Here in Los Angeles, a familiar face, Mark Geragos, the well-known defense attorney. And in Miami, Stacy Honowitz, assistant Florida state attorney. Dr. Kobilinsky, DNA tests on the stain, the hairs found, et cetera -- do you think DNA is going to crack this case?

DR. LAWRENCE KOBILINSKY: It very well might, Larry. I think with any DNA test you need to be able to compare the question sample against an exemplar. I think during the second search of the home, the crime scene investigators recovered several items. And I think the reason why they went there was to gain an exemplar or a pseudo- exemplar of Caylee's DNA. Now they should be able to compare that with the DNA in that stain and know if it was Caylee or not.

KING: Now, Stacy, did prosecutors have to charge her?

STACY HONOWITZ, ASSISTANT FLORIDA STATE ATTORNEY: Yes, well, everybody was -- yes, well, everybody was flipping out, saying they didn't have enough time and she was going to walk. The bottom line was they had 21 days to charge her, and then they had 33. The max they could do was 40 days. It wasn't a matter of never charging her. It was just a matter of releasing her on her own recognizance. The state could always come back and charge her with information.

Now formal charges are pending, and I'm sure, probably, they're going to move for another bond reduction. That's going to be the next move.

KING: Mark, this is not a homicide case.

MARK GERAGOS, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Not yet, hopefully not. But I agree with the grandmother who was on there. Short of dismissing and releasing her, getting charged, at least now she can apply for a bail reduction, potentially get out. I'm sure they can do some kind of a property bond and she could walk out the door. For a while here, it was somewhat ridiculous, I think, to have held her basically without bail and not do anything. And so at least at this point they can move forward. Her lawyers can see what they've got.

KING: Holly, do you think the public has convicted the mother?

GAGNE: Oh, Larry, everyday and twice on Sunday. Yes, they're showing these pictures over and over and over again. And Larry, I want to make a point. They're saying she's out clubbing and partying while her child was missing. However, if you were to look at the report, there's a tip from Jesse, a former boyfriend, that says he might have heard Caylee on the phone on June 26th, 24th, or 27th. So the time line is all messed up.

How can we think she's out clubbing, you know, and not caring about her daughter when someone says they heard her talking to her daughter at the end of June? You know, let's not crucify this girl, you know, until we know what's going on. And it's just not fair. It just is not fair and the media's taken it and they've run with it and they've just -- all you hear about is Casey, Casey, Casey, but the tips or things that are positive, you just hear a snip-it.

GERAGOS: While she's talking -- while she's talking, they're putting the pictures up there. We have no idea when those pictures were taken, yet they're being shown.

KING: That's like a pre-conviction, right?

(CROSS TALK)

KING: What else, Stacy?

GERAGOS: It's all of this she doesn't act right evidence. What about real evidence?

HONOWITZ: No, no, no, it's not just the pictures. That came after the fact. When you hear all of these conversations that she's had with her parents, with the police officers in the jail. Never once, as I mentioned before, has she ever mentioned trying to find this child. The public's crucifying her because they can't believe that this mother --

GAGNE: Can I comment on that, Larry?

GERAGOS: Once again, Stacy, it's she doesn't act right evidence, and that's an awful thing. It's become almost endemic for prosecutors and for people in general to say there's a certain way you've got to act. There was a woman in San Diego recently, Stacy, that you know, who was convicted on the doesn't act right evidence and the conviction was vacated. It turned out the guy wasn't even murdered.

HONOWITZ: Mark, I didn't say anything about murdering this child. I'm saying do you think, honestly, that this mother is acting rationally?

GERAGOS: Whether she's acting --

(CROSS TALK)

KING: One at a time.

GAGNE: Larry, I would like to comment on.

GERAGOS: Whether she's acting rationally or acting bizarre doesn't mean all of sudden -- That doesn't jump to murder.

KING: Holly, you want to say something? A little comment from the doctor.

GAGNE: Yes, I'd like to jump in real quick. They're not airing the phone call with her father or the interview with her father on Sunday where she was crying the entire time. They're not showing you the entire phone recording. They're showing you a snip-it to say, look at this mother. Just because you're acting irrational doesn't mean you killed your child, put her in the trunk of your car and --

HONOWITZ: I never accused her of murder at all.

GAGNE: I'm telling you what the media's saying and what they're saying down here.

KING: Doctor Kobilinsky, is this a rare case, from your standpoint?

KOBILINSKY: I wouldn't say so. Larry, it's a very circumstantial case. But as a criminalist I would say follow the evidence. You've got to see what the stain tells you. You've got to see whether the hair is postmortem. And you've got to follow the cell phone records, the phone records, and any other kind of evidence that will give us the entire picture.

KING: We've not heard the last of this, obviously. Holly and Dr. Kobilinsky, thank you. Mark Geragos and Stacy Honowitz remain. We'll be joined by Judge Alex Ferrer and Ed Smart. For more information, by the way, go to HelpFindCaylee.com. If Casey Anthony knows where her daughter is, why doesn't she just say so? Maybe some answers coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KING: Mark Geragos and Stay Honowitz remain with us. We're joined in Salt Lake City by Ed Smart. His daughter Elizabeth abducted from her home in 2002, found alive nine months later. And in Miami, Judge Alex Ferrer, the host of TV's "Judge Alex." Judge, do you ever judge anyone based on their actions? JUDGE ALEX FERRER, "JUDGE ALEX": Well, yes, everybody judges people based on their actions. In this case, this case is sadly similar to the Drew Peterson case. There isn't evidence of any wrongdoing, in the sense of the child being murdered or sold or given away or anything like that. But the reactions of the mother are completely different from what you would expect or what the public would expect from a mother who loses her two-year-old child, to go a month without reporting it? In fact, the mother didn't report it. The grandmother did.

So immediately while the system of justice will presume her innocent and wait to see where the evidence goes, the public is not that kind. The public looks at it and goes, something's wrong here. And something is wrong here. It's just a question of whether the evidence will lead to it.

KING: Ed Smart, what do you make of this case?

ED SMART, FATHER OF ELIZABETH SMART: I would love to hear from the mother. I really haven't heard her comments, her explanation. And I think that's really important to try and get some credibility on the subject. You know, the parent, I think when your child is missing, you would do anything. You would cooperate. You would try to, you know, give them any information possible to try and help find where your daughter is. And, you know, I'm anxious to hear what the mother has to say.

KING: With us on the phone is the grandmother, Cindy Anthony. The obvious question, Cindy, everyone asks, why won't your daughter talk?

CINDY ANTHONY, GRANDMOTHER OF CAYLEE ANTHONY: Well, Casey's maintained that she's protecting Caylee, and she's also protecting the family from physical harm. We believe that 100 percent. The reason I called in, I spoke to Nancy, is I had a question for Doctor Kobilinsky. He made a comment -- because I'm kind of intrigued when asking the authorities about what constitutes decomposition, things like that. He talked about check and see if the hair samples postmortem. I just want to know how can you determine a hair that's fallen off of someone's head, is it postmortem or is it just a hair that's fallen off on a normal thing, maybe shedded on clothes, and will sit there and decompose?

KING: Good question. Dr. Kobilinsky has left, but Stacy Honowitz might be able to answer it. Is there a difference?

HONOWITZ: Well, you know, hair transfers all the time, but I guess the forensics person would really be able to tell you whether or not there is a difference. Obviously, if he made that distinction early on, there is an ability for them to analyze it. He would not have said it if it wasn't the truth. They're able to make a distinction as to whether or not it's a transfer or --

GERAGOS: I'll tell you, my experience with the hairs and with this postmortem, there's a lot of courts that believe that's junk science. I wouldn't put a lot of stock in that. ANTHONY: Thank you. That's kind of what I'm wondering. We were also told that, you know, sweat cells, old blood, urine, those can also be used for DNA purposes. But my question is, how long, you know, is that something, because I know that car has had lots of hairs from all of our family. That's been a family car for at least seven or eight years.

KING: Hold it, Cindy, he's going to answer you.

GERAGOS: Cindy, actually the one thing they can do with hair with some degree of certainty is what's called mitochondrial DNA, which goes through the maternal line. They can take a sample of your hair and they could then --

ANTHONY: That just proves that its Caylee's hair, or Casey's hair or my hair or my son's hair, whoever's hair. But does that prove that that hair follicle fell off an article of clothing that was placed in the trunk, or did that fall off of a body that was placed in the trunk?

GERAGOS: They're never going to be able to prove, even if they find a hair that's in there.

ANTHONY: Then that's circumstantial evidence.

GERAGOS: That's all it is.

KING: Cindy, do you have any doubt? Are you convinced your granddaughter is alive?

ANTHONY: I'm absolutely 100 percent convinced she's alive or at least was alive when Casey gave her to the person she gave her to.

KING: Stay with us one more minute, Cindy. We'll be right back with Ed Smart, Judge Ferrer, Mark Geragos, Stacy Honowitz and Cindy Anthony. Don't go away.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOSE BAEZ, CINDY ANTHONY'S LAWYER: We're not asking for immunity on anything because she doesn't know anything. She doesn't know where the child is.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KING: We have a time limitation. Cindy, were you going to talk to your daughter today?

ANTHONY: I had a scheduled visit for her for 1:00 and I changed my mind early in the morning not to go.

KING: Any reason?

ANTHONY: Yes, because we never know when those video recordings are going to be released and, you know, the thing is, I have to figure out which is more important right now, me seeing my daughter or protecting Caylee. And right now, Casey is in a place where I know she's protected, Caylee's not. So what I have to do is make sure that I protect my granddaughter.

KING: Is Caylee about to have a birthday?

ANTHONY: Yes, on Saturday.

KING: She'll be what?

ANTHONY: Three.

KING: Three. Can she get a fair -- can we have a fair trial out of this, judge?

FERRER: Oh, absolutely. You know, we have had much more high profile cases than this, and the defendants get a completely fair trial. It's all a matter of jury selection. And if the jury selection does not render a fair and impartial jury, then you move the location of the trial. I remember when O.J. Simpson was aired -- his Bronco chase was aired all over the world. The joke used to be, knock, knock, who is there? OJ. OJ who? Welcome to the jury. They thought the trick was finding somebody who never heard of OJ. But that's not true. It can be done. More publicity makes it difficult.

KING: Ed Smart, you might have a little sympathy for the mother in that during the time your mother was missing there were accusations about you.

SMART: There were accusations. I think that we tried to do everything we could to answer those accusations, and to change the focus from -- away from us back onto Elizabeth. And I think that's what needs to happen. So much time is being spent focusing on the mother that, you know, it's just sad to see the attention go away from where it needs to be.

KING: Mark, this is a puzzlement, is it not?

GERAGOS: It's puzzling. It's strange. But at the same time, as Ed says, he spent a lot of time trying to meet the accusations and there were wild accusations about Ed at the time. But she's in a different position. She's behind bars. She's fighting for her liberty. That makes it entirely different. The calculation of her defense lawyer is entirely different than the calculation that Ed had while he was out.

KING: A prosecutor here, Stacy, is searching for the truth or anxious to convict?

HONOWITZ: Searching for the truth. That's what our job is. I know Mark's probably cracking up. I can't see the monitor, but I know he's probably laughing at that. That's the bottom line. The thing is, she holds the key to everything. Everyone is accusing her and being, you know, cross with her because she's the only one that knows. And if you listen from day one, the statements are so inconsistent that nobody can get a grasp on why she just won't say here's where my child is. That's all that matters.

KING: We're out of time but we haven't heard the last of this. I'm sure we'll be doing more on it, probably tomorrow. For more information, go to HelpFindCaylee.com. Our website is CNN.com/LarryKing. You can send Thursday's guest an email, Christian Singer, Steven Curtis Chapman and his family will be here. They suffered a tragedy in the driveway of their own home and they will talk about it and how it made them stronger. That's Thursday night.

Tomorrow, Jetblue CEO David Neeleman on his airline's latest cost cutting move, charging for pillows and blankets. He's taking your calls. That's Wednesday's LARRY KING LIVE. Time now for Anderson Cooper and "AC 360." Anderson?